MAYBE We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict Trs: { U11(tt(), N, XS) -> U12(tt(), N, XS) , U12(tt(), N, XS) -> snd(splitAt(N, XS)) , snd(pair(X, Y)) -> U51(tt(), Y) , splitAt(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> U61(tt(), N, X, XS) , splitAt(0(), XS) -> pair(nil(), XS) , U21(tt(), X) -> U22(tt(), X) , U22(tt(), X) -> X , U31(tt(), N) -> U32(tt(), N) , U32(tt(), N) -> N , U41(tt(), N, XS) -> U42(tt(), N, XS) , U42(tt(), N, XS) -> head(afterNth(N, XS)) , head(cons(N, XS)) -> U31(tt(), N) , afterNth(N, XS) -> U11(tt(), N, XS) , U51(tt(), Y) -> U52(tt(), Y) , U52(tt(), Y) -> Y , U61(tt(), N, X, XS) -> U62(tt(), N, X, XS) , U62(tt(), N, X, XS) -> U63(tt(), N, X, XS) , U63(tt(), N, X, XS) -> U64(splitAt(N, XS), X) , U64(pair(YS, ZS), X) -> pair(cons(X, YS), ZS) , U71(tt(), XS) -> U72(tt(), XS) , U72(tt(), XS) -> XS , U81(tt(), N, XS) -> U82(tt(), N, XS) , U82(tt(), N, XS) -> fst(splitAt(N, XS)) , fst(pair(X, Y)) -> U21(tt(), X) , natsFrom(N) -> cons(N, natsFrom(s(N))) , sel(N, XS) -> U41(tt(), N, XS) , tail(cons(N, XS)) -> U71(tt(), XS) , take(N, XS) -> U81(tt(), N, XS) } Obligation: innermost runtime complexity Answer: MAYBE We add following dependency tuples: Strict DPs: { U11^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_1(U12^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U12^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_2(snd^#(splitAt(N, XS)), splitAt^#(N, XS)) , snd^#(pair(X, Y)) -> c_3(U51^#(tt(), Y)) , splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_4(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , splitAt^#(0(), XS) -> c_5() , U51^#(tt(), Y) -> c_14(U52^#(tt(), Y)) , U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_16(U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U21^#(tt(), X) -> c_6(U22^#(tt(), X)) , U22^#(tt(), X) -> c_7() , U31^#(tt(), N) -> c_8(U32^#(tt(), N)) , U32^#(tt(), N) -> c_9() , U41^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_10(U42^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U42^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_11(head^#(afterNth(N, XS)), afterNth^#(N, XS)) , head^#(cons(N, XS)) -> c_12(U31^#(tt(), N)) , afterNth^#(N, XS) -> c_13(U11^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U52^#(tt(), Y) -> c_15() , U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_17(U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_18(U64^#(splitAt(N, XS), X), splitAt^#(N, XS)) , U64^#(pair(YS, ZS), X) -> c_19() , U71^#(tt(), XS) -> c_20(U72^#(tt(), XS)) , U72^#(tt(), XS) -> c_21() , U81^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_22(U82^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U82^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_23(fst^#(splitAt(N, XS)), splitAt^#(N, XS)) , fst^#(pair(X, Y)) -> c_24(U21^#(tt(), X)) , natsFrom^#(N) -> c_25(natsFrom^#(s(N))) , sel^#(N, XS) -> c_26(U41^#(tt(), N, XS)) , tail^#(cons(N, XS)) -> c_27(U71^#(tt(), XS)) , take^#(N, XS) -> c_28(U81^#(tt(), N, XS)) } and mark the set of starting terms. We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict DPs: { U11^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_1(U12^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U12^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_2(snd^#(splitAt(N, XS)), splitAt^#(N, XS)) , snd^#(pair(X, Y)) -> c_3(U51^#(tt(), Y)) , splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_4(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , splitAt^#(0(), XS) -> c_5() , U51^#(tt(), Y) -> c_14(U52^#(tt(), Y)) , U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_16(U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U21^#(tt(), X) -> c_6(U22^#(tt(), X)) , U22^#(tt(), X) -> c_7() , U31^#(tt(), N) -> c_8(U32^#(tt(), N)) , U32^#(tt(), N) -> c_9() , U41^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_10(U42^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U42^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_11(head^#(afterNth(N, XS)), afterNth^#(N, XS)) , head^#(cons(N, XS)) -> c_12(U31^#(tt(), N)) , afterNth^#(N, XS) -> c_13(U11^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U52^#(tt(), Y) -> c_15() , U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_17(U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_18(U64^#(splitAt(N, XS), X), splitAt^#(N, XS)) , U64^#(pair(YS, ZS), X) -> c_19() , U71^#(tt(), XS) -> c_20(U72^#(tt(), XS)) , U72^#(tt(), XS) -> c_21() , U81^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_22(U82^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U82^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_23(fst^#(splitAt(N, XS)), splitAt^#(N, XS)) , fst^#(pair(X, Y)) -> c_24(U21^#(tt(), X)) , natsFrom^#(N) -> c_25(natsFrom^#(s(N))) , sel^#(N, XS) -> c_26(U41^#(tt(), N, XS)) , tail^#(cons(N, XS)) -> c_27(U71^#(tt(), XS)) , take^#(N, XS) -> c_28(U81^#(tt(), N, XS)) } Weak Trs: { U11(tt(), N, XS) -> U12(tt(), N, XS) , U12(tt(), N, XS) -> snd(splitAt(N, XS)) , snd(pair(X, Y)) -> U51(tt(), Y) , splitAt(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> U61(tt(), N, X, XS) , splitAt(0(), XS) -> pair(nil(), XS) , U21(tt(), X) -> U22(tt(), X) , U22(tt(), X) -> X , U31(tt(), N) -> U32(tt(), N) , U32(tt(), N) -> N , U41(tt(), N, XS) -> U42(tt(), N, XS) , U42(tt(), N, XS) -> head(afterNth(N, XS)) , head(cons(N, XS)) -> U31(tt(), N) , afterNth(N, XS) -> U11(tt(), N, XS) , U51(tt(), Y) -> U52(tt(), Y) , U52(tt(), Y) -> Y , U61(tt(), N, X, XS) -> U62(tt(), N, X, XS) , U62(tt(), N, X, XS) -> U63(tt(), N, X, XS) , U63(tt(), N, X, XS) -> U64(splitAt(N, XS), X) , U64(pair(YS, ZS), X) -> pair(cons(X, YS), ZS) , U71(tt(), XS) -> U72(tt(), XS) , U72(tt(), XS) -> XS , U81(tt(), N, XS) -> U82(tt(), N, XS) , U82(tt(), N, XS) -> fst(splitAt(N, XS)) , fst(pair(X, Y)) -> U21(tt(), X) , natsFrom(N) -> cons(N, natsFrom(s(N))) , sel(N, XS) -> U41(tt(), N, XS) , tail(cons(N, XS)) -> U71(tt(), XS) , take(N, XS) -> U81(tt(), N, XS) } Obligation: innermost runtime complexity Answer: MAYBE We estimate the number of application of {5,9,11,16,19,21} by applications of Pre({5,9,11,16,19,21}) = {2,6,8,10,18,20,23}. Here rules are labeled as follows: DPs: { 1: U11^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_1(U12^#(tt(), N, XS)) , 2: U12^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_2(snd^#(splitAt(N, XS)), splitAt^#(N, XS)) , 3: snd^#(pair(X, Y)) -> c_3(U51^#(tt(), Y)) , 4: splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_4(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , 5: splitAt^#(0(), XS) -> c_5() , 6: U51^#(tt(), Y) -> c_14(U52^#(tt(), Y)) , 7: U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_16(U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , 8: U21^#(tt(), X) -> c_6(U22^#(tt(), X)) , 9: U22^#(tt(), X) -> c_7() , 10: U31^#(tt(), N) -> c_8(U32^#(tt(), N)) , 11: U32^#(tt(), N) -> c_9() , 12: U41^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_10(U42^#(tt(), N, XS)) , 13: U42^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_11(head^#(afterNth(N, XS)), afterNth^#(N, XS)) , 14: head^#(cons(N, XS)) -> c_12(U31^#(tt(), N)) , 15: afterNth^#(N, XS) -> c_13(U11^#(tt(), N, XS)) , 16: U52^#(tt(), Y) -> c_15() , 17: U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_17(U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , 18: U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_18(U64^#(splitAt(N, XS), X), splitAt^#(N, XS)) , 19: U64^#(pair(YS, ZS), X) -> c_19() , 20: U71^#(tt(), XS) -> c_20(U72^#(tt(), XS)) , 21: U72^#(tt(), XS) -> c_21() , 22: U81^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_22(U82^#(tt(), N, XS)) , 23: U82^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_23(fst^#(splitAt(N, XS)), splitAt^#(N, XS)) , 24: fst^#(pair(X, Y)) -> c_24(U21^#(tt(), X)) , 25: natsFrom^#(N) -> c_25(natsFrom^#(s(N))) , 26: sel^#(N, XS) -> c_26(U41^#(tt(), N, XS)) , 27: tail^#(cons(N, XS)) -> c_27(U71^#(tt(), XS)) , 28: take^#(N, XS) -> c_28(U81^#(tt(), N, XS)) } We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict DPs: { U11^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_1(U12^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U12^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_2(snd^#(splitAt(N, XS)), splitAt^#(N, XS)) , snd^#(pair(X, Y)) -> c_3(U51^#(tt(), Y)) , splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_4(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U51^#(tt(), Y) -> c_14(U52^#(tt(), Y)) , U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_16(U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U21^#(tt(), X) -> c_6(U22^#(tt(), X)) , U31^#(tt(), N) -> c_8(U32^#(tt(), N)) , U41^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_10(U42^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U42^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_11(head^#(afterNth(N, XS)), afterNth^#(N, XS)) , head^#(cons(N, XS)) -> c_12(U31^#(tt(), N)) , afterNth^#(N, XS) -> c_13(U11^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_17(U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_18(U64^#(splitAt(N, XS), X), splitAt^#(N, XS)) , U71^#(tt(), XS) -> c_20(U72^#(tt(), XS)) , U81^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_22(U82^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U82^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_23(fst^#(splitAt(N, XS)), splitAt^#(N, XS)) , fst^#(pair(X, Y)) -> c_24(U21^#(tt(), X)) , natsFrom^#(N) -> c_25(natsFrom^#(s(N))) , sel^#(N, XS) -> c_26(U41^#(tt(), N, XS)) , tail^#(cons(N, XS)) -> c_27(U71^#(tt(), XS)) , take^#(N, XS) -> c_28(U81^#(tt(), N, XS)) } Weak DPs: { splitAt^#(0(), XS) -> c_5() , U22^#(tt(), X) -> c_7() , U32^#(tt(), N) -> c_9() , U52^#(tt(), Y) -> c_15() , U64^#(pair(YS, ZS), X) -> c_19() , U72^#(tt(), XS) -> c_21() } Weak Trs: { U11(tt(), N, XS) -> U12(tt(), N, XS) , U12(tt(), N, XS) -> snd(splitAt(N, XS)) , snd(pair(X, Y)) -> U51(tt(), Y) , splitAt(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> U61(tt(), N, X, XS) , splitAt(0(), XS) -> pair(nil(), XS) , U21(tt(), X) -> U22(tt(), X) , U22(tt(), X) -> X , U31(tt(), N) -> U32(tt(), N) , U32(tt(), N) -> N , U41(tt(), N, XS) -> U42(tt(), N, XS) , U42(tt(), N, XS) -> head(afterNth(N, XS)) , head(cons(N, XS)) -> U31(tt(), N) , afterNth(N, XS) -> U11(tt(), N, XS) , U51(tt(), Y) -> U52(tt(), Y) , U52(tt(), Y) -> Y , U61(tt(), N, X, XS) -> U62(tt(), N, X, XS) , U62(tt(), N, X, XS) -> U63(tt(), N, X, XS) , U63(tt(), N, X, XS) -> U64(splitAt(N, XS), X) , U64(pair(YS, ZS), X) -> pair(cons(X, YS), ZS) , U71(tt(), XS) -> U72(tt(), XS) , U72(tt(), XS) -> XS , U81(tt(), N, XS) -> U82(tt(), N, XS) , U82(tt(), N, XS) -> fst(splitAt(N, XS)) , fst(pair(X, Y)) -> U21(tt(), X) , natsFrom(N) -> cons(N, natsFrom(s(N))) , sel(N, XS) -> U41(tt(), N, XS) , tail(cons(N, XS)) -> U71(tt(), XS) , take(N, XS) -> U81(tt(), N, XS) } Obligation: innermost runtime complexity Answer: MAYBE We estimate the number of application of {5,7,8,15} by applications of Pre({5,7,8,15}) = {3,11,18,21}. Here rules are labeled as follows: DPs: { 1: U11^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_1(U12^#(tt(), N, XS)) , 2: U12^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_2(snd^#(splitAt(N, XS)), splitAt^#(N, XS)) , 3: snd^#(pair(X, Y)) -> c_3(U51^#(tt(), Y)) , 4: splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_4(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , 5: U51^#(tt(), Y) -> c_14(U52^#(tt(), Y)) , 6: U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_16(U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , 7: U21^#(tt(), X) -> c_6(U22^#(tt(), X)) , 8: U31^#(tt(), N) -> c_8(U32^#(tt(), N)) , 9: U41^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_10(U42^#(tt(), N, XS)) , 10: U42^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_11(head^#(afterNth(N, XS)), afterNth^#(N, XS)) , 11: head^#(cons(N, XS)) -> c_12(U31^#(tt(), N)) , 12: afterNth^#(N, XS) -> c_13(U11^#(tt(), N, XS)) , 13: U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_17(U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , 14: U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_18(U64^#(splitAt(N, XS), X), splitAt^#(N, XS)) , 15: U71^#(tt(), XS) -> c_20(U72^#(tt(), XS)) , 16: U81^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_22(U82^#(tt(), N, XS)) , 17: U82^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_23(fst^#(splitAt(N, XS)), splitAt^#(N, XS)) , 18: fst^#(pair(X, Y)) -> c_24(U21^#(tt(), X)) , 19: natsFrom^#(N) -> c_25(natsFrom^#(s(N))) , 20: sel^#(N, XS) -> c_26(U41^#(tt(), N, XS)) , 21: tail^#(cons(N, XS)) -> c_27(U71^#(tt(), XS)) , 22: take^#(N, XS) -> c_28(U81^#(tt(), N, XS)) , 23: splitAt^#(0(), XS) -> c_5() , 24: U22^#(tt(), X) -> c_7() , 25: U32^#(tt(), N) -> c_9() , 26: U52^#(tt(), Y) -> c_15() , 27: U64^#(pair(YS, ZS), X) -> c_19() , 28: U72^#(tt(), XS) -> c_21() } We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict DPs: { U11^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_1(U12^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U12^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_2(snd^#(splitAt(N, XS)), splitAt^#(N, XS)) , snd^#(pair(X, Y)) -> c_3(U51^#(tt(), Y)) , splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_4(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_16(U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U41^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_10(U42^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U42^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_11(head^#(afterNth(N, XS)), afterNth^#(N, XS)) , head^#(cons(N, XS)) -> c_12(U31^#(tt(), N)) , afterNth^#(N, XS) -> c_13(U11^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_17(U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_18(U64^#(splitAt(N, XS), X), splitAt^#(N, XS)) , U81^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_22(U82^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U82^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_23(fst^#(splitAt(N, XS)), splitAt^#(N, XS)) , fst^#(pair(X, Y)) -> c_24(U21^#(tt(), X)) , natsFrom^#(N) -> c_25(natsFrom^#(s(N))) , sel^#(N, XS) -> c_26(U41^#(tt(), N, XS)) , tail^#(cons(N, XS)) -> c_27(U71^#(tt(), XS)) , take^#(N, XS) -> c_28(U81^#(tt(), N, XS)) } Weak DPs: { splitAt^#(0(), XS) -> c_5() , U51^#(tt(), Y) -> c_14(U52^#(tt(), Y)) , U21^#(tt(), X) -> c_6(U22^#(tt(), X)) , U22^#(tt(), X) -> c_7() , U31^#(tt(), N) -> c_8(U32^#(tt(), N)) , U32^#(tt(), N) -> c_9() , U52^#(tt(), Y) -> c_15() , U64^#(pair(YS, ZS), X) -> c_19() , U71^#(tt(), XS) -> c_20(U72^#(tt(), XS)) , U72^#(tt(), XS) -> c_21() } Weak Trs: { U11(tt(), N, XS) -> U12(tt(), N, XS) , U12(tt(), N, XS) -> snd(splitAt(N, XS)) , snd(pair(X, Y)) -> U51(tt(), Y) , splitAt(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> U61(tt(), N, X, XS) , splitAt(0(), XS) -> pair(nil(), XS) , U21(tt(), X) -> U22(tt(), X) , U22(tt(), X) -> X , U31(tt(), N) -> U32(tt(), N) , U32(tt(), N) -> N , U41(tt(), N, XS) -> U42(tt(), N, XS) , U42(tt(), N, XS) -> head(afterNth(N, XS)) , head(cons(N, XS)) -> U31(tt(), N) , afterNth(N, XS) -> U11(tt(), N, XS) , U51(tt(), Y) -> U52(tt(), Y) , U52(tt(), Y) -> Y , U61(tt(), N, X, XS) -> U62(tt(), N, X, XS) , U62(tt(), N, X, XS) -> U63(tt(), N, X, XS) , U63(tt(), N, X, XS) -> U64(splitAt(N, XS), X) , U64(pair(YS, ZS), X) -> pair(cons(X, YS), ZS) , U71(tt(), XS) -> U72(tt(), XS) , U72(tt(), XS) -> XS , U81(tt(), N, XS) -> U82(tt(), N, XS) , U82(tt(), N, XS) -> fst(splitAt(N, XS)) , fst(pair(X, Y)) -> U21(tt(), X) , natsFrom(N) -> cons(N, natsFrom(s(N))) , sel(N, XS) -> U41(tt(), N, XS) , tail(cons(N, XS)) -> U71(tt(), XS) , take(N, XS) -> U81(tt(), N, XS) } Obligation: innermost runtime complexity Answer: MAYBE We estimate the number of application of {3,8,14,17} by applications of Pre({3,8,14,17}) = {2,7,13}. Here rules are labeled as follows: DPs: { 1: U11^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_1(U12^#(tt(), N, XS)) , 2: U12^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_2(snd^#(splitAt(N, XS)), splitAt^#(N, XS)) , 3: snd^#(pair(X, Y)) -> c_3(U51^#(tt(), Y)) , 4: splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_4(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , 5: U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_16(U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , 6: U41^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_10(U42^#(tt(), N, XS)) , 7: U42^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_11(head^#(afterNth(N, XS)), afterNth^#(N, XS)) , 8: head^#(cons(N, XS)) -> c_12(U31^#(tt(), N)) , 9: afterNth^#(N, XS) -> c_13(U11^#(tt(), N, XS)) , 10: U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_17(U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , 11: U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_18(U64^#(splitAt(N, XS), X), splitAt^#(N, XS)) , 12: U81^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_22(U82^#(tt(), N, XS)) , 13: U82^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_23(fst^#(splitAt(N, XS)), splitAt^#(N, XS)) , 14: fst^#(pair(X, Y)) -> c_24(U21^#(tt(), X)) , 15: natsFrom^#(N) -> c_25(natsFrom^#(s(N))) , 16: sel^#(N, XS) -> c_26(U41^#(tt(), N, XS)) , 17: tail^#(cons(N, XS)) -> c_27(U71^#(tt(), XS)) , 18: take^#(N, XS) -> c_28(U81^#(tt(), N, XS)) , 19: splitAt^#(0(), XS) -> c_5() , 20: U51^#(tt(), Y) -> c_14(U52^#(tt(), Y)) , 21: U21^#(tt(), X) -> c_6(U22^#(tt(), X)) , 22: U22^#(tt(), X) -> c_7() , 23: U31^#(tt(), N) -> c_8(U32^#(tt(), N)) , 24: U32^#(tt(), N) -> c_9() , 25: U52^#(tt(), Y) -> c_15() , 26: U64^#(pair(YS, ZS), X) -> c_19() , 27: U71^#(tt(), XS) -> c_20(U72^#(tt(), XS)) , 28: U72^#(tt(), XS) -> c_21() } We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict DPs: { U11^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_1(U12^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U12^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_2(snd^#(splitAt(N, XS)), splitAt^#(N, XS)) , splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_4(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_16(U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U41^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_10(U42^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U42^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_11(head^#(afterNth(N, XS)), afterNth^#(N, XS)) , afterNth^#(N, XS) -> c_13(U11^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_17(U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_18(U64^#(splitAt(N, XS), X), splitAt^#(N, XS)) , U81^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_22(U82^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U82^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_23(fst^#(splitAt(N, XS)), splitAt^#(N, XS)) , natsFrom^#(N) -> c_25(natsFrom^#(s(N))) , sel^#(N, XS) -> c_26(U41^#(tt(), N, XS)) , take^#(N, XS) -> c_28(U81^#(tt(), N, XS)) } Weak DPs: { snd^#(pair(X, Y)) -> c_3(U51^#(tt(), Y)) , splitAt^#(0(), XS) -> c_5() , U51^#(tt(), Y) -> c_14(U52^#(tt(), Y)) , U21^#(tt(), X) -> c_6(U22^#(tt(), X)) , U22^#(tt(), X) -> c_7() , U31^#(tt(), N) -> c_8(U32^#(tt(), N)) , U32^#(tt(), N) -> c_9() , head^#(cons(N, XS)) -> c_12(U31^#(tt(), N)) , U52^#(tt(), Y) -> c_15() , U64^#(pair(YS, ZS), X) -> c_19() , U71^#(tt(), XS) -> c_20(U72^#(tt(), XS)) , U72^#(tt(), XS) -> c_21() , fst^#(pair(X, Y)) -> c_24(U21^#(tt(), X)) , tail^#(cons(N, XS)) -> c_27(U71^#(tt(), XS)) } Weak Trs: { U11(tt(), N, XS) -> U12(tt(), N, XS) , U12(tt(), N, XS) -> snd(splitAt(N, XS)) , snd(pair(X, Y)) -> U51(tt(), Y) , splitAt(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> U61(tt(), N, X, XS) , splitAt(0(), XS) -> pair(nil(), XS) , U21(tt(), X) -> U22(tt(), X) , U22(tt(), X) -> X , U31(tt(), N) -> U32(tt(), N) , U32(tt(), N) -> N , U41(tt(), N, XS) -> U42(tt(), N, XS) , U42(tt(), N, XS) -> head(afterNth(N, XS)) , head(cons(N, XS)) -> U31(tt(), N) , afterNth(N, XS) -> U11(tt(), N, XS) , U51(tt(), Y) -> U52(tt(), Y) , U52(tt(), Y) -> Y , U61(tt(), N, X, XS) -> U62(tt(), N, X, XS) , U62(tt(), N, X, XS) -> U63(tt(), N, X, XS) , U63(tt(), N, X, XS) -> U64(splitAt(N, XS), X) , U64(pair(YS, ZS), X) -> pair(cons(X, YS), ZS) , U71(tt(), XS) -> U72(tt(), XS) , U72(tt(), XS) -> XS , U81(tt(), N, XS) -> U82(tt(), N, XS) , U82(tt(), N, XS) -> fst(splitAt(N, XS)) , fst(pair(X, Y)) -> U21(tt(), X) , natsFrom(N) -> cons(N, natsFrom(s(N))) , sel(N, XS) -> U41(tt(), N, XS) , tail(cons(N, XS)) -> U71(tt(), XS) , take(N, XS) -> U81(tt(), N, XS) } Obligation: innermost runtime complexity Answer: MAYBE The following weak DPs constitute a sub-graph of the DG that is closed under successors. The DPs are removed. { snd^#(pair(X, Y)) -> c_3(U51^#(tt(), Y)) , splitAt^#(0(), XS) -> c_5() , U51^#(tt(), Y) -> c_14(U52^#(tt(), Y)) , U21^#(tt(), X) -> c_6(U22^#(tt(), X)) , U22^#(tt(), X) -> c_7() , U31^#(tt(), N) -> c_8(U32^#(tt(), N)) , U32^#(tt(), N) -> c_9() , head^#(cons(N, XS)) -> c_12(U31^#(tt(), N)) , U52^#(tt(), Y) -> c_15() , U64^#(pair(YS, ZS), X) -> c_19() , U71^#(tt(), XS) -> c_20(U72^#(tt(), XS)) , U72^#(tt(), XS) -> c_21() , fst^#(pair(X, Y)) -> c_24(U21^#(tt(), X)) , tail^#(cons(N, XS)) -> c_27(U71^#(tt(), XS)) } We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict DPs: { U11^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_1(U12^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U12^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_2(snd^#(splitAt(N, XS)), splitAt^#(N, XS)) , splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_4(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_16(U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U41^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_10(U42^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U42^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_11(head^#(afterNth(N, XS)), afterNth^#(N, XS)) , afterNth^#(N, XS) -> c_13(U11^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_17(U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_18(U64^#(splitAt(N, XS), X), splitAt^#(N, XS)) , U81^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_22(U82^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U82^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_23(fst^#(splitAt(N, XS)), splitAt^#(N, XS)) , natsFrom^#(N) -> c_25(natsFrom^#(s(N))) , sel^#(N, XS) -> c_26(U41^#(tt(), N, XS)) , take^#(N, XS) -> c_28(U81^#(tt(), N, XS)) } Weak Trs: { U11(tt(), N, XS) -> U12(tt(), N, XS) , U12(tt(), N, XS) -> snd(splitAt(N, XS)) , snd(pair(X, Y)) -> U51(tt(), Y) , splitAt(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> U61(tt(), N, X, XS) , splitAt(0(), XS) -> pair(nil(), XS) , U21(tt(), X) -> U22(tt(), X) , U22(tt(), X) -> X , U31(tt(), N) -> U32(tt(), N) , U32(tt(), N) -> N , U41(tt(), N, XS) -> U42(tt(), N, XS) , U42(tt(), N, XS) -> head(afterNth(N, XS)) , head(cons(N, XS)) -> U31(tt(), N) , afterNth(N, XS) -> U11(tt(), N, XS) , U51(tt(), Y) -> U52(tt(), Y) , U52(tt(), Y) -> Y , U61(tt(), N, X, XS) -> U62(tt(), N, X, XS) , U62(tt(), N, X, XS) -> U63(tt(), N, X, XS) , U63(tt(), N, X, XS) -> U64(splitAt(N, XS), X) , U64(pair(YS, ZS), X) -> pair(cons(X, YS), ZS) , U71(tt(), XS) -> U72(tt(), XS) , U72(tt(), XS) -> XS , U81(tt(), N, XS) -> U82(tt(), N, XS) , U82(tt(), N, XS) -> fst(splitAt(N, XS)) , fst(pair(X, Y)) -> U21(tt(), X) , natsFrom(N) -> cons(N, natsFrom(s(N))) , sel(N, XS) -> U41(tt(), N, XS) , tail(cons(N, XS)) -> U71(tt(), XS) , take(N, XS) -> U81(tt(), N, XS) } Obligation: innermost runtime complexity Answer: MAYBE Due to missing edges in the dependency-graph, the right-hand sides of following rules could be simplified: { U12^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_2(snd^#(splitAt(N, XS)), splitAt^#(N, XS)) , U42^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_11(head^#(afterNth(N, XS)), afterNth^#(N, XS)) , U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_18(U64^#(splitAt(N, XS), X), splitAt^#(N, XS)) , U82^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_23(fst^#(splitAt(N, XS)), splitAt^#(N, XS)) } We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict DPs: { U11^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_1(U12^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U12^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_2(splitAt^#(N, XS)) , splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_3(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_4(U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U41^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_5(U42^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U42^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_6(afterNth^#(N, XS)) , afterNth^#(N, XS) -> c_7(U11^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_8(U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_9(splitAt^#(N, XS)) , U81^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_10(U82^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U82^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_11(splitAt^#(N, XS)) , natsFrom^#(N) -> c_12(natsFrom^#(s(N))) , sel^#(N, XS) -> c_13(U41^#(tt(), N, XS)) , take^#(N, XS) -> c_14(U81^#(tt(), N, XS)) } Weak Trs: { U11(tt(), N, XS) -> U12(tt(), N, XS) , U12(tt(), N, XS) -> snd(splitAt(N, XS)) , snd(pair(X, Y)) -> U51(tt(), Y) , splitAt(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> U61(tt(), N, X, XS) , splitAt(0(), XS) -> pair(nil(), XS) , U21(tt(), X) -> U22(tt(), X) , U22(tt(), X) -> X , U31(tt(), N) -> U32(tt(), N) , U32(tt(), N) -> N , U41(tt(), N, XS) -> U42(tt(), N, XS) , U42(tt(), N, XS) -> head(afterNth(N, XS)) , head(cons(N, XS)) -> U31(tt(), N) , afterNth(N, XS) -> U11(tt(), N, XS) , U51(tt(), Y) -> U52(tt(), Y) , U52(tt(), Y) -> Y , U61(tt(), N, X, XS) -> U62(tt(), N, X, XS) , U62(tt(), N, X, XS) -> U63(tt(), N, X, XS) , U63(tt(), N, X, XS) -> U64(splitAt(N, XS), X) , U64(pair(YS, ZS), X) -> pair(cons(X, YS), ZS) , U71(tt(), XS) -> U72(tt(), XS) , U72(tt(), XS) -> XS , U81(tt(), N, XS) -> U82(tt(), N, XS) , U82(tt(), N, XS) -> fst(splitAt(N, XS)) , fst(pair(X, Y)) -> U21(tt(), X) , natsFrom(N) -> cons(N, natsFrom(s(N))) , sel(N, XS) -> U41(tt(), N, XS) , tail(cons(N, XS)) -> U71(tt(), XS) , take(N, XS) -> U81(tt(), N, XS) } Obligation: innermost runtime complexity Answer: MAYBE No rule is usable, rules are removed from the input problem. We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict DPs: { U11^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_1(U12^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U12^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_2(splitAt^#(N, XS)) , splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_3(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_4(U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U41^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_5(U42^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U42^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_6(afterNth^#(N, XS)) , afterNth^#(N, XS) -> c_7(U11^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_8(U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_9(splitAt^#(N, XS)) , U81^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_10(U82^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U82^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_11(splitAt^#(N, XS)) , natsFrom^#(N) -> c_12(natsFrom^#(s(N))) , sel^#(N, XS) -> c_13(U41^#(tt(), N, XS)) , take^#(N, XS) -> c_14(U81^#(tt(), N, XS)) } Obligation: innermost runtime complexity Answer: MAYBE Consider the dependency graph 1: U11^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_1(U12^#(tt(), N, XS)) -->_1 U12^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_2(splitAt^#(N, XS)) :2 2: U12^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_2(splitAt^#(N, XS)) -->_1 splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_3(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) :3 3: splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_3(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) -->_1 U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_4(U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) :4 4: U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_4(U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) -->_1 U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_8(U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) :8 5: U41^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_5(U42^#(tt(), N, XS)) -->_1 U42^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_6(afterNth^#(N, XS)) :6 6: U42^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_6(afterNth^#(N, XS)) -->_1 afterNth^#(N, XS) -> c_7(U11^#(tt(), N, XS)) :7 7: afterNth^#(N, XS) -> c_7(U11^#(tt(), N, XS)) -->_1 U11^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_1(U12^#(tt(), N, XS)) :1 8: U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_8(U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) -->_1 U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_9(splitAt^#(N, XS)) :9 9: U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_9(splitAt^#(N, XS)) -->_1 splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_3(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) :3 10: U81^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_10(U82^#(tt(), N, XS)) -->_1 U82^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_11(splitAt^#(N, XS)) :11 11: U82^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_11(splitAt^#(N, XS)) -->_1 splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_3(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) :3 12: natsFrom^#(N) -> c_12(natsFrom^#(s(N))) -->_1 natsFrom^#(N) -> c_12(natsFrom^#(s(N))) :12 13: sel^#(N, XS) -> c_13(U41^#(tt(), N, XS)) -->_1 U41^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_5(U42^#(tt(), N, XS)) :5 14: take^#(N, XS) -> c_14(U81^#(tt(), N, XS)) -->_1 U81^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_10(U82^#(tt(), N, XS)) :10 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). { sel^#(N, XS) -> c_13(U41^#(tt(), N, XS)) , take^#(N, XS) -> c_14(U81^#(tt(), N, XS)) } We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict DPs: { U11^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_1(U12^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U12^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_2(splitAt^#(N, XS)) , splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_3(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_4(U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U41^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_5(U42^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U42^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_6(afterNth^#(N, XS)) , afterNth^#(N, XS) -> c_7(U11^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_8(U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_9(splitAt^#(N, XS)) , U81^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_10(U82^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U82^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_11(splitAt^#(N, XS)) , natsFrom^#(N) -> c_12(natsFrom^#(s(N))) } Obligation: innermost runtime complexity Answer: MAYBE Consider the dependency graph 1: U11^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_1(U12^#(tt(), N, XS)) -->_1 U12^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_2(splitAt^#(N, XS)) :2 2: U12^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_2(splitAt^#(N, XS)) -->_1 splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_3(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) :3 3: splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_3(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) -->_1 U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_4(U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) :4 4: U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_4(U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) -->_1 U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_8(U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) :8 5: U41^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_5(U42^#(tt(), N, XS)) -->_1 U42^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_6(afterNth^#(N, XS)) :6 6: U42^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_6(afterNth^#(N, XS)) -->_1 afterNth^#(N, XS) -> c_7(U11^#(tt(), N, XS)) :7 7: afterNth^#(N, XS) -> c_7(U11^#(tt(), N, XS)) -->_1 U11^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_1(U12^#(tt(), N, XS)) :1 8: U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_8(U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) -->_1 U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_9(splitAt^#(N, XS)) :9 9: U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_9(splitAt^#(N, XS)) -->_1 splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_3(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) :3 10: U81^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_10(U82^#(tt(), N, XS)) -->_1 U82^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_11(splitAt^#(N, XS)) :11 11: U82^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_11(splitAt^#(N, XS)) -->_1 splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_3(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) :3 12: natsFrom^#(N) -> c_12(natsFrom^#(s(N))) -->_1 natsFrom^#(N) -> c_12(natsFrom^#(s(N))) :12 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). { U41^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_5(U42^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U81^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_10(U82^#(tt(), N, XS)) } We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict DPs: { U11^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_1(U12^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U12^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_2(splitAt^#(N, XS)) , splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_3(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_4(U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U42^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_6(afterNth^#(N, XS)) , afterNth^#(N, XS) -> c_7(U11^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_8(U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_9(splitAt^#(N, XS)) , U82^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_11(splitAt^#(N, XS)) , natsFrom^#(N) -> c_12(natsFrom^#(s(N))) } Obligation: innermost runtime complexity Answer: MAYBE Consider the dependency graph 1: U11^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_1(U12^#(tt(), N, XS)) -->_1 U12^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_2(splitAt^#(N, XS)) :2 2: U12^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_2(splitAt^#(N, XS)) -->_1 splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_3(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) :3 3: splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_3(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) -->_1 U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_4(U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) :4 4: U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_4(U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) -->_1 U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_8(U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) :7 5: U42^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_6(afterNth^#(N, XS)) -->_1 afterNth^#(N, XS) -> c_7(U11^#(tt(), N, XS)) :6 6: afterNth^#(N, XS) -> c_7(U11^#(tt(), N, XS)) -->_1 U11^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_1(U12^#(tt(), N, XS)) :1 7: U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_8(U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) -->_1 U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_9(splitAt^#(N, XS)) :8 8: U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_9(splitAt^#(N, XS)) -->_1 splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_3(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) :3 9: U82^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_11(splitAt^#(N, XS)) -->_1 splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_3(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) :3 10: natsFrom^#(N) -> c_12(natsFrom^#(s(N))) -->_1 natsFrom^#(N) -> c_12(natsFrom^#(s(N))) :10 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). { U42^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_6(afterNth^#(N, XS)) , U82^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_11(splitAt^#(N, XS)) } We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict DPs: { U11^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_1(U12^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U12^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_2(splitAt^#(N, XS)) , splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_3(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_4(U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , afterNth^#(N, XS) -> c_7(U11^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_8(U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_9(splitAt^#(N, XS)) , natsFrom^#(N) -> c_12(natsFrom^#(s(N))) } Obligation: innermost runtime complexity Answer: MAYBE Consider the dependency graph 1: U11^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_1(U12^#(tt(), N, XS)) -->_1 U12^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_2(splitAt^#(N, XS)) :2 2: U12^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_2(splitAt^#(N, XS)) -->_1 splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_3(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) :3 3: splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_3(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) -->_1 U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_4(U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) :4 4: U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_4(U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) -->_1 U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_8(U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) :6 5: afterNth^#(N, XS) -> c_7(U11^#(tt(), N, XS)) -->_1 U11^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_1(U12^#(tt(), N, XS)) :1 6: U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_8(U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) -->_1 U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_9(splitAt^#(N, XS)) :7 7: U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_9(splitAt^#(N, XS)) -->_1 splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_3(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) :3 8: natsFrom^#(N) -> c_12(natsFrom^#(s(N))) -->_1 natsFrom^#(N) -> c_12(natsFrom^#(s(N))) :8 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). { afterNth^#(N, XS) -> c_7(U11^#(tt(), N, XS)) } We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict DPs: { U11^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_1(U12^#(tt(), N, XS)) , U12^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_2(splitAt^#(N, XS)) , splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_3(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_4(U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_8(U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_9(splitAt^#(N, XS)) , natsFrom^#(N) -> c_12(natsFrom^#(s(N))) } Obligation: innermost runtime complexity Answer: MAYBE Consider the dependency graph 1: U11^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_1(U12^#(tt(), N, XS)) -->_1 U12^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_2(splitAt^#(N, XS)) :2 2: U12^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_2(splitAt^#(N, XS)) -->_1 splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_3(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) :3 3: splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_3(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) -->_1 U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_4(U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) :4 4: U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_4(U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) -->_1 U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_8(U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) :5 5: U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_8(U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) -->_1 U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_9(splitAt^#(N, XS)) :6 6: U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_9(splitAt^#(N, XS)) -->_1 splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_3(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) :3 7: natsFrom^#(N) -> c_12(natsFrom^#(s(N))) -->_1 natsFrom^#(N) -> c_12(natsFrom^#(s(N))) :7 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). { U11^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_1(U12^#(tt(), N, XS)) } We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict DPs: { U12^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_2(splitAt^#(N, XS)) , splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_3(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_4(U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_8(U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_9(splitAt^#(N, XS)) , natsFrom^#(N) -> c_12(natsFrom^#(s(N))) } Obligation: innermost runtime complexity Answer: MAYBE Consider the dependency graph 1: U12^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_2(splitAt^#(N, XS)) -->_1 splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_3(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) :2 2: splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_3(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) -->_1 U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_4(U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) :3 3: U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_4(U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) -->_1 U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_8(U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) :4 4: U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_8(U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) -->_1 U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_9(splitAt^#(N, XS)) :5 5: U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_9(splitAt^#(N, XS)) -->_1 splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_3(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) :2 6: natsFrom^#(N) -> c_12(natsFrom^#(s(N))) -->_1 natsFrom^#(N) -> c_12(natsFrom^#(s(N))) :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). { U12^#(tt(), N, XS) -> c_2(splitAt^#(N, XS)) } We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict DPs: { splitAt^#(s(N), cons(X, XS)) -> c_3(U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U61^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_4(U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U62^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_8(U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS)) , U63^#(tt(), N, X, XS) -> c_9(splitAt^#(N, XS)) , natsFrom^#(N) -> c_12(natsFrom^#(s(N))) } Obligation: innermost runtime complexity Answer: MAYBE None of the processors succeeded. Details of failed attempt(s): ----------------------------- 1) 'matrices' failed due to the following reason: None of the processors succeeded. Details of failed attempt(s): ----------------------------- 1) 'matrix interpretation of dimension 4' failed due to the following reason: The input cannot be shown compatible 2) 'matrix interpretation of dimension 3' failed due to the following reason: The input cannot be shown compatible 3) 'matrix interpretation of dimension 3' failed due to the following reason: The input cannot be shown compatible 4) 'matrix interpretation of dimension 2' failed due to the following reason: The input cannot be shown compatible 5) 'matrix interpretation of dimension 2' failed due to the following reason: The input cannot be shown compatible 6) 'matrix interpretation of dimension 1' failed due to the following reason: The input cannot be shown compatible 2) 'empty' failed due to the following reason: Empty strict component of the problem is NOT empty. Arrrr..