MAYBE We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict Trs: { cond(true(), x, y) -> cond(gr(x, y), p(x), y) , gr(0(), x) -> false() , gr(s(x), 0()) -> true() , gr(s(x), s(y)) -> gr(x, y) , p(0()) -> 0() , p(s(x)) -> x } Obligation: innermost runtime complexity Answer: MAYBE We add following dependency tuples: Strict DPs: { cond^#(true(), x, y) -> c_1(cond^#(gr(x, y), p(x), y), gr^#(x, y), p^#(x)) , gr^#(0(), x) -> c_2() , gr^#(s(x), 0()) -> c_3() , gr^#(s(x), s(y)) -> c_4(gr^#(x, y)) , p^#(0()) -> c_5() , p^#(s(x)) -> c_6() } and mark the set of starting terms. We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict DPs: { cond^#(true(), x, y) -> c_1(cond^#(gr(x, y), p(x), y), gr^#(x, y), p^#(x)) , gr^#(0(), x) -> c_2() , gr^#(s(x), 0()) -> c_3() , gr^#(s(x), s(y)) -> c_4(gr^#(x, y)) , p^#(0()) -> c_5() , p^#(s(x)) -> c_6() } Weak Trs: { cond(true(), x, y) -> cond(gr(x, y), p(x), y) , gr(0(), x) -> false() , gr(s(x), 0()) -> true() , gr(s(x), s(y)) -> gr(x, y) , p(0()) -> 0() , p(s(x)) -> x } Obligation: innermost runtime complexity Answer: MAYBE We estimate the number of application of {2,3,5,6} by applications of Pre({2,3,5,6}) = {1,4}. Here rules are labeled as follows: DPs: { 1: cond^#(true(), x, y) -> c_1(cond^#(gr(x, y), p(x), y), gr^#(x, y), p^#(x)) , 2: gr^#(0(), x) -> c_2() , 3: gr^#(s(x), 0()) -> c_3() , 4: gr^#(s(x), s(y)) -> c_4(gr^#(x, y)) , 5: p^#(0()) -> c_5() , 6: p^#(s(x)) -> c_6() } We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict DPs: { cond^#(true(), x, y) -> c_1(cond^#(gr(x, y), p(x), y), gr^#(x, y), p^#(x)) , gr^#(s(x), s(y)) -> c_4(gr^#(x, y)) } Weak DPs: { gr^#(0(), x) -> c_2() , gr^#(s(x), 0()) -> c_3() , p^#(0()) -> c_5() , p^#(s(x)) -> c_6() } Weak Trs: { cond(true(), x, y) -> cond(gr(x, y), p(x), y) , gr(0(), x) -> false() , gr(s(x), 0()) -> true() , gr(s(x), s(y)) -> gr(x, y) , p(0()) -> 0() , p(s(x)) -> x } 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. { gr^#(0(), x) -> c_2() , gr^#(s(x), 0()) -> c_3() , p^#(0()) -> c_5() , p^#(s(x)) -> c_6() } We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict DPs: { cond^#(true(), x, y) -> c_1(cond^#(gr(x, y), p(x), y), gr^#(x, y), p^#(x)) , gr^#(s(x), s(y)) -> c_4(gr^#(x, y)) } Weak Trs: { cond(true(), x, y) -> cond(gr(x, y), p(x), y) , gr(0(), x) -> false() , gr(s(x), 0()) -> true() , gr(s(x), s(y)) -> gr(x, y) , p(0()) -> 0() , p(s(x)) -> x } Obligation: innermost runtime complexity Answer: MAYBE Due to missing edges in the dependency-graph, the right-hand sides of following rules could be simplified: { cond^#(true(), x, y) -> c_1(cond^#(gr(x, y), p(x), y), gr^#(x, y), p^#(x)) } We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict DPs: { cond^#(true(), x, y) -> c_1(cond^#(gr(x, y), p(x), y), gr^#(x, y)) , gr^#(s(x), s(y)) -> c_2(gr^#(x, y)) } Weak Trs: { cond(true(), x, y) -> cond(gr(x, y), p(x), y) , gr(0(), x) -> false() , gr(s(x), 0()) -> true() , gr(s(x), s(y)) -> gr(x, y) , p(0()) -> 0() , p(s(x)) -> x } Obligation: innermost runtime complexity Answer: MAYBE We replace rewrite rules by usable rules: Weak Usable Rules: { gr(0(), x) -> false() , gr(s(x), 0()) -> true() , gr(s(x), s(y)) -> gr(x, y) , p(0()) -> 0() , p(s(x)) -> x } We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict DPs: { cond^#(true(), x, y) -> c_1(cond^#(gr(x, y), p(x), y), gr^#(x, y)) , gr^#(s(x), s(y)) -> c_2(gr^#(x, y)) } Weak Trs: { gr(0(), x) -> false() , gr(s(x), 0()) -> true() , gr(s(x), s(y)) -> gr(x, y) , p(0()) -> 0() , p(s(x)) -> x } Obligation: innermost runtime complexity Answer: MAYBE The input cannot be shown compatible Arrrr..