MAYBE
1082.50/297.02	MAYBE
1082.50/297.02	
1082.50/297.02	We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the
1082.50/297.02	certificate MAYBE.
1082.50/297.02	
1082.50/297.02	Strict Trs:
1082.50/297.02	  { rev(nil()) -> nil()
1082.50/297.02	  , rev(++(x, y)) -> ++(rev1(x, y), rev2(x, y))
1082.50/297.02	  , rev1(x, nil()) -> x
1082.50/297.02	  , rev1(x, ++(y, z)) -> rev1(y, z)
1082.50/297.02	  , rev2(x, nil()) -> nil()
1082.50/297.02	  , rev2(x, ++(y, z)) -> rev(++(x, rev(rev2(y, z)))) }
1082.50/297.02	Obligation:
1082.50/297.02	  runtime complexity
1082.50/297.02	Answer:
1082.50/297.02	  MAYBE
1082.50/297.02	
1082.50/297.02	None of the processors succeeded.
1082.50/297.02	
1082.50/297.02	Details of failed attempt(s):
1082.50/297.02	-----------------------------
1082.50/297.02	1) 'With Problem ... (timeout of 297 seconds)' failed due to the
1082.50/297.02	   following reason:
1082.50/297.02	   
1082.50/297.02	   Computation stopped due to timeout after 297.0 seconds.
1082.50/297.02	
1082.50/297.02	2) 'Best' failed due to the following reason:
1082.50/297.02	   
1082.50/297.02	   None of the processors succeeded.
1082.50/297.02	   
1082.50/297.02	   Details of failed attempt(s):
1082.50/297.02	   -----------------------------
1082.50/297.02	   1) 'With Problem ... (timeout of 148 seconds) (timeout of 297
1082.50/297.02	      seconds)' failed due to the following reason:
1082.50/297.02	      
1082.50/297.02	      Computation stopped due to timeout after 148.0 seconds.
1082.50/297.02	   
1082.50/297.02	   2) 'Best' failed due to the following reason:
1082.50/297.02	      
1082.50/297.02	      None of the processors succeeded.
1082.50/297.02	      
1082.50/297.02	      Details of failed attempt(s):
1082.50/297.02	      -----------------------------
1082.50/297.02	      1) 'bsearch-popstar (timeout of 297 seconds)' failed due to the
1082.50/297.02	         following reason:
1082.50/297.02	         
1082.50/297.02	         The processor is inapplicable, reason:
1082.50/297.02	           Processor only applicable for innermost runtime complexity analysis
1082.50/297.02	      
1082.50/297.02	      2) 'Polynomial Path Order (PS) (timeout of 297 seconds)' failed due
1082.50/297.02	         to the following reason:
1082.50/297.02	         
1082.50/297.02	         The processor is inapplicable, reason:
1082.50/297.02	           Processor only applicable for innermost runtime complexity analysis
1082.50/297.02	      
1082.50/297.02	   
1082.50/297.02	   3) 'Fastest (timeout of 24 seconds) (timeout of 297 seconds)'
1082.50/297.02	      failed due to the following reason:
1082.50/297.02	      
1082.50/297.02	      None of the processors succeeded.
1082.50/297.02	      
1082.50/297.02	      Details of failed attempt(s):
1082.50/297.02	      -----------------------------
1082.50/297.02	      1) 'Bounds with minimal-enrichment and initial automaton 'match''
1082.50/297.02	         failed due to the following reason:
1082.50/297.02	         
1082.50/297.02	         match-boundness of the problem could not be verified.
1082.50/297.02	      
1082.50/297.02	      2) 'Bounds with perSymbol-enrichment and initial automaton 'match''
1082.50/297.02	         failed due to the following reason:
1082.50/297.02	         
1082.50/297.02	         match-boundness of the problem could not be verified.
1082.50/297.02	      
1082.50/297.02	   
1082.50/297.02	
1082.50/297.02	3) 'Weak Dependency Pairs (timeout of 297 seconds)' failed due to
1082.50/297.02	   the following reason:
1082.50/297.02	   
1082.50/297.02	   We add the following weak dependency pairs:
1082.50/297.02	   
1082.50/297.02	   Strict DPs:
1082.50/297.02	     { rev^#(nil()) -> c_1()
1082.50/297.02	     , rev^#(++(x, y)) -> c_2(rev1^#(x, y), rev2^#(x, y))
1082.50/297.02	     , rev1^#(x, nil()) -> c_3(x)
1082.50/297.02	     , rev1^#(x, ++(y, z)) -> c_4(rev1^#(y, z))
1082.50/297.02	     , rev2^#(x, nil()) -> c_5()
1082.50/297.02	     , rev2^#(x, ++(y, z)) -> c_6(rev^#(++(x, rev(rev2(y, z))))) }
1082.50/297.02	   
1082.50/297.02	   and mark the set of starting terms.
1082.50/297.02	   
1082.50/297.02	   We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the
1082.50/297.02	   certificate MAYBE.
1082.50/297.02	   
1082.50/297.02	   Strict DPs:
1082.50/297.02	     { rev^#(nil()) -> c_1()
1082.50/297.02	     , rev^#(++(x, y)) -> c_2(rev1^#(x, y), rev2^#(x, y))
1082.50/297.02	     , rev1^#(x, nil()) -> c_3(x)
1082.50/297.02	     , rev1^#(x, ++(y, z)) -> c_4(rev1^#(y, z))
1082.50/297.02	     , rev2^#(x, nil()) -> c_5()
1082.50/297.02	     , rev2^#(x, ++(y, z)) -> c_6(rev^#(++(x, rev(rev2(y, z))))) }
1082.50/297.02	   Strict Trs:
1082.50/297.02	     { rev(nil()) -> nil()
1082.50/297.02	     , rev(++(x, y)) -> ++(rev1(x, y), rev2(x, y))
1082.50/297.02	     , rev1(x, nil()) -> x
1082.50/297.02	     , rev1(x, ++(y, z)) -> rev1(y, z)
1082.50/297.02	     , rev2(x, nil()) -> nil()
1082.50/297.02	     , rev2(x, ++(y, z)) -> rev(++(x, rev(rev2(y, z)))) }
1082.50/297.02	   Obligation:
1082.50/297.02	     runtime complexity
1082.50/297.02	   Answer:
1082.50/297.02	     MAYBE
1082.50/297.02	   
1082.50/297.02	   We estimate the number of application of {1,5} by applications of
1082.50/297.02	   Pre({1,5}) = {2,3}. Here rules are labeled as follows:
1082.50/297.02	   
1082.50/297.02	     DPs:
1082.50/297.02	       { 1: rev^#(nil()) -> c_1()
1082.50/297.02	       , 2: rev^#(++(x, y)) -> c_2(rev1^#(x, y), rev2^#(x, y))
1082.50/297.02	       , 3: rev1^#(x, nil()) -> c_3(x)
1082.50/297.02	       , 4: rev1^#(x, ++(y, z)) -> c_4(rev1^#(y, z))
1082.50/297.02	       , 5: rev2^#(x, nil()) -> c_5()
1082.50/297.02	       , 6: rev2^#(x, ++(y, z)) -> c_6(rev^#(++(x, rev(rev2(y, z))))) }
1082.50/297.02	   
1082.50/297.02	   We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the
1082.50/297.02	   certificate MAYBE.
1082.50/297.02	   
1082.50/297.02	   Strict DPs:
1082.50/297.02	     { rev^#(++(x, y)) -> c_2(rev1^#(x, y), rev2^#(x, y))
1082.50/297.02	     , rev1^#(x, nil()) -> c_3(x)
1082.50/297.02	     , rev1^#(x, ++(y, z)) -> c_4(rev1^#(y, z))
1082.50/297.02	     , rev2^#(x, ++(y, z)) -> c_6(rev^#(++(x, rev(rev2(y, z))))) }
1082.50/297.02	   Strict Trs:
1082.50/297.02	     { rev(nil()) -> nil()
1082.50/297.02	     , rev(++(x, y)) -> ++(rev1(x, y), rev2(x, y))
1082.50/297.02	     , rev1(x, nil()) -> x
1082.50/297.02	     , rev1(x, ++(y, z)) -> rev1(y, z)
1082.50/297.02	     , rev2(x, nil()) -> nil()
1082.50/297.02	     , rev2(x, ++(y, z)) -> rev(++(x, rev(rev2(y, z)))) }
1082.50/297.02	   Weak DPs:
1082.50/297.02	     { rev^#(nil()) -> c_1()
1082.50/297.02	     , rev2^#(x, nil()) -> c_5() }
1082.50/297.02	   Obligation:
1082.50/297.02	     runtime complexity
1082.50/297.02	   Answer:
1082.50/297.02	     MAYBE
1082.50/297.02	   
1082.50/297.02	   Empty strict component of the problem is NOT empty.
1082.50/297.02	
1082.50/297.02	
1082.50/297.02	Arrrr..
1083.04/297.53	EOF