MAYBE
* Step 1: WeightGap MAYBE
    + Considered Problem:
        - Strict TRS:
            cons(x,cons(y,z)) -> big()
            inf(x) -> cons(x,inf(s(x)))
        - Signature:
            {cons/2,inf/1} / {big/0,s/1}
        - Obligation:
            innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {cons,inf} and constructors {big,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(cons) = {2}
          
          Following symbols are considered usable:
            all
          TcT has computed the following interpretation:
             p(big) = [1]         
            p(cons) = [1] x2 + [1]
             p(inf) = [4] x1 + [0]
               p(s) = [1] x1 + [4]
          
          Following rules are strictly oriented:
          cons(x,cons(y,z)) = [1] z + [2]
                            > [1]        
                            = big()      
          
          
          Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented:
          inf(x) =  [4] x + [0]      
                 >= [4] x + [17]     
                 =  cons(x,inf(s(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:
          inf(x) -> cons(x,inf(s(x)))
      - Weak TRS:
          cons(x,cons(y,z)) -> big()
      - Signature:
          {cons/2,inf/1} / {big/0,s/1}
      - Obligation:
          innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {cons,inf} and constructors {big,s}
  + Applied Processor:
      EmptyProcessor
  + Details:
      The problem is still open.
MAYBE