MAYBE We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict Trs: { minus(x, 0()) -> x , minus(s(x), s(y)) -> minus(x, y) , double(0()) -> 0() , double(s(x)) -> s(s(double(x))) , plus(0(), y) -> y , plus(s(x), y) -> s(plus(x, y)) , plus(s(x), y) -> s(plus(minus(x, y), double(y))) , plus(s(x), y) -> plus(x, s(y)) , plus(s(plus(x, y)), z) -> s(plus(plus(x, y), z)) } Obligation: runtime complexity Answer: MAYBE None of the processors succeeded. Details of failed attempt(s): ----------------------------- 1) 'WithProblem (timeout of 60 seconds)' failed due to the following reason: Computation stopped due to timeout after 60.0 seconds. 2) 'Best' failed due to the following reason: None of the processors succeeded. Details of failed attempt(s): ----------------------------- 1) 'WithProblem (timeout of 30 seconds) (timeout of 60 seconds)' failed due to the following reason: Computation stopped due to timeout after 30.0 seconds. 2) 'Best' failed due to the following reason: None of the processors succeeded. Details of failed attempt(s): ----------------------------- 1) 'bsearch-popstar (timeout of 60 seconds)' failed due to the following reason: The processor is inapplicable, reason: Processor only applicable for innermost runtime complexity analysis 2) 'Polynomial Path Order (PS) (timeout of 60 seconds)' failed due to the following reason: The processor is inapplicable, reason: Processor only applicable for innermost runtime complexity analysis 3) 'Fastest (timeout of 5 seconds) (timeout of 60 seconds)' failed due to the following reason: None of the processors succeeded. Details of failed attempt(s): ----------------------------- 1) 'Bounds with perSymbol-enrichment and initial automaton 'match'' failed due to the following reason: match-boundness of the problem could not be verified. 2) 'Bounds with minimal-enrichment and initial automaton 'match'' failed due to the following reason: match-boundness of the problem could not be verified. 3) 'Innermost Weak Dependency Pairs (timeout of 60 seconds)' failed due to the following reason: We add the following weak dependency pairs: Strict DPs: { minus^#(x, 0()) -> c_1(x) , minus^#(s(x), s(y)) -> c_2(minus^#(x, y)) , double^#(0()) -> c_3() , double^#(s(x)) -> c_4(double^#(x)) , plus^#(0(), y) -> c_5(y) , plus^#(s(x), y) -> c_6(plus^#(x, y)) , plus^#(s(x), y) -> c_7(plus^#(minus(x, y), double(y))) , plus^#(s(x), y) -> c_8(plus^#(x, s(y))) , plus^#(s(plus(x, y)), z) -> c_9(plus^#(plus(x, y), z)) } and mark the set of starting terms. We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict DPs: { minus^#(x, 0()) -> c_1(x) , minus^#(s(x), s(y)) -> c_2(minus^#(x, y)) , double^#(0()) -> c_3() , double^#(s(x)) -> c_4(double^#(x)) , plus^#(0(), y) -> c_5(y) , plus^#(s(x), y) -> c_6(plus^#(x, y)) , plus^#(s(x), y) -> c_7(plus^#(minus(x, y), double(y))) , plus^#(s(x), y) -> c_8(plus^#(x, s(y))) , plus^#(s(plus(x, y)), z) -> c_9(plus^#(plus(x, y), z)) } Strict Trs: { minus(x, 0()) -> x , minus(s(x), s(y)) -> minus(x, y) , double(0()) -> 0() , double(s(x)) -> s(s(double(x))) , plus(0(), y) -> y , plus(s(x), y) -> s(plus(x, y)) , plus(s(x), y) -> s(plus(minus(x, y), double(y))) , plus(s(x), y) -> plus(x, s(y)) , plus(s(plus(x, y)), z) -> s(plus(plus(x, y), z)) } Obligation: runtime complexity Answer: MAYBE We estimate the number of application of {3} by applications of Pre({3}) = {1,4,5}. Here rules are labeled as follows: DPs: { 1: minus^#(x, 0()) -> c_1(x) , 2: minus^#(s(x), s(y)) -> c_2(minus^#(x, y)) , 3: double^#(0()) -> c_3() , 4: double^#(s(x)) -> c_4(double^#(x)) , 5: plus^#(0(), y) -> c_5(y) , 6: plus^#(s(x), y) -> c_6(plus^#(x, y)) , 7: plus^#(s(x), y) -> c_7(plus^#(minus(x, y), double(y))) , 8: plus^#(s(x), y) -> c_8(plus^#(x, s(y))) , 9: plus^#(s(plus(x, y)), z) -> c_9(plus^#(plus(x, y), z)) } We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict DPs: { minus^#(x, 0()) -> c_1(x) , minus^#(s(x), s(y)) -> c_2(minus^#(x, y)) , double^#(s(x)) -> c_4(double^#(x)) , plus^#(0(), y) -> c_5(y) , plus^#(s(x), y) -> c_6(plus^#(x, y)) , plus^#(s(x), y) -> c_7(plus^#(minus(x, y), double(y))) , plus^#(s(x), y) -> c_8(plus^#(x, s(y))) , plus^#(s(plus(x, y)), z) -> c_9(plus^#(plus(x, y), z)) } Strict Trs: { minus(x, 0()) -> x , minus(s(x), s(y)) -> minus(x, y) , double(0()) -> 0() , double(s(x)) -> s(s(double(x))) , plus(0(), y) -> y , plus(s(x), y) -> s(plus(x, y)) , plus(s(x), y) -> s(plus(minus(x, y), double(y))) , plus(s(x), y) -> plus(x, s(y)) , plus(s(plus(x, y)), z) -> s(plus(plus(x, y), z)) } Weak DPs: { double^#(0()) -> c_3() } Obligation: runtime complexity Answer: MAYBE Empty strict component of the problem is NOT empty. Arrrr..