MAYBE 719.84/277.81 MAYBE 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the 719.84/277.81 certificate MAYBE. 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 Strict Trs: 719.84/277.81 { min(x, 0()) -> 0() 719.84/277.81 , min(0(), y) -> 0() 719.84/277.81 , min(s(x), s(y)) -> s(min(x, y)) 719.84/277.81 , max(x, 0()) -> x 719.84/277.81 , max(0(), y) -> y 719.84/277.81 , max(s(x), s(y)) -> s(max(x, y)) 719.84/277.81 , -(x, 0()) -> x 719.84/277.81 , -(s(x), s(y)) -> -(x, y) 719.84/277.81 , gcd(s(x), s(y)) -> 719.84/277.81 gcd(-(s(max(x, y)), s(min(x, y))), s(min(x, y))) } 719.84/277.81 Obligation: 719.84/277.81 runtime complexity 719.84/277.81 Answer: 719.84/277.81 MAYBE 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 None of the processors succeeded. 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 Details of failed attempt(s): 719.84/277.81 ----------------------------- 719.84/277.81 1) 'Best' failed due to the following reason: 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 None of the processors succeeded. 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 Details of failed attempt(s): 719.84/277.81 ----------------------------- 719.84/277.81 1) 'With Problem ... (timeout of 148 seconds) (timeout of 297 719.84/277.81 seconds)' failed due to the following reason: 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 Computation stopped due to timeout after 148.0 seconds. 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 2) 'Best' failed due to the following reason: 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 None of the processors succeeded. 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 Details of failed attempt(s): 719.84/277.81 ----------------------------- 719.84/277.81 1) 'bsearch-popstar (timeout of 297 seconds)' failed due to the 719.84/277.81 following reason: 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 The processor is inapplicable, reason: 719.84/277.81 Processor only applicable for innermost runtime complexity analysis 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 2) 'Polynomial Path Order (PS) (timeout of 297 seconds)' failed due 719.84/277.81 to the following reason: 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 The processor is inapplicable, reason: 719.84/277.81 Processor only applicable for innermost runtime complexity analysis 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 3) 'Fastest (timeout of 24 seconds) (timeout of 297 seconds)' 719.84/277.81 failed due to the following reason: 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 None of the processors succeeded. 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 Details of failed attempt(s): 719.84/277.81 ----------------------------- 719.84/277.81 1) 'Bounds with minimal-enrichment and initial automaton 'match'' 719.84/277.81 failed due to the following reason: 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 match-boundness of the problem could not be verified. 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 2) 'Bounds with perSymbol-enrichment and initial automaton 'match'' 719.84/277.81 failed due to the following reason: 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 match-boundness of the problem could not be verified. 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 2) 'Weak Dependency Pairs (timeout of 297 seconds)' failed due to 719.84/277.81 the following reason: 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 We add the following weak dependency pairs: 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 Strict DPs: 719.84/277.81 { min^#(x, 0()) -> c_1() 719.84/277.81 , min^#(0(), y) -> c_2() 719.84/277.81 , min^#(s(x), s(y)) -> c_3(min^#(x, y)) 719.84/277.81 , max^#(x, 0()) -> c_4(x) 719.84/277.81 , max^#(0(), y) -> c_5(y) 719.84/277.81 , max^#(s(x), s(y)) -> c_6(max^#(x, y)) 719.84/277.81 , -^#(x, 0()) -> c_7(x) 719.84/277.81 , -^#(s(x), s(y)) -> c_8(-^#(x, y)) 719.84/277.81 , gcd^#(s(x), s(y)) -> 719.84/277.81 c_9(gcd^#(-(s(max(x, y)), s(min(x, y))), s(min(x, y)))) } 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 and mark the set of starting terms. 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the 719.84/277.81 certificate MAYBE. 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 Strict DPs: 719.84/277.81 { min^#(x, 0()) -> c_1() 719.84/277.81 , min^#(0(), y) -> c_2() 719.84/277.81 , min^#(s(x), s(y)) -> c_3(min^#(x, y)) 719.84/277.81 , max^#(x, 0()) -> c_4(x) 719.84/277.81 , max^#(0(), y) -> c_5(y) 719.84/277.81 , max^#(s(x), s(y)) -> c_6(max^#(x, y)) 719.84/277.81 , -^#(x, 0()) -> c_7(x) 719.84/277.81 , -^#(s(x), s(y)) -> c_8(-^#(x, y)) 719.84/277.81 , gcd^#(s(x), s(y)) -> 719.84/277.81 c_9(gcd^#(-(s(max(x, y)), s(min(x, y))), s(min(x, y)))) } 719.84/277.81 Strict Trs: 719.84/277.81 { min(x, 0()) -> 0() 719.84/277.81 , min(0(), y) -> 0() 719.84/277.81 , min(s(x), s(y)) -> s(min(x, y)) 719.84/277.81 , max(x, 0()) -> x 719.84/277.81 , max(0(), y) -> y 719.84/277.81 , max(s(x), s(y)) -> s(max(x, y)) 719.84/277.81 , -(x, 0()) -> x 719.84/277.81 , -(s(x), s(y)) -> -(x, y) 719.84/277.81 , gcd(s(x), s(y)) -> 719.84/277.81 gcd(-(s(max(x, y)), s(min(x, y))), s(min(x, y))) } 719.84/277.81 Obligation: 719.84/277.81 runtime complexity 719.84/277.81 Answer: 719.84/277.81 MAYBE 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 We estimate the number of application of {1,2} by applications of 719.84/277.81 Pre({1,2}) = {3,4,5,7}. Here rules are labeled as follows: 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 DPs: 719.84/277.81 { 1: min^#(x, 0()) -> c_1() 719.84/277.81 , 2: min^#(0(), y) -> c_2() 719.84/277.81 , 3: min^#(s(x), s(y)) -> c_3(min^#(x, y)) 719.84/277.81 , 4: max^#(x, 0()) -> c_4(x) 719.84/277.81 , 5: max^#(0(), y) -> c_5(y) 719.84/277.81 , 6: max^#(s(x), s(y)) -> c_6(max^#(x, y)) 719.84/277.81 , 7: -^#(x, 0()) -> c_7(x) 719.84/277.81 , 8: -^#(s(x), s(y)) -> c_8(-^#(x, y)) 719.84/277.81 , 9: gcd^#(s(x), s(y)) -> 719.84/277.81 c_9(gcd^#(-(s(max(x, y)), s(min(x, y))), s(min(x, y)))) } 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the 719.84/277.81 certificate MAYBE. 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 Strict DPs: 719.84/277.81 { min^#(s(x), s(y)) -> c_3(min^#(x, y)) 719.84/277.81 , max^#(x, 0()) -> c_4(x) 719.84/277.81 , max^#(0(), y) -> c_5(y) 719.84/277.81 , max^#(s(x), s(y)) -> c_6(max^#(x, y)) 719.84/277.81 , -^#(x, 0()) -> c_7(x) 719.84/277.81 , -^#(s(x), s(y)) -> c_8(-^#(x, y)) 719.84/277.81 , gcd^#(s(x), s(y)) -> 719.84/277.81 c_9(gcd^#(-(s(max(x, y)), s(min(x, y))), s(min(x, y)))) } 719.84/277.81 Strict Trs: 719.84/277.81 { min(x, 0()) -> 0() 719.84/277.81 , min(0(), y) -> 0() 719.84/277.81 , min(s(x), s(y)) -> s(min(x, y)) 719.84/277.81 , max(x, 0()) -> x 719.84/277.81 , max(0(), y) -> y 719.84/277.81 , max(s(x), s(y)) -> s(max(x, y)) 719.84/277.81 , -(x, 0()) -> x 719.84/277.81 , -(s(x), s(y)) -> -(x, y) 719.84/277.81 , gcd(s(x), s(y)) -> 719.84/277.81 gcd(-(s(max(x, y)), s(min(x, y))), s(min(x, y))) } 719.84/277.81 Weak DPs: 719.84/277.81 { min^#(x, 0()) -> c_1() 719.84/277.81 , min^#(0(), y) -> c_2() } 719.84/277.81 Obligation: 719.84/277.81 runtime complexity 719.84/277.81 Answer: 719.84/277.81 MAYBE 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 Empty strict component of the problem is NOT empty. 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 719.84/277.81 Arrrr.. 720.04/278.08 EOF