(0) Obligation:
Runtime Complexity TRS:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
mul0(Cons(x, xs), y) → add0(mul0(xs, y), y)
add0(Cons(x, xs), y) → add0(xs, Cons(S, y))
mul0(Nil, y) → Nil
add0(Nil, y) → y
goal(xs, ys) → mul0(xs, ys)
Rewrite Strategy: INNERMOST
(1) CpxTrsToCpxRelTrsProof (BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID) transformation)
Transformed TRS to relative TRS where S is empty.
(2) Obligation:
Runtime Complexity Relative TRS:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
mul0(Cons(x, xs), y) → add0(mul0(xs, y), y)
add0(Cons(x, xs), y) → add0(xs, Cons(S, y))
mul0(Nil, y) → Nil
add0(Nil, y) → y
goal(xs, ys) → mul0(xs, ys)
S is empty.
Rewrite Strategy: INNERMOST
(3) SlicingProof (LOWER BOUND(ID) transformation)
Sliced the following arguments:
Cons/0
(4) Obligation:
Runtime Complexity Relative TRS:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:
mul0(Cons(xs), y) → add0(mul0(xs, y), y)
add0(Cons(xs), y) → add0(xs, Cons(y))
mul0(Nil, y) → Nil
add0(Nil, y) → y
goal(xs, ys) → mul0(xs, ys)
S is empty.
Rewrite Strategy: INNERMOST
(5) DecreasingLoopProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)
The following loop(s) give(s) rise to the lower bound Ω(n1):
The rewrite sequence
mul0(Cons(xs), y) →+ add0(mul0(xs, y), y)
gives rise to a decreasing loop by considering the right hand sides subterm at position [0].
The pumping substitution is [xs / Cons(xs)].
The result substitution is [ ].
(6) BOUNDS(n^1, INF)