MAYBE
* Step 1: DependencyPairs MAYBE
    + Considered Problem:
        - Strict TRS:
            c() -> d()
            g() -> h()
            h() -> g()
        - Signature:
            {c/0,g/0,h/0} / {d/0}
        - Obligation:
            innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {c,g,h} and constructors {d}
    + Applied Processor:
        DependencyPairs {dpKind_ = DT}
    + Details:
        We add the following dependency tuples:
        
        Strict DPs
          c#() -> c_1()
          g#() -> c_2(h#())
          h#() -> c_3(g#())
        Weak DPs
          
        
        and mark the set of starting terms.
* Step 2: UsableRules MAYBE
    + Considered Problem:
        - Strict DPs:
            c#() -> c_1()
            g#() -> c_2(h#())
            h#() -> c_3(g#())
        - Weak TRS:
            c() -> d()
            g() -> h()
            h() -> g()
        - Signature:
            {c/0,g/0,h/0,c#/0,g#/0,h#/0} / {d/0,c_1/0,c_2/1,c_3/1}
        - Obligation:
            innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {c#,g#,h#} and constructors {d}
    + Applied Processor:
        UsableRules
    + Details:
        We replace rewrite rules by usable rules:
          c#() -> c_1()
          g#() -> c_2(h#())
          h#() -> c_3(g#())
* Step 3: PredecessorEstimation MAYBE
    + Considered Problem:
        - Strict DPs:
            c#() -> c_1()
            g#() -> c_2(h#())
            h#() -> c_3(g#())
        - Signature:
            {c/0,g/0,h/0,c#/0,g#/0,h#/0} / {d/0,c_1/0,c_2/1,c_3/1}
        - Obligation:
            innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {c#,g#,h#} and constructors {d}
    + Applied Processor:
        PredecessorEstimation {onSelection = all simple predecessor estimation selector}
    + Details:
        We estimate the number of application of
          {1}
        by application of
          Pre({1}) = {}.
        Here rules are labelled as follows:
          1: c#() -> c_1()
          2: g#() -> c_2(h#())
          3: h#() -> c_3(g#())
* Step 4: RemoveWeakSuffixes MAYBE
    + Considered Problem:
        - Strict DPs:
            g#() -> c_2(h#())
            h#() -> c_3(g#())
        - Weak DPs:
            c#() -> c_1()
        - Signature:
            {c/0,g/0,h/0,c#/0,g#/0,h#/0} / {d/0,c_1/0,c_2/1,c_3/1}
        - Obligation:
            innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {c#,g#,h#} and constructors {d}
    + Applied Processor:
        RemoveWeakSuffixes
    + Details:
        Consider the dependency graph
          1:S:g#() -> c_2(h#())
             -->_1 h#() -> c_3(g#()):2
          
          2:S:h#() -> c_3(g#())
             -->_1 g#() -> c_2(h#()):1
          
          3:W:c#() -> c_1()
             
          
        The following weak DPs constitute a sub-graph of the DG that is closed under successors. The DPs are removed.
          3: c#() -> c_1()
* Step 5: WeightGap MAYBE
    + Considered Problem:
        - Strict DPs:
            g#() -> c_2(h#())
            h#() -> c_3(g#())
        - Signature:
            {c/0,g/0,h/0,c#/0,g#/0,h#/0} / {d/0,c_1/0,c_2/1,c_3/1}
        - Obligation:
            innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {c#,g#,h#} and constructors {d}
    + Applied Processor:
        WeightGap {wgDimension = 1, wgDegree = 0, wgKind = Algebraic, wgUArgs = UArgs, wgOn = WgOnAny}
    + Details:
        The weightgap principle applies using the following constant growth matrix-interpretation:
          We apply a matrix interpretation of kind constructor based matrix interpretation (containing no more than 0 non-zero interpretation-entries in the diagonal of the component-wise maxima):
          The following argument positions are considered usable:
            uargs(c_2) = {1},
            uargs(c_3) = {1}
          
          Following symbols are considered usable:
            all
          TcT has computed the following interpretation:
              p(c) = [0]         
              p(d) = [0]         
              p(g) = [0]         
              p(h) = [0]         
             p(c#) = [0]         
             p(g#) = [0]         
             p(h#) = [1]         
            p(c_1) = [0]         
            p(c_2) = [1] x1 + [0]
            p(c_3) = [1] x1 + [0]
          
          Following rules are strictly oriented:
          h#() = [1]      
               > [0]      
               = c_3(g#())
          
          
          Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented:
          g#() =  [0]      
               >= [1]      
               =  c_2(h#())
          
        Further, it can be verified that all rules not oriented are covered by the weightgap condition.
* Step 6: Failure MAYBE
  + Considered Problem:
      - Strict DPs:
          g#() -> c_2(h#())
      - Weak DPs:
          h#() -> c_3(g#())
      - Signature:
          {c/0,g/0,h/0,c#/0,g#/0,h#/0} / {d/0,c_1/0,c_2/1,c_3/1}
      - Obligation:
          innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {c#,g#,h#} and constructors {d}
  + Applied Processor:
      EmptyProcessor
  + Details:
      The problem is still open.
MAYBE