MAYBE
* Step 1: DependencyPairs MAYBE
    + Considered Problem:
        - Strict TRS:
            activate(X) -> X
            activate(n__cons(X1,X2)) -> cons(X1,X2)
            activate(n__from(X)) -> from(X)
            activate(n__nil()) -> nil()
            cons(X1,X2) -> n__cons(X1,X2)
            from(X) -> cons(X,n__from(s(X)))
            from(X) -> n__from(X)
            length(n__cons(X,Y)) -> s(length1(activate(Y)))
            length(n__nil()) -> 0()
            length1(X) -> length(activate(X))
            nil() -> n__nil()
        - Signature:
            {activate/1,cons/2,from/1,length/1,length1/1,nil/0} / {0/0,n__cons/2,n__from/1,n__nil/0,s/1}
        - Obligation:
            innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {activate,cons,from,length,length1
            ,nil} and constructors {0,n__cons,n__from,n__nil,s}
    + Applied Processor:
        DependencyPairs {dpKind_ = WIDP}
    + Details:
        We add the following weak innermost dependency pairs:
        
        Strict DPs
          activate#(X) -> c_1()
          activate#(n__cons(X1,X2)) -> c_2(cons#(X1,X2))
          activate#(n__from(X)) -> c_3(from#(X))
          activate#(n__nil()) -> c_4(nil#())
          cons#(X1,X2) -> c_5()
          from#(X) -> c_6(cons#(X,n__from(s(X))))
          from#(X) -> c_7()
          length#(n__cons(X,Y)) -> c_8(length1#(activate(Y)))
          length#(n__nil()) -> c_9()
          length1#(X) -> c_10(length#(activate(X)))
          nil#() -> c_11()
        Weak DPs
          
        
        and mark the set of starting terms.
* Step 2: UsableRules MAYBE
    + Considered Problem:
        - Strict DPs:
            activate#(X) -> c_1()
            activate#(n__cons(X1,X2)) -> c_2(cons#(X1,X2))
            activate#(n__from(X)) -> c_3(from#(X))
            activate#(n__nil()) -> c_4(nil#())
            cons#(X1,X2) -> c_5()
            from#(X) -> c_6(cons#(X,n__from(s(X))))
            from#(X) -> c_7()
            length#(n__cons(X,Y)) -> c_8(length1#(activate(Y)))
            length#(n__nil()) -> c_9()
            length1#(X) -> c_10(length#(activate(X)))
            nil#() -> c_11()
        - Strict TRS:
            activate(X) -> X
            activate(n__cons(X1,X2)) -> cons(X1,X2)
            activate(n__from(X)) -> from(X)
            activate(n__nil()) -> nil()
            cons(X1,X2) -> n__cons(X1,X2)
            from(X) -> cons(X,n__from(s(X)))
            from(X) -> n__from(X)
            length(n__cons(X,Y)) -> s(length1(activate(Y)))
            length(n__nil()) -> 0()
            length1(X) -> length(activate(X))
            nil() -> n__nil()
        - Signature:
            {activate/1,cons/2,from/1,length/1,length1/1,nil/0,activate#/1,cons#/2,from#/1,length#/1,length1#/1
            ,nil#/0} / {0/0,n__cons/2,n__from/1,n__nil/0,s/1,c_1/0,c_2/1,c_3/1,c_4/1,c_5/0,c_6/1,c_7/0,c_8/1,c_9/0
            ,c_10/1,c_11/0}
        - Obligation:
            innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {activate#,cons#,from#,length#,length1#
            ,nil#} and constructors {0,n__cons,n__from,n__nil,s}
    + Applied Processor:
        UsableRules
    + Details:
        We replace rewrite rules by usable rules:
          activate(X) -> X
          activate(n__cons(X1,X2)) -> cons(X1,X2)
          activate(n__from(X)) -> from(X)
          activate(n__nil()) -> nil()
          cons(X1,X2) -> n__cons(X1,X2)
          from(X) -> cons(X,n__from(s(X)))
          from(X) -> n__from(X)
          nil() -> n__nil()
          activate#(X) -> c_1()
          activate#(n__cons(X1,X2)) -> c_2(cons#(X1,X2))
          activate#(n__from(X)) -> c_3(from#(X))
          activate#(n__nil()) -> c_4(nil#())
          cons#(X1,X2) -> c_5()
          from#(X) -> c_6(cons#(X,n__from(s(X))))
          from#(X) -> c_7()
          length#(n__cons(X,Y)) -> c_8(length1#(activate(Y)))
          length#(n__nil()) -> c_9()
          length1#(X) -> c_10(length#(activate(X)))
          nil#() -> c_11()
* Step 3: WeightGap MAYBE
    + Considered Problem:
        - Strict DPs:
            activate#(X) -> c_1()
            activate#(n__cons(X1,X2)) -> c_2(cons#(X1,X2))
            activate#(n__from(X)) -> c_3(from#(X))
            activate#(n__nil()) -> c_4(nil#())
            cons#(X1,X2) -> c_5()
            from#(X) -> c_6(cons#(X,n__from(s(X))))
            from#(X) -> c_7()
            length#(n__cons(X,Y)) -> c_8(length1#(activate(Y)))
            length#(n__nil()) -> c_9()
            length1#(X) -> c_10(length#(activate(X)))
            nil#() -> c_11()
        - Strict TRS:
            activate(X) -> X
            activate(n__cons(X1,X2)) -> cons(X1,X2)
            activate(n__from(X)) -> from(X)
            activate(n__nil()) -> nil()
            cons(X1,X2) -> n__cons(X1,X2)
            from(X) -> cons(X,n__from(s(X)))
            from(X) -> n__from(X)
            nil() -> n__nil()
        - Signature:
            {activate/1,cons/2,from/1,length/1,length1/1,nil/0,activate#/1,cons#/2,from#/1,length#/1,length1#/1
            ,nil#/0} / {0/0,n__cons/2,n__from/1,n__nil/0,s/1,c_1/0,c_2/1,c_3/1,c_4/1,c_5/0,c_6/1,c_7/0,c_8/1,c_9/0
            ,c_10/1,c_11/0}
        - Obligation:
            innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {activate#,cons#,from#,length#,length1#
            ,nil#} and constructors {0,n__cons,n__from,n__nil,s}
    + Applied Processor:
        WeightGap {wgDimension = 1, wgDegree = 1, wgKind = Algebraic, wgUArgs = UArgs, wgOn = WgOnTrs}
    + Details:
        The weightgap principle applies using the following constant growth matrix-interpretation:
          We apply a matrix interpretation of kind constructor based matrix interpretation:
          The following argument positions are considered usable:
            uargs(length#) = {1},
            uargs(length1#) = {1},
            uargs(c_2) = {1},
            uargs(c_3) = {1},
            uargs(c_4) = {1},
            uargs(c_6) = {1},
            uargs(c_8) = {1},
            uargs(c_10) = {1}
          
          Following symbols are considered usable:
            all
          TcT has computed the following interpretation:
                    p(0) = [0]          
             p(activate) = [1] x1 + [14]
                 p(cons) = [1] x2 + [2] 
                 p(from) = [1] x1 + [10]
               p(length) = [0]          
              p(length1) = [0]          
              p(n__cons) = [1] x2 + [1] 
              p(n__from) = [1] x1 + [1] 
               p(n__nil) = [1]          
                  p(nil) = [2]          
                    p(s) = [1] x1 + [5] 
            p(activate#) = [4] x1 + [0] 
                p(cons#) = [4] x2 + [0] 
                p(from#) = [4] x1 + [0] 
              p(length#) = [1] x1 + [0] 
             p(length1#) = [1] x1 + [0] 
                 p(nil#) = [0]          
                  p(c_1) = [0]          
                  p(c_2) = [1] x1 + [0] 
                  p(c_3) = [1] x1 + [0] 
                  p(c_4) = [1] x1 + [0] 
                  p(c_5) = [0]          
                  p(c_6) = [1] x1 + [0] 
                  p(c_7) = [0]          
                  p(c_8) = [1] x1 + [0] 
                  p(c_9) = [0]          
                 p(c_10) = [1] x1 + [0] 
                 p(c_11) = [2]          
          
          Following rules are strictly oriented:
          activate#(n__cons(X1,X2)) = [4] X2 + [4]         
                                    > [4] X2 + [0]         
                                    = c_2(cons#(X1,X2))    
          
              activate#(n__from(X)) = [4] X + [4]          
                                    > [4] X + [0]          
                                    = c_3(from#(X))        
          
                activate#(n__nil()) = [4]                  
                                    > [0]                  
                                    = c_4(nil#())          
          
                  length#(n__nil()) = [1]                  
                                    > [0]                  
                                    = c_9()                
          
                        activate(X) = [1] X + [14]         
                                    > [1] X + [0]          
                                    = X                    
          
           activate(n__cons(X1,X2)) = [1] X2 + [15]        
                                    > [1] X2 + [2]         
                                    = cons(X1,X2)          
          
               activate(n__from(X)) = [1] X + [15]         
                                    > [1] X + [10]         
                                    = from(X)              
          
                 activate(n__nil()) = [15]                 
                                    > [2]                  
                                    = nil()                
          
                        cons(X1,X2) = [1] X2 + [2]         
                                    > [1] X2 + [1]         
                                    = n__cons(X1,X2)       
          
                            from(X) = [1] X + [10]         
                                    > [1] X + [8]          
                                    = cons(X,n__from(s(X)))
          
                            from(X) = [1] X + [10]         
                                    > [1] X + [1]          
                                    = n__from(X)           
          
                              nil() = [2]                  
                                    > [1]                  
                                    = n__nil()             
          
          
          Following rules are (at-least) weakly oriented:
                   activate#(X) =  [4] X + [0]                
                                >= [0]                        
                                =  c_1()                      
          
                   cons#(X1,X2) =  [4] X2 + [0]               
                                >= [0]                        
                                =  c_5()                      
          
                       from#(X) =  [4] X + [0]                
                                >= [4] X + [24]               
                                =  c_6(cons#(X,n__from(s(X))))
          
                       from#(X) =  [4] X + [0]                
                                >= [0]                        
                                =  c_7()                      
          
          length#(n__cons(X,Y)) =  [1] Y + [1]                
                                >= [1] Y + [14]               
                                =  c_8(length1#(activate(Y))) 
          
                    length1#(X) =  [1] X + [0]                
                                >= [1] X + [14]               
                                =  c_10(length#(activate(X))) 
          
                         nil#() =  [0]                        
                                >= [2]                        
                                =  c_11()                     
          
        Further, it can be verified that all rules not oriented are covered by the weightgap condition.
* Step 4: PredecessorEstimation MAYBE
    + Considered Problem:
        - Strict DPs:
            activate#(X) -> c_1()
            cons#(X1,X2) -> c_5()
            from#(X) -> c_6(cons#(X,n__from(s(X))))
            from#(X) -> c_7()
            length#(n__cons(X,Y)) -> c_8(length1#(activate(Y)))
            length1#(X) -> c_10(length#(activate(X)))
            nil#() -> c_11()
        - Weak DPs:
            activate#(n__cons(X1,X2)) -> c_2(cons#(X1,X2))
            activate#(n__from(X)) -> c_3(from#(X))
            activate#(n__nil()) -> c_4(nil#())
            length#(n__nil()) -> c_9()
        - Weak TRS:
            activate(X) -> X
            activate(n__cons(X1,X2)) -> cons(X1,X2)
            activate(n__from(X)) -> from(X)
            activate(n__nil()) -> nil()
            cons(X1,X2) -> n__cons(X1,X2)
            from(X) -> cons(X,n__from(s(X)))
            from(X) -> n__from(X)
            nil() -> n__nil()
        - Signature:
            {activate/1,cons/2,from/1,length/1,length1/1,nil/0,activate#/1,cons#/2,from#/1,length#/1,length1#/1
            ,nil#/0} / {0/0,n__cons/2,n__from/1,n__nil/0,s/1,c_1/0,c_2/1,c_3/1,c_4/1,c_5/0,c_6/1,c_7/0,c_8/1,c_9/0
            ,c_10/1,c_11/0}
        - Obligation:
            innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {activate#,cons#,from#,length#,length1#
            ,nil#} and constructors {0,n__cons,n__from,n__nil,s}
    + 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: activate#(X) -> c_1()
          2: cons#(X1,X2) -> c_5()
          3: from#(X) -> c_6(cons#(X,n__from(s(X))))
          4: from#(X) -> c_7()
          5: length#(n__cons(X,Y)) -> c_8(length1#(activate(Y)))
          6: length1#(X) -> c_10(length#(activate(X)))
          7: nil#() -> c_11()
          8: activate#(n__cons(X1,X2)) -> c_2(cons#(X1,X2))
          9: activate#(n__from(X)) -> c_3(from#(X))
          10: activate#(n__nil()) -> c_4(nil#())
          11: length#(n__nil()) -> c_9()
* Step 5: RemoveWeakSuffixes MAYBE
    + Considered Problem:
        - Strict DPs:
            cons#(X1,X2) -> c_5()
            from#(X) -> c_6(cons#(X,n__from(s(X))))
            from#(X) -> c_7()
            length#(n__cons(X,Y)) -> c_8(length1#(activate(Y)))
            length1#(X) -> c_10(length#(activate(X)))
            nil#() -> c_11()
        - Weak DPs:
            activate#(X) -> c_1()
            activate#(n__cons(X1,X2)) -> c_2(cons#(X1,X2))
            activate#(n__from(X)) -> c_3(from#(X))
            activate#(n__nil()) -> c_4(nil#())
            length#(n__nil()) -> c_9()
        - Weak TRS:
            activate(X) -> X
            activate(n__cons(X1,X2)) -> cons(X1,X2)
            activate(n__from(X)) -> from(X)
            activate(n__nil()) -> nil()
            cons(X1,X2) -> n__cons(X1,X2)
            from(X) -> cons(X,n__from(s(X)))
            from(X) -> n__from(X)
            nil() -> n__nil()
        - Signature:
            {activate/1,cons/2,from/1,length/1,length1/1,nil/0,activate#/1,cons#/2,from#/1,length#/1,length1#/1
            ,nil#/0} / {0/0,n__cons/2,n__from/1,n__nil/0,s/1,c_1/0,c_2/1,c_3/1,c_4/1,c_5/0,c_6/1,c_7/0,c_8/1,c_9/0
            ,c_10/1,c_11/0}
        - Obligation:
            innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {activate#,cons#,from#,length#,length1#
            ,nil#} and constructors {0,n__cons,n__from,n__nil,s}
    + Applied Processor:
        RemoveWeakSuffixes
    + Details:
        Consider the dependency graph
          1:S:cons#(X1,X2) -> c_5()
             
          
          2:S:from#(X) -> c_6(cons#(X,n__from(s(X))))
             -->_1 cons#(X1,X2) -> c_5():1
          
          3:S:from#(X) -> c_7()
             
          
          4:S:length#(n__cons(X,Y)) -> c_8(length1#(activate(Y)))
             -->_1 length1#(X) -> c_10(length#(activate(X))):5
          
          5:S:length1#(X) -> c_10(length#(activate(X)))
             -->_1 length#(n__nil()) -> c_9():11
             -->_1 length#(n__cons(X,Y)) -> c_8(length1#(activate(Y))):4
          
          6:S:nil#() -> c_11()
             
          
          7:W:activate#(X) -> c_1()
             
          
          8:W:activate#(n__cons(X1,X2)) -> c_2(cons#(X1,X2))
             -->_1 cons#(X1,X2) -> c_5():1
          
          9:W:activate#(n__from(X)) -> c_3(from#(X))
             -->_1 from#(X) -> c_7():3
             -->_1 from#(X) -> c_6(cons#(X,n__from(s(X)))):2
          
          10:W:activate#(n__nil()) -> c_4(nil#())
             -->_1 nil#() -> c_11():6
          
          11:W:length#(n__nil()) -> c_9()
             
          
        The following weak DPs constitute a sub-graph of the DG that is closed under successors. The DPs are removed.
          7: activate#(X) -> c_1()
          11: length#(n__nil()) -> c_9()
* Step 6: RemoveHeads MAYBE
    + Considered Problem:
        - Strict DPs:
            cons#(X1,X2) -> c_5()
            from#(X) -> c_6(cons#(X,n__from(s(X))))
            from#(X) -> c_7()
            length#(n__cons(X,Y)) -> c_8(length1#(activate(Y)))
            length1#(X) -> c_10(length#(activate(X)))
            nil#() -> c_11()
        - Weak DPs:
            activate#(n__cons(X1,X2)) -> c_2(cons#(X1,X2))
            activate#(n__from(X)) -> c_3(from#(X))
            activate#(n__nil()) -> c_4(nil#())
        - Weak TRS:
            activate(X) -> X
            activate(n__cons(X1,X2)) -> cons(X1,X2)
            activate(n__from(X)) -> from(X)
            activate(n__nil()) -> nil()
            cons(X1,X2) -> n__cons(X1,X2)
            from(X) -> cons(X,n__from(s(X)))
            from(X) -> n__from(X)
            nil() -> n__nil()
        - Signature:
            {activate/1,cons/2,from/1,length/1,length1/1,nil/0,activate#/1,cons#/2,from#/1,length#/1,length1#/1
            ,nil#/0} / {0/0,n__cons/2,n__from/1,n__nil/0,s/1,c_1/0,c_2/1,c_3/1,c_4/1,c_5/0,c_6/1,c_7/0,c_8/1,c_9/0
            ,c_10/1,c_11/0}
        - Obligation:
            innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {activate#,cons#,from#,length#,length1#
            ,nil#} and constructors {0,n__cons,n__from,n__nil,s}
    + Applied Processor:
        RemoveHeads
    + Details:
        Consider the dependency graph
        
        1:S:cons#(X1,X2) -> c_5()
           
        
        2:S:from#(X) -> c_6(cons#(X,n__from(s(X))))
           -->_1 cons#(X1,X2) -> c_5():1
        
        3:S:from#(X) -> c_7()
           
        
        4:S:length#(n__cons(X,Y)) -> c_8(length1#(activate(Y)))
           -->_1 length1#(X) -> c_10(length#(activate(X))):5
        
        5:S:length1#(X) -> c_10(length#(activate(X)))
           -->_1 length#(n__cons(X,Y)) -> c_8(length1#(activate(Y))):4
        
        6:S:nil#() -> c_11()
           
        
        8:W:activate#(n__cons(X1,X2)) -> c_2(cons#(X1,X2))
           -->_1 cons#(X1,X2) -> c_5():1
        
        9:W:activate#(n__from(X)) -> c_3(from#(X))
           -->_1 from#(X) -> c_7():3
           -->_1 from#(X) -> c_6(cons#(X,n__from(s(X)))):2
        
        10:W:activate#(n__nil()) -> c_4(nil#())
           -->_1 nil#() -> c_11():6
        
        
        Following roots of the dependency graph are removed, as the considered set of starting terms is closed under reduction with respect to these rules (modulo compound contexts).
        
        [(8,activate#(n__cons(X1,X2)) -> c_2(cons#(X1,X2)))
        ,(9,activate#(n__from(X)) -> c_3(from#(X)))
        ,(10,activate#(n__nil()) -> c_4(nil#()))]
* Step 7: RemoveHeads MAYBE
    + Considered Problem:
        - Strict DPs:
            cons#(X1,X2) -> c_5()
            from#(X) -> c_6(cons#(X,n__from(s(X))))
            from#(X) -> c_7()
            length#(n__cons(X,Y)) -> c_8(length1#(activate(Y)))
            length1#(X) -> c_10(length#(activate(X)))
            nil#() -> c_11()
        - Weak TRS:
            activate(X) -> X
            activate(n__cons(X1,X2)) -> cons(X1,X2)
            activate(n__from(X)) -> from(X)
            activate(n__nil()) -> nil()
            cons(X1,X2) -> n__cons(X1,X2)
            from(X) -> cons(X,n__from(s(X)))
            from(X) -> n__from(X)
            nil() -> n__nil()
        - Signature:
            {activate/1,cons/2,from/1,length/1,length1/1,nil/0,activate#/1,cons#/2,from#/1,length#/1,length1#/1
            ,nil#/0} / {0/0,n__cons/2,n__from/1,n__nil/0,s/1,c_1/0,c_2/1,c_3/1,c_4/1,c_5/0,c_6/1,c_7/0,c_8/1,c_9/0
            ,c_10/1,c_11/0}
        - Obligation:
            innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {activate#,cons#,from#,length#,length1#
            ,nil#} and constructors {0,n__cons,n__from,n__nil,s}
    + Applied Processor:
        RemoveHeads
    + Details:
        Consider the dependency graph
        
        1:S:cons#(X1,X2) -> c_5()
           
        
        2:S:from#(X) -> c_6(cons#(X,n__from(s(X))))
           -->_1 cons#(X1,X2) -> c_5():1
        
        3:S:from#(X) -> c_7()
           
        
        4:S:length#(n__cons(X,Y)) -> c_8(length1#(activate(Y)))
           -->_1 length1#(X) -> c_10(length#(activate(X))):5
        
        5:S:length1#(X) -> c_10(length#(activate(X)))
           -->_1 length#(n__cons(X,Y)) -> c_8(length1#(activate(Y))):4
        
        6:S:nil#() -> c_11()
           
        
        
        Following roots of the dependency graph are removed, as the considered set of starting terms is closed under reduction with respect to these rules (modulo compound contexts).
        
        [(2,from#(X) -> c_6(cons#(X,n__from(s(X))))),(3,from#(X) -> c_7()),(6,nil#() -> c_11())]
* Step 8: RemoveHeads MAYBE
    + Considered Problem:
        - Strict DPs:
            cons#(X1,X2) -> c_5()
            length#(n__cons(X,Y)) -> c_8(length1#(activate(Y)))
            length1#(X) -> c_10(length#(activate(X)))
        - Weak TRS:
            activate(X) -> X
            activate(n__cons(X1,X2)) -> cons(X1,X2)
            activate(n__from(X)) -> from(X)
            activate(n__nil()) -> nil()
            cons(X1,X2) -> n__cons(X1,X2)
            from(X) -> cons(X,n__from(s(X)))
            from(X) -> n__from(X)
            nil() -> n__nil()
        - Signature:
            {activate/1,cons/2,from/1,length/1,length1/1,nil/0,activate#/1,cons#/2,from#/1,length#/1,length1#/1
            ,nil#/0} / {0/0,n__cons/2,n__from/1,n__nil/0,s/1,c_1/0,c_2/1,c_3/1,c_4/1,c_5/0,c_6/1,c_7/0,c_8/1,c_9/0
            ,c_10/1,c_11/0}
        - Obligation:
            innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {activate#,cons#,from#,length#,length1#
            ,nil#} and constructors {0,n__cons,n__from,n__nil,s}
    + Applied Processor:
        RemoveHeads
    + Details:
        Consider the dependency graph
        
        1:S:cons#(X1,X2) -> c_5()
           
        
        4:S:length#(n__cons(X,Y)) -> c_8(length1#(activate(Y)))
           -->_1 length1#(X) -> c_10(length#(activate(X))):5
        
        5:S:length1#(X) -> c_10(length#(activate(X)))
           -->_1 length#(n__cons(X,Y)) -> c_8(length1#(activate(Y))):4
        
        
        Following roots of the dependency graph are removed, as the considered set of starting terms is closed under reduction with respect to these rules (modulo compound contexts).
        
        [(1,cons#(X1,X2) -> c_5())]
* Step 9: Failure MAYBE
  + Considered Problem:
      - Strict DPs:
          length#(n__cons(X,Y)) -> c_8(length1#(activate(Y)))
          length1#(X) -> c_10(length#(activate(X)))
      - Weak TRS:
          activate(X) -> X
          activate(n__cons(X1,X2)) -> cons(X1,X2)
          activate(n__from(X)) -> from(X)
          activate(n__nil()) -> nil()
          cons(X1,X2) -> n__cons(X1,X2)
          from(X) -> cons(X,n__from(s(X)))
          from(X) -> n__from(X)
          nil() -> n__nil()
      - Signature:
          {activate/1,cons/2,from/1,length/1,length1/1,nil/0,activate#/1,cons#/2,from#/1,length#/1,length1#/1
          ,nil#/0} / {0/0,n__cons/2,n__from/1,n__nil/0,s/1,c_1/0,c_2/1,c_3/1,c_4/1,c_5/0,c_6/1,c_7/0,c_8/1,c_9/0
          ,c_10/1,c_11/0}
      - Obligation:
          innermost runtime complexity wrt. defined symbols {activate#,cons#,from#,length#,length1#
          ,nil#} and constructors {0,n__cons,n__from,n__nil,s}
  + Applied Processor:
      EmptyProcessor
  + Details:
      The problem is still open.
MAYBE