*** 1 Progress [(O(1),O(n^2))] *** Considered Problem: Strict DP Rules: Strict TRS Rules: loop(Cons(x,xs),Nil(),pp,ss) -> False() loop(Cons(x',xs'),Cons(x,xs),pp,ss) -> loop[Ite](!EQ(x',x),Cons(x',xs'),Cons(x,xs),pp,ss) loop(Nil(),s,pp,ss) -> True() match1(p,s) -> loop(p,s,p,s) Weak DP Rules: Weak TRS Rules: !EQ(0(),0()) -> True() !EQ(0(),S(y)) -> False() !EQ(S(x),0()) -> False() !EQ(S(x),S(y)) -> !EQ(x,y) loop[Ite](False(),p,s,pp,Cons(x,xs)) -> loop(pp,xs,pp,xs) loop[Ite](True(),Cons(x',xs'),Cons(x,xs),pp,ss) -> loop(xs',xs,pp,ss) Signature: {!EQ/2,loop/4,loop[Ite]/5,match1/2} / {0/0,Cons/2,False/0,Nil/0,S/1,True/0} Obligation: Innermost basic terms: {!EQ,loop,loop[Ite],match1}/{0,Cons,False,Nil,S,True} Applied Processor: WeightGap {wgDimension = 1, wgDegree = 1, wgKind = Algebraic, wgUArgs = UArgs, wgOn = WgOnAny} Proof: The weightgap principle applies using the following nonconstant growth matrix-interpretation: We apply a matrix interpretation of kind constructor based matrix interpretation: The following argument positions are considered usable: uargs(loop[Ite]) = {1} Following symbols are considered usable: {} TcT has computed the following interpretation: p(!EQ) = [1] p(0) = [0] p(Cons) = [1] p(False) = [1] p(Nil) = [0] p(S) = [0] p(True) = [0] p(loop) = [1] p(loop[Ite]) = [1] x1 + [2] x2 + [2] x3 + [4] p(match1) = [1] Following rules are strictly oriented: loop(Nil(),s,pp,ss) = [1] > [0] = True() Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented: !EQ(0(),0()) = [1] >= [0] = True() !EQ(0(),S(y)) = [1] >= [1] = False() !EQ(S(x),0()) = [1] >= [1] = False() !EQ(S(x),S(y)) = [1] >= [1] = !EQ(x,y) loop(Cons(x,xs),Nil(),pp,ss) = [1] >= [1] = False() loop(Cons(x',xs') = [1] ,Cons(x,xs) ,pp ,ss) >= [9] = loop[Ite](!EQ(x',x) ,Cons(x',xs') ,Cons(x,xs) ,pp ,ss) loop[Ite](False() = [2] p + [2] s + [5] ,p ,s ,pp ,Cons(x,xs)) >= [1] = loop(pp,xs,pp,xs) loop[Ite](True() = [8] ,Cons(x',xs') ,Cons(x,xs) ,pp ,ss) >= [1] = loop(xs',xs,pp,ss) match1(p,s) = [1] >= [1] = loop(p,s,p,s) Further, it can be verified that all rules not oriented are covered by the weightgap condition. *** 1.1 Progress [(O(1),O(n^2))] *** Considered Problem: Strict DP Rules: Strict TRS Rules: loop(Cons(x,xs),Nil(),pp,ss) -> False() loop(Cons(x',xs'),Cons(x,xs),pp,ss) -> loop[Ite](!EQ(x',x),Cons(x',xs'),Cons(x,xs),pp,ss) match1(p,s) -> loop(p,s,p,s) Weak DP Rules: Weak TRS Rules: !EQ(0(),0()) -> True() !EQ(0(),S(y)) -> False() !EQ(S(x),0()) -> False() !EQ(S(x),S(y)) -> !EQ(x,y) loop(Nil(),s,pp,ss) -> True() loop[Ite](False(),p,s,pp,Cons(x,xs)) -> loop(pp,xs,pp,xs) loop[Ite](True(),Cons(x',xs'),Cons(x,xs),pp,ss) -> loop(xs',xs,pp,ss) Signature: {!EQ/2,loop/4,loop[Ite]/5,match1/2} / {0/0,Cons/2,False/0,Nil/0,S/1,True/0} Obligation: Innermost basic terms: {!EQ,loop,loop[Ite],match1}/{0,Cons,False,Nil,S,True} Applied Processor: WeightGap {wgDimension = 1, wgDegree = 1, wgKind = Algebraic, wgUArgs = UArgs, wgOn = WgOnAny} Proof: The weightgap principle applies using the following nonconstant growth matrix-interpretation: We apply a matrix interpretation of kind constructor based matrix interpretation: The following argument positions are considered usable: uargs(loop[Ite]) = {1} Following symbols are considered usable: {} TcT has computed the following interpretation: p(!EQ) = [2] p(0) = [0] p(Cons) = [2] p(False) = [1] p(Nil) = [0] p(S) = [1] x1 + [0] p(True) = [2] p(loop) = [2] p(loop[Ite]) = [1] x1 + [1] x2 + [5] x3 + [1] p(match1) = [5] Following rules are strictly oriented: loop(Cons(x,xs),Nil(),pp,ss) = [2] > [1] = False() match1(p,s) = [5] > [2] = loop(p,s,p,s) Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented: !EQ(0(),0()) = [2] >= [2] = True() !EQ(0(),S(y)) = [2] >= [1] = False() !EQ(S(x),0()) = [2] >= [1] = False() !EQ(S(x),S(y)) = [2] >= [2] = !EQ(x,y) loop(Cons(x',xs') = [2] ,Cons(x,xs) ,pp ,ss) >= [15] = loop[Ite](!EQ(x',x) ,Cons(x',xs') ,Cons(x,xs) ,pp ,ss) loop(Nil(),s,pp,ss) = [2] >= [2] = True() loop[Ite](False() = [1] p + [5] s + [2] ,p ,s ,pp ,Cons(x,xs)) >= [2] = loop(pp,xs,pp,xs) loop[Ite](True() = [15] ,Cons(x',xs') ,Cons(x,xs) ,pp ,ss) >= [2] = loop(xs',xs,pp,ss) Further, it can be verified that all rules not oriented are covered by the weightgap condition. *** 1.1.1 Progress [(O(1),O(n^2))] *** Considered Problem: Strict DP Rules: Strict TRS Rules: loop(Cons(x',xs'),Cons(x,xs),pp,ss) -> loop[Ite](!EQ(x',x),Cons(x',xs'),Cons(x,xs),pp,ss) Weak DP Rules: Weak TRS Rules: !EQ(0(),0()) -> True() !EQ(0(),S(y)) -> False() !EQ(S(x),0()) -> False() !EQ(S(x),S(y)) -> !EQ(x,y) loop(Cons(x,xs),Nil(),pp,ss) -> False() loop(Nil(),s,pp,ss) -> True() loop[Ite](False(),p,s,pp,Cons(x,xs)) -> loop(pp,xs,pp,xs) loop[Ite](True(),Cons(x',xs'),Cons(x,xs),pp,ss) -> loop(xs',xs,pp,ss) match1(p,s) -> loop(p,s,p,s) Signature: {!EQ/2,loop/4,loop[Ite]/5,match1/2} / {0/0,Cons/2,False/0,Nil/0,S/1,True/0} Obligation: Innermost basic terms: {!EQ,loop,loop[Ite],match1}/{0,Cons,False,Nil,S,True} Applied Processor: NaturalPI {shape = Mixed 2, restrict = Restrict, uargs = UArgs, urules = URules, selector = Just any strict-rules, greedy = NoGreedy} Proof: We apply a polynomial interpretation of kind constructor-based(mixed(2)): The following argument positions are considered usable: uargs(loop[Ite]) = {1} Following symbols are considered usable: {!EQ,loop,loop[Ite],match1} TcT has computed the following interpretation: p(!EQ) = 0 p(0) = 0 p(Cons) = 1 + x2 p(False) = 0 p(Nil) = 1 p(S) = 0 p(True) = 0 p(loop) = 3 + x1 + 3*x2 + 2*x3 + 2*x3*x4 + 2*x4^2 p(loop[Ite]) = 2 + 2*x1 + 2*x1*x4 + x2 + 3*x3 + 2*x4 + 2*x4*x5 + 2*x5^2 p(match1) = 3 + 3*x1 + 3*x1*x2 + 2*x1^2 + 3*x2 + 2*x2^2 Following rules are strictly oriented: loop(Cons(x',xs') = 7 + 2*pp + 2*pp*ss + 2*ss^2 + 3*xs + xs' ,Cons(x,xs) ,pp ,ss) > 6 + 2*pp + 2*pp*ss + 2*ss^2 + 3*xs + xs' = loop[Ite](!EQ(x',x) ,Cons(x',xs') ,Cons(x,xs) ,pp ,ss) Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented: !EQ(0(),0()) = 0 >= 0 = True() !EQ(0(),S(y)) = 0 >= 0 = False() !EQ(S(x),0()) = 0 >= 0 = False() !EQ(S(x),S(y)) = 0 >= 0 = !EQ(x,y) loop(Cons(x,xs),Nil(),pp,ss) = 7 + 2*pp + 2*pp*ss + 2*ss^2 + xs >= 0 = False() loop(Nil(),s,pp,ss) = 4 + 2*pp + 2*pp*ss + 3*s + 2*ss^2 >= 0 = True() loop[Ite](False() = 4 + p + 4*pp + 2*pp*xs + 3*s + 4*xs + 2*xs^2 ,p ,s ,pp ,Cons(x,xs)) >= 3 + 3*pp + 2*pp*xs + 3*xs + 2*xs^2 = loop(pp,xs,pp,xs) loop[Ite](True() = 6 + 2*pp + 2*pp*ss + 2*ss^2 + 3*xs + xs' ,Cons(x',xs') ,Cons(x,xs) ,pp ,ss) >= 3 + 2*pp + 2*pp*ss + 2*ss^2 + 3*xs + xs' = loop(xs',xs,pp,ss) match1(p,s) = 3 + 3*p + 3*p*s + 2*p^2 + 3*s + 2*s^2 >= 3 + 3*p + 2*p*s + 3*s + 2*s^2 = loop(p,s,p,s) *** 1.1.1.1 Progress [(O(1),O(1))] *** Considered Problem: Strict DP Rules: Strict TRS Rules: Weak DP Rules: Weak TRS Rules: !EQ(0(),0()) -> True() !EQ(0(),S(y)) -> False() !EQ(S(x),0()) -> False() !EQ(S(x),S(y)) -> !EQ(x,y) loop(Cons(x,xs),Nil(),pp,ss) -> False() loop(Cons(x',xs'),Cons(x,xs),pp,ss) -> loop[Ite](!EQ(x',x),Cons(x',xs'),Cons(x,xs),pp,ss) loop(Nil(),s,pp,ss) -> True() loop[Ite](False(),p,s,pp,Cons(x,xs)) -> loop(pp,xs,pp,xs) loop[Ite](True(),Cons(x',xs'),Cons(x,xs),pp,ss) -> loop(xs',xs,pp,ss) match1(p,s) -> loop(p,s,p,s) Signature: {!EQ/2,loop/4,loop[Ite]/5,match1/2} / {0/0,Cons/2,False/0,Nil/0,S/1,True/0} Obligation: Innermost basic terms: {!EQ,loop,loop[Ite],match1}/{0,Cons,False,Nil,S,True} Applied Processor: EmptyProcessor Proof: The problem is already closed. The intended complexity is O(1).