WORST_CASE(?,O(n^1))
proof of input_OGpbwTgaD7.trs
# AProVE Commit ID: aff8ecad908e01718a4c36e68d2e55d5e0f16e15 fuhs 20220216 unpublished


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

(0) CpxTRS
(1) RelTrsToTrsProof [UPPER BOUND(ID), 0 ms]
(2) CpxTRS
(3) CpxTrsMatchBoundsProof [FINISHED, 0 ms]
(4) BOUNDS(1, n^1)


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

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


The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   f(g(x)) -> g(g(f(x)))
   f(g(x)) -> g(g(g(x)))

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

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

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


The TRS R consists of the following rules:

   f(g(x)) -> g(g(f(x)))
   f(g(x)) -> g(g(g(x)))

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

(3) CpxTrsMatchBoundsProof (FINISHED)
A linear upper bound on the runtime complexity of the TRS R could be shown with a Match Bound [MATCHBOUNDS1,MATCHBOUNDS2] of 1. 
The certificate found is represented by the following graph.

"[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]
{(1,2,[f_1|0]), (1,3,[g_1|1]), (1,5,[g_1|1]), (2,2,[g_1|0]), (3,4,[g_1|1]), (4,2,[f_1|1]), (4,3,[g_1|1]), (4,5,[g_1|1]), (5,6,[g_1|1]), (6,2,[g_1|1])}"
----------------------------------------

(4)
BOUNDS(1, n^1)