YES(?,O(1))
0.00/0.29	YES(?,O(1))
0.00/0.29	
0.00/0.29	We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the
0.00/0.29	certificate YES(?,O(1)).
0.00/0.29	
0.00/0.29	Strict Trs:
0.00/0.29	  { 2nd(cons(X, n__cons(Y, Z))) -> activate(Y)
0.00/0.29	  , cons(X1, X2) -> n__cons(X1, X2)
0.00/0.29	  , activate(X) -> X
0.00/0.29	  , activate(n__cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(X1, X2)
0.00/0.29	  , activate(n__from(X)) -> from(X)
0.00/0.29	  , from(X) -> cons(X, n__from(s(X)))
0.00/0.29	  , from(X) -> n__from(X) }
0.00/0.29	Obligation:
0.00/0.29	  innermost runtime complexity
0.00/0.29	Answer:
0.00/0.29	  YES(?,O(1))
0.00/0.29	
0.00/0.29	Arguments of following rules are not normal-forms:
0.00/0.29	
0.00/0.29	{ 2nd(cons(X, n__cons(Y, Z))) -> activate(Y) }
0.00/0.29	
0.00/0.29	All above mentioned rules can be savely removed.
0.00/0.29	
0.00/0.29	We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the
0.00/0.29	certificate YES(?,O(1)).
0.00/0.29	
0.00/0.29	Strict Trs:
0.00/0.29	  { cons(X1, X2) -> n__cons(X1, X2)
0.00/0.29	  , activate(X) -> X
0.00/0.29	  , activate(n__cons(X1, X2)) -> cons(X1, X2)
0.00/0.29	  , activate(n__from(X)) -> from(X)
0.00/0.29	  , from(X) -> cons(X, n__from(s(X)))
0.00/0.29	  , from(X) -> n__from(X) }
0.00/0.29	Obligation:
0.00/0.29	  innermost runtime complexity
0.00/0.29	Answer:
0.00/0.29	  YES(?,O(1))
0.00/0.29	
0.00/0.29	The input was oriented with the instance of 'Small Polynomial Path
0.00/0.29	Order (PS,0-bounded)' as induced by the safe mapping
0.00/0.29	
0.00/0.29	 safe(cons) = {1, 2}, safe(n__cons) = {1, 2}, safe(activate) = {1},
0.00/0.29	 safe(from) = {1}, safe(n__from) = {1}, safe(s) = {1}
0.00/0.29	
0.00/0.29	and precedence
0.00/0.29	
0.00/0.29	 activate > cons, activate > from, from > cons .
0.00/0.29	
0.00/0.29	Following symbols are considered recursive:
0.00/0.29	
0.00/0.29	 {}
0.00/0.29	
0.00/0.29	The recursion depth is 0.
0.00/0.29	
0.00/0.29	For your convenience, here are the satisfied ordering constraints:
0.00/0.29	
0.00/0.29	                 cons(; X1,  X2) > n__cons(; X1,  X2)           
0.00/0.29	                                                                
0.00/0.29	                   activate(; X) > X                            
0.00/0.29	                                                                
0.00/0.29	  activate(; n__cons(; X1,  X2)) > cons(; X1,  X2)              
0.00/0.29	                                                                
0.00/0.29	        activate(; n__from(; X)) > from(; X)                    
0.00/0.29	                                                                
0.00/0.29	                       from(; X) > cons(; X,  n__from(; s(; X)))
0.00/0.29	                                                                
0.00/0.29	                       from(; X) > n__from(; X)                 
0.00/0.29	                                                                
0.00/0.29	
0.00/0.29	Hurray, we answered YES(?,O(1))
0.00/0.29	EOF