MAYBE
proof of input_j2MSvVF9Fe.trs
# AProVE Commit ID: aff8ecad908e01718a4c36e68d2e55d5e0f16e15 fuhs 20220216 unpublished


The Runtime Complexity (parallel-innermost) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(1, INF).

(0) CpxTRS
(1) RenamingProof [BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID), 0 ms]
(2) CpxTRS
(3) RelTrsToTrsProof [UPPER BOUND(ID), 0 ms]
(4) CpxTRS
(5) RelTrsToWeightedTrsProof [UPPER BOUND(ID), 0 ms]
(6) CpxWeightedTrs
    (7) TypeInferenceProof [BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID), 0 ms]
    (8) CpxTypedWeightedTrs
    (9) CompletionProof [UPPER BOUND(ID), 0 ms]
    (10) CpxTypedWeightedCompleteTrs
        (11) CpxTypedWeightedTrsToRntsProof [UPPER BOUND(ID), 0 ms]
        (12) CpxRNTS
    (13) CompletionProof [UPPER BOUND(ID), 0 ms]
    (14) CpxTypedWeightedCompleteTrs
        (15) NarrowingProof [BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID), 0 ms]
        (16) CpxTypedWeightedCompleteTrs
        (17) CpxTypedWeightedTrsToRntsProof [UPPER BOUND(ID), 0 ms]
        (18) CpxRNTS
        (19) InliningProof [UPPER BOUND(ID), 35 ms]
        (20) CpxRNTS
        (21) SimplificationProof [BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID), 0 ms]
        (22) CpxRNTS
        (23) CpxRntsAnalysisOrderProof [BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID), 0 ms]
        (24) CpxRNTS
        (25) ResultPropagationProof [UPPER BOUND(ID), 0 ms]
        (26) CpxRNTS
        (27) IntTrsBoundProof [UPPER BOUND(ID), 148 ms]
        (28) CpxRNTS
        (29) IntTrsBoundProof [UPPER BOUND(ID), 47 ms]
        (30) CpxRNTS
        (31) ResultPropagationProof [UPPER BOUND(ID), 0 ms]
        (32) CpxRNTS
        (33) IntTrsBoundProof [UPPER BOUND(ID), 1160 ms]
        (34) CpxRNTS
        (35) IntTrsBoundProof [UPPER BOUND(ID), 647 ms]
        (36) CpxRNTS
(37) CpxTrsToCdtProof [UPPER BOUND(ID), 0 ms]
(38) CdtProblem
    (39) CdtLeafRemovalProof [ComplexityIfPolyImplication, 0 ms]
    (40) CdtProblem
    (41) CdtUsableRulesProof [BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID), 0 ms]
    (42) CdtProblem


----------------------------------------

(0)
Obligation:
The Runtime Complexity (parallel-innermost) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(1, INF).


The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   equal0(Nil) -> number42(Nil)
   equal0(Cons(x, xs)) -> equal0(Cons(x, xs))
   number42(x) -> Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Nil))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
   goal(x) -> equal0(x)

S is empty.
Rewrite Strategy: PARALLEL_INNERMOST
----------------------------------------

(1) RenamingProof (BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID))
Renamed function symbols to avoid clashes with predefined symbol.
----------------------------------------

(2)
Obligation:
The Runtime Complexity (parallel-innermost) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(1, INF).


The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   equal0(Nil) -> number42(Nil)
   equal0(Cons(x, xs)) -> equal0(Cons(x, xs))
   number42(x) -> Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Nil))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
   goal(x) -> equal0(x)

S is empty.
Rewrite Strategy: PARALLEL_INNERMOST
----------------------------------------

(3) RelTrsToTrsProof (UPPER BOUND(ID))
transformed relative TRS to TRS
----------------------------------------

(4)
Obligation:
The Runtime Complexity (parallel-innermost) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(1, INF).


The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   equal0(Nil) -> number42(Nil)
   equal0(Cons(x, xs)) -> equal0(Cons(x, xs))
   number42(x) -> Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Nil))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
   goal(x) -> equal0(x)

S is empty.
Rewrite Strategy: PARALLEL_INNERMOST
----------------------------------------

(5) RelTrsToWeightedTrsProof (UPPER BOUND(ID))
Transformed relative TRS to weighted TRS
----------------------------------------

(6)
Obligation:
The Runtime Complexity (innermost) of the given CpxWeightedTrs could be proven to be BOUNDS(1, INF).


The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   equal0(Nil) -> number42(Nil) [1]
   equal0(Cons(x, xs)) -> equal0(Cons(x, xs)) [1]
   number42(x) -> Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Nil)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) [1]
   goal(x) -> equal0(x) [1]

Rewrite Strategy: INNERMOST
----------------------------------------

(7) TypeInferenceProof (BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID))
Infered types.
----------------------------------------

(8)
Obligation:
Runtime Complexity Weighted TRS with Types.
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   equal0(Nil) -> number42(Nil) [1]
   equal0(Cons(x, xs)) -> equal0(Cons(x, xs)) [1]
   number42(x) -> Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Nil)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) [1]
   goal(x) -> equal0(x) [1]

The TRS has the following type information:
equal0 :: Nil:Cons -> Nil:Cons
Nil :: Nil:Cons
number42 :: Nil:Cons -> Nil:Cons
Cons :: Nil:Cons -> Nil:Cons -> Nil:Cons
goal :: Nil:Cons -> Nil:Cons

Rewrite Strategy: INNERMOST
----------------------------------------

(9) CompletionProof (UPPER BOUND(ID))
The TRS is a completely defined constructor system, as every type has a constant constructor and the following rules were added:
none

And the following fresh constants: none

----------------------------------------

(10)
Obligation:
Runtime Complexity Weighted TRS where all functions are completely defined. The underlying TRS is:

Runtime Complexity Weighted TRS with Types.
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   equal0(Nil) -> number42(Nil) [1]
   equal0(Cons(x, xs)) -> equal0(Cons(x, xs)) [1]
   number42(x) -> Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Nil)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) [1]
   goal(x) -> equal0(x) [1]

The TRS has the following type information:
equal0 :: Nil:Cons -> Nil:Cons
Nil :: Nil:Cons
number42 :: Nil:Cons -> Nil:Cons
Cons :: Nil:Cons -> Nil:Cons -> Nil:Cons
goal :: Nil:Cons -> Nil:Cons

Rewrite Strategy: INNERMOST
----------------------------------------

(11) CpxTypedWeightedTrsToRntsProof (UPPER BOUND(ID))
Transformed the TRS into an over-approximating RNTS by (improved) Size Abstraction.
The constant constructors are abstracted as follows:

   Nil => 0

----------------------------------------

(12)
Obligation:
Complexity RNTS consisting of the following rules:

   equal0(z) -{ 1 }-> number42(0) :|: z = 0
   equal0(z) -{ 1 }-> equal0(1 + x + xs) :|: z = 1 + x + xs, xs >= 0, x >= 0
   goal(z) -{ 1 }-> equal0(x) :|: x >= 0, z = x
   number42(z) -{ 1 }-> 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: x >= 0, z = x

Only complete derivations are relevant for the runtime complexity.

----------------------------------------

(13) CompletionProof (UPPER BOUND(ID))
The transformation into a RNTS is sound, since:

(a) The obligation is a constructor system where every type has a constant constructor,

(b) The following defined symbols do not have to be completely defined, as they can never occur inside other defined symbols:

   equal0_1
   number42_1
   goal_1

(c) The following functions are completely defined:
none

Due to the following rules being added:
none

And the following fresh constants: none

----------------------------------------

(14)
Obligation:
Runtime Complexity Weighted TRS where critical functions are completely defined. The underlying TRS is:

Runtime Complexity Weighted TRS with Types.
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   equal0(Nil) -> number42(Nil) [1]
   equal0(Cons(x, xs)) -> equal0(Cons(x, xs)) [1]
   number42(x) -> Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Nil)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) [1]
   goal(x) -> equal0(x) [1]

The TRS has the following type information:
equal0 :: Nil:Cons -> Nil:Cons
Nil :: Nil:Cons
number42 :: Nil:Cons -> Nil:Cons
Cons :: Nil:Cons -> Nil:Cons -> Nil:Cons
goal :: Nil:Cons -> Nil:Cons

Rewrite Strategy: INNERMOST
----------------------------------------

(15) NarrowingProof (BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID))
Narrowed the inner basic terms of all right-hand sides by a single narrowing step.
----------------------------------------

(16)
Obligation:
Runtime Complexity Weighted TRS where critical functions are completely defined. The underlying TRS is:

Runtime Complexity Weighted TRS with Types.
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   equal0(Nil) -> number42(Nil) [1]
   equal0(Cons(x, xs)) -> equal0(Cons(x, xs)) [1]
   number42(x) -> Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Nil)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) [1]
   goal(x) -> equal0(x) [1]

The TRS has the following type information:
equal0 :: Nil:Cons -> Nil:Cons
Nil :: Nil:Cons
number42 :: Nil:Cons -> Nil:Cons
Cons :: Nil:Cons -> Nil:Cons -> Nil:Cons
goal :: Nil:Cons -> Nil:Cons

Rewrite Strategy: INNERMOST
----------------------------------------

(17) CpxTypedWeightedTrsToRntsProof (UPPER BOUND(ID))
Transformed the TRS into an over-approximating RNTS by (improved) Size Abstraction.
The constant constructors are abstracted as follows:

   Nil => 0

----------------------------------------

(18)
Obligation:
Complexity RNTS consisting of the following rules:

   equal0(z) -{ 1 }-> number42(0) :|: z = 0
   equal0(z) -{ 1 }-> equal0(1 + x + xs) :|: z = 1 + x + xs, xs >= 0, x >= 0
   goal(z) -{ 1 }-> equal0(x) :|: x >= 0, z = x
   number42(z) -{ 1 }-> 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: x >= 0, z = x


----------------------------------------

(19) InliningProof (UPPER BOUND(ID))
Inlined the following terminating rules on right-hand sides where appropriate:

   number42(z) -{ 1 }-> 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: x >= 0, z = x

----------------------------------------

(20)
Obligation:
Complexity RNTS consisting of the following rules:

   equal0(z) -{ 1 }-> equal0(1 + x + xs) :|: z = 1 + x + xs, xs >= 0, x >= 0
   equal0(z) -{ 2 }-> 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z = 0, x >= 0, 0 = x
   goal(z) -{ 1 }-> equal0(x) :|: x >= 0, z = x
   number42(z) -{ 1 }-> 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: x >= 0, z = x


----------------------------------------

(21) SimplificationProof (BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID))
Simplified the RNTS by moving equalities from the constraints into the right-hand sides.
----------------------------------------

(22)
Obligation:
Complexity RNTS consisting of the following rules:

   equal0(z) -{ 1 }-> equal0(1 + x + xs) :|: z = 1 + x + xs, xs >= 0, x >= 0
   equal0(z) -{ 2 }-> 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z = 0, x >= 0, 0 = x
   goal(z) -{ 1 }-> equal0(z) :|: z >= 0
   number42(z) -{ 1 }-> 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z >= 0


----------------------------------------

(23) CpxRntsAnalysisOrderProof (BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID))
Found the following analysis order by SCC decomposition:

   { number42 }
   { equal0 }
   { goal }

----------------------------------------

(24)
Obligation:
Complexity RNTS consisting of the following rules:

   equal0(z) -{ 1 }-> equal0(1 + x + xs) :|: z = 1 + x + xs, xs >= 0, x >= 0
   equal0(z) -{ 2 }-> 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z = 0, x >= 0, 0 = x
   goal(z) -{ 1 }-> equal0(z) :|: z >= 0
   number42(z) -{ 1 }-> 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z >= 0

Function symbols to be analyzed: {number42}, {equal0}, {goal}

----------------------------------------

(25) ResultPropagationProof (UPPER BOUND(ID))
Applied inner abstraction using the recently inferred runtime/size bounds where possible.
----------------------------------------

(26)
Obligation:
Complexity RNTS consisting of the following rules:

   equal0(z) -{ 1 }-> equal0(1 + x + xs) :|: z = 1 + x + xs, xs >= 0, x >= 0
   equal0(z) -{ 2 }-> 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z = 0, x >= 0, 0 = x
   goal(z) -{ 1 }-> equal0(z) :|: z >= 0
   number42(z) -{ 1 }-> 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z >= 0

Function symbols to be analyzed: {number42}, {equal0}, {goal}

----------------------------------------

(27) IntTrsBoundProof (UPPER BOUND(ID))

Computed SIZE bound using CoFloCo for: number42
after applying outer abstraction to obtain an ITS,
resulting in: O(1) with polynomial bound: 42

----------------------------------------

(28)
Obligation:
Complexity RNTS consisting of the following rules:

   equal0(z) -{ 1 }-> equal0(1 + x + xs) :|: z = 1 + x + xs, xs >= 0, x >= 0
   equal0(z) -{ 2 }-> 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z = 0, x >= 0, 0 = x
   goal(z) -{ 1 }-> equal0(z) :|: z >= 0
   number42(z) -{ 1 }-> 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z >= 0

Function symbols to be analyzed: {number42}, {equal0}, {goal}
Previous analysis results are:
  number42: runtime: ?, size: O(1) [42]

----------------------------------------

(29) IntTrsBoundProof (UPPER BOUND(ID))

Computed RUNTIME bound using CoFloCo for: number42
after applying outer abstraction to obtain an ITS,
resulting in: O(1) with polynomial bound: 1

----------------------------------------

(30)
Obligation:
Complexity RNTS consisting of the following rules:

   equal0(z) -{ 1 }-> equal0(1 + x + xs) :|: z = 1 + x + xs, xs >= 0, x >= 0
   equal0(z) -{ 2 }-> 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z = 0, x >= 0, 0 = x
   goal(z) -{ 1 }-> equal0(z) :|: z >= 0
   number42(z) -{ 1 }-> 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z >= 0

Function symbols to be analyzed: {equal0}, {goal}
Previous analysis results are:
  number42: runtime: O(1) [1], size: O(1) [42]

----------------------------------------

(31) ResultPropagationProof (UPPER BOUND(ID))
Applied inner abstraction using the recently inferred runtime/size bounds where possible.
----------------------------------------

(32)
Obligation:
Complexity RNTS consisting of the following rules:

   equal0(z) -{ 1 }-> equal0(1 + x + xs) :|: z = 1 + x + xs, xs >= 0, x >= 0
   equal0(z) -{ 2 }-> 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z = 0, x >= 0, 0 = x
   goal(z) -{ 1 }-> equal0(z) :|: z >= 0
   number42(z) -{ 1 }-> 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z >= 0

Function symbols to be analyzed: {equal0}, {goal}
Previous analysis results are:
  number42: runtime: O(1) [1], size: O(1) [42]

----------------------------------------

(33) IntTrsBoundProof (UPPER BOUND(ID))

Computed SIZE bound using CoFloCo for: equal0
after applying outer abstraction to obtain an ITS,
resulting in: O(1) with polynomial bound: 42

----------------------------------------

(34)
Obligation:
Complexity RNTS consisting of the following rules:

   equal0(z) -{ 1 }-> equal0(1 + x + xs) :|: z = 1 + x + xs, xs >= 0, x >= 0
   equal0(z) -{ 2 }-> 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z = 0, x >= 0, 0 = x
   goal(z) -{ 1 }-> equal0(z) :|: z >= 0
   number42(z) -{ 1 }-> 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z >= 0

Function symbols to be analyzed: {equal0}, {goal}
Previous analysis results are:
  number42: runtime: O(1) [1], size: O(1) [42]
  equal0: runtime: ?, size: O(1) [42]

----------------------------------------

(35) IntTrsBoundProof (UPPER BOUND(ID))

Computed RUNTIME bound using CoFloCo for: equal0
after applying outer abstraction to obtain an ITS,
resulting in: INF with polynomial bound: ?

----------------------------------------

(36)
Obligation:
Complexity RNTS consisting of the following rules:

   equal0(z) -{ 1 }-> equal0(1 + x + xs) :|: z = 1 + x + xs, xs >= 0, x >= 0
   equal0(z) -{ 2 }-> 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z = 0, x >= 0, 0 = x
   goal(z) -{ 1 }-> equal0(z) :|: z >= 0
   number42(z) -{ 1 }-> 1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + (1 + 0 + 0))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) :|: z >= 0

Function symbols to be analyzed: {equal0}, {goal}
Previous analysis results are:
  number42: runtime: O(1) [1], size: O(1) [42]
  equal0: runtime: INF, size: O(1) [42]

----------------------------------------

(37) CpxTrsToCdtProof (UPPER BOUND(ID))
Converted Cpx (relative) TRS with rewrite strategy PARALLEL_INNERMOST to CDT
----------------------------------------

(38)
Obligation:
Complexity Dependency Tuples Problem

Rules:
   equal0(Nil) -> number42(Nil)
   equal0(Cons(z0, z1)) -> equal0(Cons(z0, z1))
   number42(z0) -> Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Nil))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
   goal(z0) -> equal0(z0)
Tuples:
   EQUAL0(Nil) -> c(NUMBER42(Nil))
   EQUAL0(Cons(z0, z1)) -> c1(EQUAL0(Cons(z0, z1)))
   NUMBER42(z0) -> c2
   GOAL(z0) -> c3(EQUAL0(z0))
S tuples:
   EQUAL0(Nil) -> c(NUMBER42(Nil))
   EQUAL0(Cons(z0, z1)) -> c1(EQUAL0(Cons(z0, z1)))
   NUMBER42(z0) -> c2
   GOAL(z0) -> c3(EQUAL0(z0))
K tuples:none
Defined Rule Symbols:   equal0_1, number42_1, goal_1

Defined Pair Symbols:   EQUAL0_1, NUMBER42_1, GOAL_1

Compound Symbols:   c_1, c1_1, c2, c3_1


----------------------------------------

(39) CdtLeafRemovalProof (ComplexityIfPolyImplication)
Removed 1 leading nodes:
   GOAL(z0) -> c3(EQUAL0(z0))
Removed 2 trailing nodes:
   EQUAL0(Nil) -> c(NUMBER42(Nil))
   NUMBER42(z0) -> c2

----------------------------------------

(40)
Obligation:
Complexity Dependency Tuples Problem

Rules:
   equal0(Nil) -> number42(Nil)
   equal0(Cons(z0, z1)) -> equal0(Cons(z0, z1))
   number42(z0) -> Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Nil))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
   goal(z0) -> equal0(z0)
Tuples:
   EQUAL0(Cons(z0, z1)) -> c1(EQUAL0(Cons(z0, z1)))
S tuples:
   EQUAL0(Cons(z0, z1)) -> c1(EQUAL0(Cons(z0, z1)))
K tuples:none
Defined Rule Symbols:   equal0_1, number42_1, goal_1

Defined Pair Symbols:   EQUAL0_1

Compound Symbols:   c1_1


----------------------------------------

(41) CdtUsableRulesProof (BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID))
The following rules are not usable and were removed:
   equal0(Nil) -> number42(Nil)
   equal0(Cons(z0, z1)) -> equal0(Cons(z0, z1))
   number42(z0) -> Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Cons(Nil, Nil))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
   goal(z0) -> equal0(z0)

----------------------------------------

(42)
Obligation:
Complexity Dependency Tuples Problem

Rules:none
Tuples:
   EQUAL0(Cons(z0, z1)) -> c1(EQUAL0(Cons(z0, z1)))
S tuples:
   EQUAL0(Cons(z0, z1)) -> c1(EQUAL0(Cons(z0, z1)))
K tuples:none
Defined Rule Symbols:none

Defined Pair Symbols:   EQUAL0_1

Compound Symbols:   c1_1