MAYBE We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict Trs: { from(X) -> cons(X, n__from(s(X))) , from(X) -> n__from(X) , 2ndspos(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> 2ndspos(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z))) , 2ndspos(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> rcons(posrecip(Y), 2ndsneg(N, activate(Z))) , 2ndspos(0(), Z) -> rnil() , activate(X) -> X , activate(n__from(X)) -> from(X) , 2ndsneg(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> 2ndsneg(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z))) , 2ndsneg(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> rcons(negrecip(Y), 2ndspos(N, activate(Z))) , 2ndsneg(0(), Z) -> rnil() , pi(X) -> 2ndspos(X, from(0())) , plus(s(X), Y) -> s(plus(X, Y)) , plus(0(), Y) -> Y , times(s(X), Y) -> plus(Y, times(X, Y)) , times(0(), Y) -> 0() , square(X) -> times(X, X) } Obligation: innermost runtime complexity Answer: MAYBE We add following dependency tuples: Strict DPs: { from^#(X) -> c_1() , from^#(X) -> c_2() , 2ndspos^#(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> c_3(2ndspos^#(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z))), activate^#(Z)) , 2ndspos^#(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> c_4(2ndsneg^#(N, activate(Z)), activate^#(Z)) , 2ndspos^#(0(), Z) -> c_5() , activate^#(X) -> c_6() , activate^#(n__from(X)) -> c_7(from^#(X)) , 2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> c_8(2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z))), activate^#(Z)) , 2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> c_9(2ndspos^#(N, activate(Z)), activate^#(Z)) , 2ndsneg^#(0(), Z) -> c_10() , pi^#(X) -> c_11(2ndspos^#(X, from(0())), from^#(0())) , plus^#(s(X), Y) -> c_12(plus^#(X, Y)) , plus^#(0(), Y) -> c_13() , times^#(s(X), Y) -> c_14(plus^#(Y, times(X, Y)), times^#(X, Y)) , times^#(0(), Y) -> c_15() , square^#(X) -> c_16(times^#(X, X)) } and mark the set of starting terms. We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict DPs: { from^#(X) -> c_1() , from^#(X) -> c_2() , 2ndspos^#(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> c_3(2ndspos^#(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z))), activate^#(Z)) , 2ndspos^#(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> c_4(2ndsneg^#(N, activate(Z)), activate^#(Z)) , 2ndspos^#(0(), Z) -> c_5() , activate^#(X) -> c_6() , activate^#(n__from(X)) -> c_7(from^#(X)) , 2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> c_8(2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z))), activate^#(Z)) , 2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> c_9(2ndspos^#(N, activate(Z)), activate^#(Z)) , 2ndsneg^#(0(), Z) -> c_10() , pi^#(X) -> c_11(2ndspos^#(X, from(0())), from^#(0())) , plus^#(s(X), Y) -> c_12(plus^#(X, Y)) , plus^#(0(), Y) -> c_13() , times^#(s(X), Y) -> c_14(plus^#(Y, times(X, Y)), times^#(X, Y)) , times^#(0(), Y) -> c_15() , square^#(X) -> c_16(times^#(X, X)) } Weak Trs: { from(X) -> cons(X, n__from(s(X))) , from(X) -> n__from(X) , 2ndspos(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> 2ndspos(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z))) , 2ndspos(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> rcons(posrecip(Y), 2ndsneg(N, activate(Z))) , 2ndspos(0(), Z) -> rnil() , activate(X) -> X , activate(n__from(X)) -> from(X) , 2ndsneg(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> 2ndsneg(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z))) , 2ndsneg(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> rcons(negrecip(Y), 2ndspos(N, activate(Z))) , 2ndsneg(0(), Z) -> rnil() , pi(X) -> 2ndspos(X, from(0())) , plus(s(X), Y) -> s(plus(X, Y)) , plus(0(), Y) -> Y , times(s(X), Y) -> plus(Y, times(X, Y)) , times(0(), Y) -> 0() , square(X) -> times(X, X) } Obligation: innermost runtime complexity Answer: MAYBE We estimate the number of application of {1,2,5,6,10,13,15} by applications of Pre({1,2,5,6,10,13,15}) = {3,4,7,8,9,11,12,14,16}. Here rules are labeled as follows: DPs: { 1: from^#(X) -> c_1() , 2: from^#(X) -> c_2() , 3: 2ndspos^#(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> c_3(2ndspos^#(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z))), activate^#(Z)) , 4: 2ndspos^#(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> c_4(2ndsneg^#(N, activate(Z)), activate^#(Z)) , 5: 2ndspos^#(0(), Z) -> c_5() , 6: activate^#(X) -> c_6() , 7: activate^#(n__from(X)) -> c_7(from^#(X)) , 8: 2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> c_8(2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z))), activate^#(Z)) , 9: 2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> c_9(2ndspos^#(N, activate(Z)), activate^#(Z)) , 10: 2ndsneg^#(0(), Z) -> c_10() , 11: pi^#(X) -> c_11(2ndspos^#(X, from(0())), from^#(0())) , 12: plus^#(s(X), Y) -> c_12(plus^#(X, Y)) , 13: plus^#(0(), Y) -> c_13() , 14: times^#(s(X), Y) -> c_14(plus^#(Y, times(X, Y)), times^#(X, Y)) , 15: times^#(0(), Y) -> c_15() , 16: square^#(X) -> c_16(times^#(X, X)) } We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict DPs: { 2ndspos^#(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> c_3(2ndspos^#(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z))), activate^#(Z)) , 2ndspos^#(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> c_4(2ndsneg^#(N, activate(Z)), activate^#(Z)) , activate^#(n__from(X)) -> c_7(from^#(X)) , 2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> c_8(2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z))), activate^#(Z)) , 2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> c_9(2ndspos^#(N, activate(Z)), activate^#(Z)) , pi^#(X) -> c_11(2ndspos^#(X, from(0())), from^#(0())) , plus^#(s(X), Y) -> c_12(plus^#(X, Y)) , times^#(s(X), Y) -> c_14(plus^#(Y, times(X, Y)), times^#(X, Y)) , square^#(X) -> c_16(times^#(X, X)) } Weak DPs: { from^#(X) -> c_1() , from^#(X) -> c_2() , 2ndspos^#(0(), Z) -> c_5() , activate^#(X) -> c_6() , 2ndsneg^#(0(), Z) -> c_10() , plus^#(0(), Y) -> c_13() , times^#(0(), Y) -> c_15() } Weak Trs: { from(X) -> cons(X, n__from(s(X))) , from(X) -> n__from(X) , 2ndspos(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> 2ndspos(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z))) , 2ndspos(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> rcons(posrecip(Y), 2ndsneg(N, activate(Z))) , 2ndspos(0(), Z) -> rnil() , activate(X) -> X , activate(n__from(X)) -> from(X) , 2ndsneg(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> 2ndsneg(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z))) , 2ndsneg(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> rcons(negrecip(Y), 2ndspos(N, activate(Z))) , 2ndsneg(0(), Z) -> rnil() , pi(X) -> 2ndspos(X, from(0())) , plus(s(X), Y) -> s(plus(X, Y)) , plus(0(), Y) -> Y , times(s(X), Y) -> plus(Y, times(X, Y)) , times(0(), Y) -> 0() , square(X) -> times(X, X) } Obligation: innermost runtime complexity Answer: MAYBE We estimate the number of application of {3} by applications of Pre({3}) = {1,2,4,5}. Here rules are labeled as follows: DPs: { 1: 2ndspos^#(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> c_3(2ndspos^#(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z))), activate^#(Z)) , 2: 2ndspos^#(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> c_4(2ndsneg^#(N, activate(Z)), activate^#(Z)) , 3: activate^#(n__from(X)) -> c_7(from^#(X)) , 4: 2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> c_8(2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z))), activate^#(Z)) , 5: 2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> c_9(2ndspos^#(N, activate(Z)), activate^#(Z)) , 6: pi^#(X) -> c_11(2ndspos^#(X, from(0())), from^#(0())) , 7: plus^#(s(X), Y) -> c_12(plus^#(X, Y)) , 8: times^#(s(X), Y) -> c_14(plus^#(Y, times(X, Y)), times^#(X, Y)) , 9: square^#(X) -> c_16(times^#(X, X)) , 10: from^#(X) -> c_1() , 11: from^#(X) -> c_2() , 12: 2ndspos^#(0(), Z) -> c_5() , 13: activate^#(X) -> c_6() , 14: 2ndsneg^#(0(), Z) -> c_10() , 15: plus^#(0(), Y) -> c_13() , 16: times^#(0(), Y) -> c_15() } We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict DPs: { 2ndspos^#(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> c_3(2ndspos^#(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z))), activate^#(Z)) , 2ndspos^#(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> c_4(2ndsneg^#(N, activate(Z)), activate^#(Z)) , 2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> c_8(2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z))), activate^#(Z)) , 2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> c_9(2ndspos^#(N, activate(Z)), activate^#(Z)) , pi^#(X) -> c_11(2ndspos^#(X, from(0())), from^#(0())) , plus^#(s(X), Y) -> c_12(plus^#(X, Y)) , times^#(s(X), Y) -> c_14(plus^#(Y, times(X, Y)), times^#(X, Y)) , square^#(X) -> c_16(times^#(X, X)) } Weak DPs: { from^#(X) -> c_1() , from^#(X) -> c_2() , 2ndspos^#(0(), Z) -> c_5() , activate^#(X) -> c_6() , activate^#(n__from(X)) -> c_7(from^#(X)) , 2ndsneg^#(0(), Z) -> c_10() , plus^#(0(), Y) -> c_13() , times^#(0(), Y) -> c_15() } Weak Trs: { from(X) -> cons(X, n__from(s(X))) , from(X) -> n__from(X) , 2ndspos(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> 2ndspos(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z))) , 2ndspos(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> rcons(posrecip(Y), 2ndsneg(N, activate(Z))) , 2ndspos(0(), Z) -> rnil() , activate(X) -> X , activate(n__from(X)) -> from(X) , 2ndsneg(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> 2ndsneg(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z))) , 2ndsneg(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> rcons(negrecip(Y), 2ndspos(N, activate(Z))) , 2ndsneg(0(), Z) -> rnil() , pi(X) -> 2ndspos(X, from(0())) , plus(s(X), Y) -> s(plus(X, Y)) , plus(0(), Y) -> Y , times(s(X), Y) -> plus(Y, times(X, Y)) , times(0(), Y) -> 0() , square(X) -> times(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. { from^#(X) -> c_1() , from^#(X) -> c_2() , 2ndspos^#(0(), Z) -> c_5() , activate^#(X) -> c_6() , activate^#(n__from(X)) -> c_7(from^#(X)) , 2ndsneg^#(0(), Z) -> c_10() , plus^#(0(), Y) -> c_13() , times^#(0(), Y) -> c_15() } We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict DPs: { 2ndspos^#(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> c_3(2ndspos^#(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z))), activate^#(Z)) , 2ndspos^#(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> c_4(2ndsneg^#(N, activate(Z)), activate^#(Z)) , 2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> c_8(2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z))), activate^#(Z)) , 2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> c_9(2ndspos^#(N, activate(Z)), activate^#(Z)) , pi^#(X) -> c_11(2ndspos^#(X, from(0())), from^#(0())) , plus^#(s(X), Y) -> c_12(plus^#(X, Y)) , times^#(s(X), Y) -> c_14(plus^#(Y, times(X, Y)), times^#(X, Y)) , square^#(X) -> c_16(times^#(X, X)) } Weak Trs: { from(X) -> cons(X, n__from(s(X))) , from(X) -> n__from(X) , 2ndspos(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> 2ndspos(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z))) , 2ndspos(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> rcons(posrecip(Y), 2ndsneg(N, activate(Z))) , 2ndspos(0(), Z) -> rnil() , activate(X) -> X , activate(n__from(X)) -> from(X) , 2ndsneg(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> 2ndsneg(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z))) , 2ndsneg(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> rcons(negrecip(Y), 2ndspos(N, activate(Z))) , 2ndsneg(0(), Z) -> rnil() , pi(X) -> 2ndspos(X, from(0())) , plus(s(X), Y) -> s(plus(X, Y)) , plus(0(), Y) -> Y , times(s(X), Y) -> plus(Y, times(X, Y)) , times(0(), Y) -> 0() , square(X) -> times(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: { 2ndspos^#(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> c_3(2ndspos^#(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z))), activate^#(Z)) , 2ndspos^#(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> c_4(2ndsneg^#(N, activate(Z)), activate^#(Z)) , 2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> c_8(2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z))), activate^#(Z)) , 2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> c_9(2ndspos^#(N, activate(Z)), activate^#(Z)) , pi^#(X) -> c_11(2ndspos^#(X, from(0())), from^#(0())) } We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict DPs: { 2ndspos^#(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> c_1(2ndspos^#(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z)))) , 2ndspos^#(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> c_2(2ndsneg^#(N, activate(Z))) , 2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> c_3(2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z)))) , 2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> c_4(2ndspos^#(N, activate(Z))) , pi^#(X) -> c_5(2ndspos^#(X, from(0()))) , plus^#(s(X), Y) -> c_6(plus^#(X, Y)) , times^#(s(X), Y) -> c_7(plus^#(Y, times(X, Y)), times^#(X, Y)) , square^#(X) -> c_8(times^#(X, X)) } Weak Trs: { from(X) -> cons(X, n__from(s(X))) , from(X) -> n__from(X) , 2ndspos(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> 2ndspos(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z))) , 2ndspos(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> rcons(posrecip(Y), 2ndsneg(N, activate(Z))) , 2ndspos(0(), Z) -> rnil() , activate(X) -> X , activate(n__from(X)) -> from(X) , 2ndsneg(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> 2ndsneg(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z))) , 2ndsneg(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> rcons(negrecip(Y), 2ndspos(N, activate(Z))) , 2ndsneg(0(), Z) -> rnil() , pi(X) -> 2ndspos(X, from(0())) , plus(s(X), Y) -> s(plus(X, Y)) , plus(0(), Y) -> Y , times(s(X), Y) -> plus(Y, times(X, Y)) , times(0(), Y) -> 0() , square(X) -> times(X, X) } Obligation: innermost runtime complexity Answer: MAYBE We replace rewrite rules by usable rules: Weak Usable Rules: { from(X) -> cons(X, n__from(s(X))) , from(X) -> n__from(X) , activate(X) -> X , activate(n__from(X)) -> from(X) , plus(s(X), Y) -> s(plus(X, Y)) , plus(0(), Y) -> Y , times(s(X), Y) -> plus(Y, times(X, Y)) , times(0(), Y) -> 0() } We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict DPs: { 2ndspos^#(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> c_1(2ndspos^#(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z)))) , 2ndspos^#(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> c_2(2ndsneg^#(N, activate(Z))) , 2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> c_3(2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z)))) , 2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> c_4(2ndspos^#(N, activate(Z))) , pi^#(X) -> c_5(2ndspos^#(X, from(0()))) , plus^#(s(X), Y) -> c_6(plus^#(X, Y)) , times^#(s(X), Y) -> c_7(plus^#(Y, times(X, Y)), times^#(X, Y)) , square^#(X) -> c_8(times^#(X, X)) } Weak Trs: { from(X) -> cons(X, n__from(s(X))) , from(X) -> n__from(X) , activate(X) -> X , activate(n__from(X)) -> from(X) , plus(s(X), Y) -> s(plus(X, Y)) , plus(0(), Y) -> Y , times(s(X), Y) -> plus(Y, times(X, Y)) , times(0(), Y) -> 0() } Obligation: innermost runtime complexity Answer: MAYBE Consider the dependency graph 1: 2ndspos^#(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> c_1(2ndspos^#(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z)))) -->_1 2ndspos^#(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> c_2(2ndsneg^#(N, activate(Z))) :2 2: 2ndspos^#(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> c_2(2ndsneg^#(N, activate(Z))) -->_1 2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> c_4(2ndspos^#(N, activate(Z))) :4 -->_1 2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> c_3(2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z)))) :3 3: 2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> c_3(2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z)))) -->_1 2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> c_4(2ndspos^#(N, activate(Z))) :4 4: 2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> c_4(2ndspos^#(N, activate(Z))) -->_1 2ndspos^#(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> c_2(2ndsneg^#(N, activate(Z))) :2 -->_1 2ndspos^#(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> c_1(2ndspos^#(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z)))) :1 5: pi^#(X) -> c_5(2ndspos^#(X, from(0()))) -->_1 2ndspos^#(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> c_2(2ndsneg^#(N, activate(Z))) :2 -->_1 2ndspos^#(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> c_1(2ndspos^#(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z)))) :1 6: plus^#(s(X), Y) -> c_6(plus^#(X, Y)) -->_1 plus^#(s(X), Y) -> c_6(plus^#(X, Y)) :6 7: times^#(s(X), Y) -> c_7(plus^#(Y, times(X, Y)), times^#(X, Y)) -->_2 times^#(s(X), Y) -> c_7(plus^#(Y, times(X, Y)), times^#(X, Y)) :7 -->_1 plus^#(s(X), Y) -> c_6(plus^#(X, Y)) :6 8: square^#(X) -> c_8(times^#(X, X)) -->_1 times^#(s(X), Y) -> c_7(plus^#(Y, times(X, Y)), times^#(X, Y)) :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). { square^#(X) -> c_8(times^#(X, X)) } We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the certificate MAYBE. Strict DPs: { 2ndspos^#(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> c_1(2ndspos^#(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z)))) , 2ndspos^#(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> c_2(2ndsneg^#(N, activate(Z))) , 2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons(X, Z)) -> c_3(2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons2(X, activate(Z)))) , 2ndsneg^#(s(N), cons2(X, cons(Y, Z))) -> c_4(2ndspos^#(N, activate(Z))) , pi^#(X) -> c_5(2ndspos^#(X, from(0()))) , plus^#(s(X), Y) -> c_6(plus^#(X, Y)) , times^#(s(X), Y) -> c_7(plus^#(Y, times(X, Y)), times^#(X, Y)) } Weak Trs: { from(X) -> cons(X, n__from(s(X))) , from(X) -> n__from(X) , activate(X) -> X , activate(n__from(X)) -> from(X) , plus(s(X), Y) -> s(plus(X, Y)) , plus(0(), Y) -> Y , times(s(X), Y) -> plus(Y, times(X, Y)) , times(0(), Y) -> 0() } Obligation: innermost runtime complexity Answer: MAYBE The input cannot be shown compatible Arrrr..