YES(O(1),O(n^1)) 11.88/5.69 YES(O(1),O(n^1)) 11.88/5.69 11.88/5.69 We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the 11.88/5.69 certificate YES(O(1),O(n^1)). 11.88/5.69 11.88/5.69 Strict Trs: 11.88/5.69 { a__f(X1, X2, X3) -> f(X1, X2, X3) 11.88/5.69 , a__f(X, g(X), Y) -> a__f(Y, Y, Y) 11.88/5.69 , a__g(X) -> g(X) 11.88/5.69 , a__g(b()) -> c() 11.88/5.69 , a__b() -> b() 11.88/5.69 , a__b() -> c() 11.88/5.69 , mark(g(X)) -> a__g(mark(X)) 11.88/5.69 , mark(b()) -> a__b() 11.88/5.69 , mark(c()) -> c() 11.88/5.69 , mark(f(X1, X2, X3)) -> a__f(X1, X2, X3) } 11.88/5.69 Obligation: 11.88/5.69 innermost runtime complexity 11.88/5.69 Answer: 11.88/5.69 YES(O(1),O(n^1)) 11.88/5.69 11.88/5.69 We add the following dependency tuples: 11.88/5.69 11.88/5.69 Strict DPs: 11.88/5.69 { a__f^#(X1, X2, X3) -> c_1() 11.88/5.69 , a__f^#(X, g(X), Y) -> c_2(a__f^#(Y, Y, Y)) 11.88/5.69 , a__g^#(X) -> c_3() 11.88/5.69 , a__g^#(b()) -> c_4() 11.88/5.69 , a__b^#() -> c_5() 11.88/5.69 , a__b^#() -> c_6() 11.88/5.69 , mark^#(g(X)) -> c_7(a__g^#(mark(X)), mark^#(X)) 11.88/5.69 , mark^#(b()) -> c_8(a__b^#()) 11.88/5.69 , mark^#(c()) -> c_9() 11.88/5.69 , mark^#(f(X1, X2, X3)) -> c_10(a__f^#(X1, X2, X3)) } 11.88/5.69 11.88/5.69 and mark the set of starting terms. 11.88/5.69 11.88/5.69 We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the 11.88/5.69 certificate YES(O(1),O(n^1)). 11.88/5.69 11.88/5.69 Strict DPs: 11.88/5.69 { a__f^#(X1, X2, X3) -> c_1() 11.88/5.69 , a__f^#(X, g(X), Y) -> c_2(a__f^#(Y, Y, Y)) 11.88/5.69 , a__g^#(X) -> c_3() 11.88/5.69 , a__g^#(b()) -> c_4() 11.88/5.69 , a__b^#() -> c_5() 11.88/5.69 , a__b^#() -> c_6() 11.88/5.69 , mark^#(g(X)) -> c_7(a__g^#(mark(X)), mark^#(X)) 11.88/5.69 , mark^#(b()) -> c_8(a__b^#()) 11.88/5.69 , mark^#(c()) -> c_9() 11.88/5.69 , mark^#(f(X1, X2, X3)) -> c_10(a__f^#(X1, X2, X3)) } 11.88/5.69 Weak Trs: 11.88/5.69 { a__f(X1, X2, X3) -> f(X1, X2, X3) 11.88/5.69 , a__f(X, g(X), Y) -> a__f(Y, Y, Y) 11.88/5.69 , a__g(X) -> g(X) 11.88/5.69 , a__g(b()) -> c() 11.88/5.69 , a__b() -> b() 11.88/5.69 , a__b() -> c() 11.88/5.69 , mark(g(X)) -> a__g(mark(X)) 11.88/5.69 , mark(b()) -> a__b() 11.88/5.69 , mark(c()) -> c() 11.88/5.69 , mark(f(X1, X2, X3)) -> a__f(X1, X2, X3) } 11.88/5.69 Obligation: 11.88/5.69 innermost runtime complexity 11.88/5.69 Answer: 11.88/5.69 YES(O(1),O(n^1)) 11.88/5.69 11.88/5.69 We estimate the number of application of {1,3,4,5,6,9} by 11.88/5.69 applications of Pre({1,3,4,5,6,9}) = {2,7,8,10}. Here rules are 11.88/5.69 labeled as follows: 11.88/5.69 11.88/5.69 DPs: 11.88/5.69 { 1: a__f^#(X1, X2, X3) -> c_1() 11.88/5.69 , 2: a__f^#(X, g(X), Y) -> c_2(a__f^#(Y, Y, Y)) 11.88/5.69 , 3: a__g^#(X) -> c_3() 11.88/5.69 , 4: a__g^#(b()) -> c_4() 11.88/5.69 , 5: a__b^#() -> c_5() 11.88/5.69 , 6: a__b^#() -> c_6() 11.88/5.70 , 7: mark^#(g(X)) -> c_7(a__g^#(mark(X)), mark^#(X)) 11.88/5.70 , 8: mark^#(b()) -> c_8(a__b^#()) 11.88/5.70 , 9: mark^#(c()) -> c_9() 11.88/5.70 , 10: mark^#(f(X1, X2, X3)) -> c_10(a__f^#(X1, X2, X3)) } 11.88/5.70 11.88/5.70 We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the 11.88/5.70 certificate YES(O(1),O(n^1)). 11.88/5.70 11.88/5.70 Strict DPs: 11.88/5.70 { a__f^#(X, g(X), Y) -> c_2(a__f^#(Y, Y, Y)) 11.88/5.70 , mark^#(g(X)) -> c_7(a__g^#(mark(X)), mark^#(X)) 11.88/5.70 , mark^#(b()) -> c_8(a__b^#()) 11.88/5.70 , mark^#(f(X1, X2, X3)) -> c_10(a__f^#(X1, X2, X3)) } 11.88/5.70 Weak DPs: 11.88/5.70 { a__f^#(X1, X2, X3) -> c_1() 11.88/5.70 , a__g^#(X) -> c_3() 11.88/5.70 , a__g^#(b()) -> c_4() 11.88/5.70 , a__b^#() -> c_5() 11.88/5.70 , a__b^#() -> c_6() 11.88/5.70 , mark^#(c()) -> c_9() } 11.88/5.70 Weak Trs: 11.88/5.70 { a__f(X1, X2, X3) -> f(X1, X2, X3) 11.88/5.70 , a__f(X, g(X), Y) -> a__f(Y, Y, Y) 11.88/5.70 , a__g(X) -> g(X) 11.88/5.70 , a__g(b()) -> c() 11.88/5.70 , a__b() -> b() 11.88/5.70 , a__b() -> c() 11.88/5.70 , mark(g(X)) -> a__g(mark(X)) 11.88/5.70 , mark(b()) -> a__b() 11.88/5.70 , mark(c()) -> c() 11.88/5.70 , mark(f(X1, X2, X3)) -> a__f(X1, X2, X3) } 11.88/5.70 Obligation: 11.88/5.70 innermost runtime complexity 11.88/5.70 Answer: 11.88/5.70 YES(O(1),O(n^1)) 11.88/5.70 11.88/5.70 We estimate the number of application of {1,3} by applications of 11.88/5.70 Pre({1,3}) = {2,4}. Here rules are labeled as follows: 11.88/5.70 11.88/5.70 DPs: 11.88/5.70 { 1: a__f^#(X, g(X), Y) -> c_2(a__f^#(Y, Y, Y)) 11.88/5.70 , 2: mark^#(g(X)) -> c_7(a__g^#(mark(X)), mark^#(X)) 11.88/5.70 , 3: mark^#(b()) -> c_8(a__b^#()) 11.88/5.70 , 4: mark^#(f(X1, X2, X3)) -> c_10(a__f^#(X1, X2, X3)) 11.88/5.70 , 5: a__f^#(X1, X2, X3) -> c_1() 11.88/5.70 , 6: a__g^#(X) -> c_3() 11.88/5.70 , 7: a__g^#(b()) -> c_4() 11.88/5.70 , 8: a__b^#() -> c_5() 11.88/5.70 , 9: a__b^#() -> c_6() 11.88/5.70 , 10: mark^#(c()) -> c_9() } 11.88/5.70 11.88/5.70 We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the 11.88/5.70 certificate YES(O(1),O(n^1)). 11.88/5.70 11.88/5.70 Strict DPs: 11.88/5.70 { mark^#(g(X)) -> c_7(a__g^#(mark(X)), mark^#(X)) 11.88/5.70 , mark^#(f(X1, X2, X3)) -> c_10(a__f^#(X1, X2, X3)) } 11.88/5.70 Weak DPs: 11.88/5.70 { a__f^#(X1, X2, X3) -> c_1() 11.88/5.70 , a__f^#(X, g(X), Y) -> c_2(a__f^#(Y, Y, Y)) 11.88/5.70 , a__g^#(X) -> c_3() 11.88/5.70 , a__g^#(b()) -> c_4() 11.88/5.70 , a__b^#() -> c_5() 11.88/5.70 , a__b^#() -> c_6() 11.88/5.70 , mark^#(b()) -> c_8(a__b^#()) 11.88/5.70 , mark^#(c()) -> c_9() } 11.88/5.70 Weak Trs: 11.88/5.70 { a__f(X1, X2, X3) -> f(X1, X2, X3) 11.88/5.70 , a__f(X, g(X), Y) -> a__f(Y, Y, Y) 11.88/5.70 , a__g(X) -> g(X) 11.88/5.70 , a__g(b()) -> c() 11.88/5.70 , a__b() -> b() 11.88/5.70 , a__b() -> c() 11.88/5.70 , mark(g(X)) -> a__g(mark(X)) 11.88/5.70 , mark(b()) -> a__b() 11.88/5.70 , mark(c()) -> c() 11.88/5.70 , mark(f(X1, X2, X3)) -> a__f(X1, X2, X3) } 11.88/5.70 Obligation: 11.88/5.70 innermost runtime complexity 11.88/5.70 Answer: 11.88/5.70 YES(O(1),O(n^1)) 11.88/5.70 11.88/5.70 We estimate the number of application of {2} by applications of 11.88/5.70 Pre({2}) = {1}. Here rules are labeled as follows: 11.88/5.70 11.88/5.70 DPs: 11.88/5.70 { 1: mark^#(g(X)) -> c_7(a__g^#(mark(X)), mark^#(X)) 11.88/5.70 , 2: mark^#(f(X1, X2, X3)) -> c_10(a__f^#(X1, X2, X3)) 11.88/5.70 , 3: a__f^#(X1, X2, X3) -> c_1() 11.88/5.70 , 4: a__f^#(X, g(X), Y) -> c_2(a__f^#(Y, Y, Y)) 11.88/5.70 , 5: a__g^#(X) -> c_3() 11.88/5.70 , 6: a__g^#(b()) -> c_4() 11.88/5.70 , 7: a__b^#() -> c_5() 11.88/5.70 , 8: a__b^#() -> c_6() 11.88/5.70 , 9: mark^#(b()) -> c_8(a__b^#()) 11.88/5.70 , 10: mark^#(c()) -> c_9() } 11.88/5.70 11.88/5.70 We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the 11.88/5.70 certificate YES(O(1),O(n^1)). 11.88/5.70 11.88/5.70 Strict DPs: { mark^#(g(X)) -> c_7(a__g^#(mark(X)), mark^#(X)) } 11.88/5.70 Weak DPs: 11.88/5.70 { a__f^#(X1, X2, X3) -> c_1() 11.88/5.70 , a__f^#(X, g(X), Y) -> c_2(a__f^#(Y, Y, Y)) 11.88/5.70 , a__g^#(X) -> c_3() 11.88/5.70 , a__g^#(b()) -> c_4() 11.88/5.70 , a__b^#() -> c_5() 11.88/5.70 , a__b^#() -> c_6() 11.88/5.70 , mark^#(b()) -> c_8(a__b^#()) 11.88/5.70 , mark^#(c()) -> c_9() 11.88/5.70 , mark^#(f(X1, X2, X3)) -> c_10(a__f^#(X1, X2, X3)) } 11.88/5.70 Weak Trs: 11.88/5.70 { a__f(X1, X2, X3) -> f(X1, X2, X3) 11.88/5.70 , a__f(X, g(X), Y) -> a__f(Y, Y, Y) 11.88/5.70 , a__g(X) -> g(X) 11.88/5.70 , a__g(b()) -> c() 11.88/5.70 , a__b() -> b() 11.88/5.70 , a__b() -> c() 11.88/5.70 , mark(g(X)) -> a__g(mark(X)) 11.88/5.70 , mark(b()) -> a__b() 11.88/5.70 , mark(c()) -> c() 11.88/5.70 , mark(f(X1, X2, X3)) -> a__f(X1, X2, X3) } 11.88/5.70 Obligation: 11.88/5.70 innermost runtime complexity 11.88/5.70 Answer: 11.88/5.70 YES(O(1),O(n^1)) 11.88/5.70 11.88/5.70 The following weak DPs constitute a sub-graph of the DG that is 11.88/5.70 closed under successors. The DPs are removed. 11.88/5.70 11.88/5.70 { a__f^#(X1, X2, X3) -> c_1() 11.88/5.70 , a__f^#(X, g(X), Y) -> c_2(a__f^#(Y, Y, Y)) 11.88/5.70 , a__g^#(X) -> c_3() 11.88/5.70 , a__g^#(b()) -> c_4() 11.88/5.70 , a__b^#() -> c_5() 11.88/5.70 , a__b^#() -> c_6() 11.88/5.70 , mark^#(b()) -> c_8(a__b^#()) 11.88/5.70 , mark^#(c()) -> c_9() 11.88/5.70 , mark^#(f(X1, X2, X3)) -> c_10(a__f^#(X1, X2, X3)) } 11.88/5.70 11.88/5.70 We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the 11.88/5.70 certificate YES(O(1),O(n^1)). 11.88/5.70 11.88/5.70 Strict DPs: { mark^#(g(X)) -> c_7(a__g^#(mark(X)), mark^#(X)) } 11.88/5.70 Weak Trs: 11.88/5.70 { a__f(X1, X2, X3) -> f(X1, X2, X3) 11.88/5.70 , a__f(X, g(X), Y) -> a__f(Y, Y, Y) 11.88/5.70 , a__g(X) -> g(X) 11.88/5.70 , a__g(b()) -> c() 11.88/5.70 , a__b() -> b() 11.88/5.70 , a__b() -> c() 11.88/5.70 , mark(g(X)) -> a__g(mark(X)) 11.88/5.70 , mark(b()) -> a__b() 11.88/5.70 , mark(c()) -> c() 11.88/5.70 , mark(f(X1, X2, X3)) -> a__f(X1, X2, X3) } 11.88/5.70 Obligation: 11.88/5.70 innermost runtime complexity 11.88/5.70 Answer: 11.88/5.70 YES(O(1),O(n^1)) 11.88/5.70 11.88/5.70 Due to missing edges in the dependency-graph, the right-hand sides 11.88/5.70 of following rules could be simplified: 11.88/5.70 11.88/5.70 { mark^#(g(X)) -> c_7(a__g^#(mark(X)), mark^#(X)) } 11.88/5.70 11.88/5.70 We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the 11.88/5.70 certificate YES(O(1),O(n^1)). 11.88/5.70 11.88/5.70 Strict DPs: { mark^#(g(X)) -> c_1(mark^#(X)) } 11.88/5.70 Weak Trs: 11.88/5.70 { a__f(X1, X2, X3) -> f(X1, X2, X3) 11.88/5.70 , a__f(X, g(X), Y) -> a__f(Y, Y, Y) 11.88/5.70 , a__g(X) -> g(X) 11.88/5.70 , a__g(b()) -> c() 11.88/5.70 , a__b() -> b() 11.88/5.70 , a__b() -> c() 11.88/5.70 , mark(g(X)) -> a__g(mark(X)) 11.88/5.70 , mark(b()) -> a__b() 11.88/5.70 , mark(c()) -> c() 11.88/5.70 , mark(f(X1, X2, X3)) -> a__f(X1, X2, X3) } 12.07/5.70 Obligation: 12.07/5.70 innermost runtime complexity 12.07/5.70 Answer: 12.07/5.70 YES(O(1),O(n^1)) 12.07/5.70 12.07/5.70 No rule is usable, rules are removed from the input problem. 12.07/5.70 12.07/5.70 We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the 12.07/5.70 certificate YES(O(1),O(n^1)). 12.07/5.70 12.07/5.70 Strict DPs: { mark^#(g(X)) -> c_1(mark^#(X)) } 12.07/5.70 Obligation: 12.07/5.70 innermost runtime complexity 12.07/5.70 Answer: 12.07/5.70 YES(O(1),O(n^1)) 12.07/5.70 12.07/5.70 We use the processor 'Small Polynomial Path Order (PS,1-bounded)' 12.07/5.70 to orient following rules strictly. 12.07/5.70 12.07/5.70 DPs: 12.07/5.70 { 1: mark^#(g(X)) -> c_1(mark^#(X)) } 12.07/5.70 12.07/5.70 Sub-proof: 12.07/5.70 ---------- 12.07/5.70 The input was oriented with the instance of 'Small Polynomial Path 12.07/5.70 Order (PS,1-bounded)' as induced by the safe mapping 12.07/5.70 12.07/5.70 safe(g) = {1}, safe(mark^#) = {}, safe(c_1) = {} 12.07/5.70 12.07/5.70 and precedence 12.07/5.70 12.07/5.70 empty . 12.07/5.70 12.07/5.70 Following symbols are considered recursive: 12.07/5.70 12.07/5.70 {mark^#} 12.07/5.70 12.07/5.70 The recursion depth is 1. 12.07/5.70 12.07/5.70 Further, following argument filtering is employed: 12.07/5.70 12.07/5.70 pi(g) = [1], pi(mark^#) = [1], pi(c_1) = [1] 12.07/5.70 12.07/5.70 Usable defined function symbols are a subset of: 12.07/5.70 12.07/5.70 {mark^#} 12.07/5.70 12.07/5.70 For your convenience, here are the satisfied ordering constraints: 12.07/5.70 12.07/5.70 pi(mark^#(g(X))) = mark^#(g(; X);) 12.07/5.70 > c_1(mark^#(X;);) 12.07/5.70 = pi(c_1(mark^#(X))) 12.07/5.70 12.07/5.70 12.07/5.70 The strictly oriented rules are moved into the weak component. 12.07/5.70 12.07/5.70 We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the 12.07/5.70 certificate YES(O(1),O(1)). 12.07/5.70 12.07/5.70 Weak DPs: { mark^#(g(X)) -> c_1(mark^#(X)) } 12.07/5.70 Obligation: 12.07/5.70 innermost runtime complexity 12.07/5.70 Answer: 12.07/5.70 YES(O(1),O(1)) 12.07/5.70 12.07/5.70 The following weak DPs constitute a sub-graph of the DG that is 12.07/5.70 closed under successors. The DPs are removed. 12.07/5.70 12.07/5.70 { mark^#(g(X)) -> c_1(mark^#(X)) } 12.07/5.70 12.07/5.70 We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the 12.07/5.70 certificate YES(O(1),O(1)). 12.07/5.70 12.07/5.70 Rules: Empty 12.07/5.70 Obligation: 12.07/5.70 innermost runtime complexity 12.07/5.70 Answer: 12.07/5.70 YES(O(1),O(1)) 12.07/5.70 12.07/5.70 Empty rules are trivially bounded 12.07/5.70 12.07/5.70 Hurray, we answered YES(O(1),O(n^1)) 12.07/5.71 EOF