MAYBE
* Step 1: WeightGap MAYBE
    + Considered Problem:
        - Strict TRS:
            c() -> d()
            g(X) -> h(X)
            h(d()) -> g(c())
        - Signature:
            {c/0,g/1,h/1} / {d/0}
        - Obligation:
            innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {c,g,h} and constructors {d}
    + 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(g) = {1}
          
          Following symbols are considered usable:
            all
          TcT has computed the following interpretation:
            p(c) = [2]         
            p(d) = [0]         
            p(g) = [1] x1 + [0]
            p(h) = [0]         
          
          Following rules are strictly oriented:
          c() = [2]
              > [0]
              = d()
          
          
          Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented:
            g(X) =  [1] X + [0]
                 >= [0]        
                 =  h(X)       
          
          h(d()) =  [0]        
                 >= [2]        
                 =  g(c())     
          
        Further, it can be verified that all rules not oriented are covered by the weightgap condition.
* Step 2: WeightGap MAYBE
    + Considered Problem:
        - Strict TRS:
            g(X) -> h(X)
            h(d()) -> g(c())
        - Weak TRS:
            c() -> d()
        - Signature:
            {c/0,g/1,h/1} / {d/0}
        - Obligation:
            innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {c,g,h} and constructors {d}
    + 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(g) = {1}
          
          Following symbols are considered usable:
            all
          TcT has computed the following interpretation:
            p(c) = [0]         
            p(d) = [0]         
            p(g) = [1] x1 + [0]
            p(h) = [1]         
          
          Following rules are strictly oriented:
          h(d()) = [1]   
                 > [0]   
                 = g(c())
          
          
          Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented:
           c() =  [0]        
               >= [0]        
               =  d()        
          
          g(X) =  [1] X + [0]
               >= [1]        
               =  h(X)       
          
        Further, it can be verified that all rules not oriented are covered by the weightgap condition.
* Step 3: Failure MAYBE
  + Considered Problem:
      - Strict TRS:
          g(X) -> h(X)
      - Weak TRS:
          c() -> d()
          h(d()) -> g(c())
      - Signature:
          {c/0,g/1,h/1} / {d/0}
      - Obligation:
          innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {c,g,h} and constructors {d}
  + Applied Processor:
      EmptyProcessor
  + Details:
      The problem is still open.
MAYBE