MAYBE We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict Trs: { +(x, 0()) -> x , +(0(), x) -> x , +(s(x), s(y)) -> s(s(+(x, y))) , *(x, 0()) -> 0() , *(0(), x) -> 0() , *(s(x), s(y)) -> s(+(*(x, y), +(x, y))) , sum(nil()) -> 0() , sum(cons(x, l)) -> +(x, sum(l)) , prod(nil()) -> s(0()) , prod(cons(x, l)) -> *(x, prod(l)) } Obligation: innermost runtime complexity Answer: MAYBE We add following dependency tuples: Strict DPs: { +^#(x, 0()) -> c_1() , +^#(0(), x) -> c_2() , +^#(s(x), s(y)) -> c_3(+^#(x, y)) , *^#(x, 0()) -> c_4() , *^#(0(), x) -> c_5() , *^#(s(x), s(y)) -> c_6(+^#(*(x, y), +(x, y)), *^#(x, y), +^#(x, y)) , sum^#(nil()) -> c_7() , sum^#(cons(x, l)) -> c_8(+^#(x, sum(l)), sum^#(l)) , prod^#(nil()) -> c_9() , prod^#(cons(x, l)) -> c_10(*^#(x, prod(l)), prod^#(l)) } and mark the set of starting terms. We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict DPs: { +^#(x, 0()) -> c_1() , +^#(0(), x) -> c_2() , +^#(s(x), s(y)) -> c_3(+^#(x, y)) , *^#(x, 0()) -> c_4() , *^#(0(), x) -> c_5() , *^#(s(x), s(y)) -> c_6(+^#(*(x, y), +(x, y)), *^#(x, y), +^#(x, y)) , sum^#(nil()) -> c_7() , sum^#(cons(x, l)) -> c_8(+^#(x, sum(l)), sum^#(l)) , prod^#(nil()) -> c_9() , prod^#(cons(x, l)) -> c_10(*^#(x, prod(l)), prod^#(l)) } Weak Trs: { +(x, 0()) -> x , +(0(), x) -> x , +(s(x), s(y)) -> s(s(+(x, y))) , *(x, 0()) -> 0() , *(0(), x) -> 0() , *(s(x), s(y)) -> s(+(*(x, y), +(x, y))) , sum(nil()) -> 0() , sum(cons(x, l)) -> +(x, sum(l)) , prod(nil()) -> s(0()) , prod(cons(x, l)) -> *(x, prod(l)) } Obligation: innermost runtime complexity Answer: MAYBE We estimate the number of application of {1,2,4,5,7,9} by applications of Pre({1,2,4,5,7,9}) = {3,6,8,10}. Here rules are labeled as follows: DPs: { 1: +^#(x, 0()) -> c_1() , 2: +^#(0(), x) -> c_2() , 3: +^#(s(x), s(y)) -> c_3(+^#(x, y)) , 4: *^#(x, 0()) -> c_4() , 5: *^#(0(), x) -> c_5() , 6: *^#(s(x), s(y)) -> c_6(+^#(*(x, y), +(x, y)), *^#(x, y), +^#(x, y)) , 7: sum^#(nil()) -> c_7() , 8: sum^#(cons(x, l)) -> c_8(+^#(x, sum(l)), sum^#(l)) , 9: prod^#(nil()) -> c_9() , 10: prod^#(cons(x, l)) -> c_10(*^#(x, prod(l)), prod^#(l)) } We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict DPs: { +^#(s(x), s(y)) -> c_3(+^#(x, y)) , *^#(s(x), s(y)) -> c_6(+^#(*(x, y), +(x, y)), *^#(x, y), +^#(x, y)) , sum^#(cons(x, l)) -> c_8(+^#(x, sum(l)), sum^#(l)) , prod^#(cons(x, l)) -> c_10(*^#(x, prod(l)), prod^#(l)) } Weak DPs: { +^#(x, 0()) -> c_1() , +^#(0(), x) -> c_2() , *^#(x, 0()) -> c_4() , *^#(0(), x) -> c_5() , sum^#(nil()) -> c_7() , prod^#(nil()) -> c_9() } Weak Trs: { +(x, 0()) -> x , +(0(), x) -> x , +(s(x), s(y)) -> s(s(+(x, y))) , *(x, 0()) -> 0() , *(0(), x) -> 0() , *(s(x), s(y)) -> s(+(*(x, y), +(x, y))) , sum(nil()) -> 0() , sum(cons(x, l)) -> +(x, sum(l)) , prod(nil()) -> s(0()) , prod(cons(x, l)) -> *(x, prod(l)) } 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. { +^#(x, 0()) -> c_1() , +^#(0(), x) -> c_2() , *^#(x, 0()) -> c_4() , *^#(0(), x) -> c_5() , sum^#(nil()) -> c_7() , prod^#(nil()) -> c_9() } We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict DPs: { +^#(s(x), s(y)) -> c_3(+^#(x, y)) , *^#(s(x), s(y)) -> c_6(+^#(*(x, y), +(x, y)), *^#(x, y), +^#(x, y)) , sum^#(cons(x, l)) -> c_8(+^#(x, sum(l)), sum^#(l)) , prod^#(cons(x, l)) -> c_10(*^#(x, prod(l)), prod^#(l)) } Weak Trs: { +(x, 0()) -> x , +(0(), x) -> x , +(s(x), s(y)) -> s(s(+(x, y))) , *(x, 0()) -> 0() , *(0(), x) -> 0() , *(s(x), s(y)) -> s(+(*(x, y), +(x, y))) , sum(nil()) -> 0() , sum(cons(x, l)) -> +(x, sum(l)) , prod(nil()) -> s(0()) , prod(cons(x, l)) -> *(x, prod(l)) } Obligation: innermost runtime complexity Answer: MAYBE The input cannot be shown compatible Arrrr..