MAYBE We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict Trs: { f(n__a(), X, X) -> f(activate(X), b(), n__b()) , activate(X) -> X , activate(n__a()) -> a() , activate(n__b()) -> b() , b() -> n__b() , b() -> a() , a() -> n__a() } Obligation: innermost runtime complexity Answer: MAYBE We use the processor 'matrix interpretation of dimension 2' to orient following rules strictly. Trs: { activate(n__a()) -> a() } The induced complexity on above rules (modulo remaining rules) is YES(?,O(n^1)) . These rules are moved into the corresponding weak component(s). Sub-proof: ---------- TcT has computed the following constructor-based matrix interpretation satisfying not(EDA) and not(IDA(1)). [f](x1, x2, x3) = [1 0] x1 + [1 0] x2 + [1 1] x3 + [1] [0 0] [0 0] [0 0] [1] [n__a] = [0] [1] [activate](x1) = [2 1] x1 + [0] [0 3] [1] [b] = [0] [1] [n__b] = [0] [0] [a] = [0] [1] This order satisfies the following ordering constraints: [f(n__a(), X, X)] = [2 1] X + [1] [0 0] [1] >= [2 1] X + [1] [0 0] [1] = [f(activate(X), b(), n__b())] [activate(X)] = [2 1] X + [0] [0 3] [1] >= [1 0] X + [0] [0 1] [0] = [X] [activate(n__a())] = [1] [4] > [0] [1] = [a()] [activate(n__b())] = [0] [1] >= [0] [1] = [b()] [b()] = [0] [1] >= [0] [0] = [n__b()] [b()] = [0] [1] >= [0] [1] = [a()] [a()] = [0] [1] >= [0] [1] = [n__a()] We return to the main proof. We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict Trs: { f(n__a(), X, X) -> f(activate(X), b(), n__b()) , activate(X) -> X , activate(n__b()) -> b() , b() -> n__b() , b() -> a() , a() -> n__a() } Weak Trs: { activate(n__a()) -> a() } Obligation: innermost runtime complexity Answer: MAYBE Empty strict component of the problem is NOT empty. Arrrr..