MAYBE * Step 1: WeightGap MAYBE + Considered Problem: - Strict TRS: f(s(x),x) -> f(s(x),round(s(x))) round(0()) -> 0() round(0()) -> s(0()) round(s(0())) -> s(0()) round(s(s(x))) -> s(s(round(x))) - Signature: {f/2,round/1} / {0/0,s/1} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {f,round} and constructors {0,s} + Applied Processor: WeightGap {wgDimension = 1, wgDegree = 1, wgKind = Algebraic, wgUArgs = UArgs, wgOn = WgOnAny} + Details: The weightgap principle applies using the following nonconstant growth matrix-interpretation: We apply a matrix interpretation of kind constructor based matrix interpretation: The following argument positions are considered usable: uargs(f) = {2}, uargs(s) = {1} Following symbols are considered usable: all TcT has computed the following interpretation: p(0) = [1] p(f) = [1] x2 + [2] p(round) = [1] x1 + [14] p(s) = [1] x1 + [0] Following rules are strictly oriented: round(0()) = [15] > [1] = 0() round(0()) = [15] > [1] = s(0()) round(s(0())) = [15] > [1] = s(0()) Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented: f(s(x),x) = [1] x + [2] >= [1] x + [16] = f(s(x),round(s(x))) round(s(s(x))) = [1] x + [14] >= [1] x + [14] = s(s(round(x))) Further, it can be verified that all rules not oriented are covered by the weightgap condition. * Step 2: Failure MAYBE + Considered Problem: - Strict TRS: f(s(x),x) -> f(s(x),round(s(x))) round(s(s(x))) -> s(s(round(x))) - Weak TRS: round(0()) -> 0() round(0()) -> s(0()) round(s(0())) -> s(0()) - Signature: {f/2,round/1} / {0/0,s/1} - Obligation: innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {f,round} and constructors {0,s} + Applied Processor: EmptyProcessor + Details: The problem is still open. MAYBE