MAYBE
1035.60/297.34	MAYBE
1035.60/297.34	
1035.60/297.34	We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the
1035.60/297.34	certificate MAYBE.
1035.60/297.34	
1035.60/297.34	Strict Trs:
1035.60/297.34	  { f(s(a()), s(b()), x) -> f(x, x, x)
1035.60/297.34	  , g(f(s(x), s(y), z)) -> g(f(x, y, z))
1035.60/297.34	  , cons(x, y) -> x
1035.60/297.34	  , cons(x, y) -> y }
1035.60/297.34	Obligation:
1035.60/297.34	  runtime complexity
1035.60/297.34	Answer:
1035.60/297.34	  MAYBE
1035.60/297.34	
1035.60/297.34	None of the processors succeeded.
1035.60/297.34	
1035.60/297.34	Details of failed attempt(s):
1035.60/297.34	-----------------------------
1035.60/297.34	1) 'With Problem ... (timeout of 297 seconds)' failed due to the
1035.60/297.34	   following reason:
1035.60/297.34	   
1035.60/297.34	   Computation stopped due to timeout after 297.0 seconds.
1035.60/297.34	
1035.60/297.34	2) 'Best' failed due to the following reason:
1035.60/297.34	   
1035.60/297.34	   None of the processors succeeded.
1035.60/297.34	   
1035.60/297.34	   Details of failed attempt(s):
1035.60/297.34	   -----------------------------
1035.60/297.34	   1) 'With Problem ... (timeout of 148 seconds) (timeout of 297
1035.60/297.34	      seconds)' failed due to the following reason:
1035.60/297.34	      
1035.60/297.34	      Computation stopped due to timeout after 148.0 seconds.
1035.60/297.34	   
1035.60/297.34	   2) 'Best' failed due to the following reason:
1035.60/297.34	      
1035.60/297.34	      None of the processors succeeded.
1035.60/297.34	      
1035.60/297.34	      Details of failed attempt(s):
1035.60/297.34	      -----------------------------
1035.60/297.34	      1) 'bsearch-popstar (timeout of 297 seconds)' failed due to the
1035.60/297.34	         following reason:
1035.60/297.34	         
1035.60/297.34	         The processor is inapplicable, reason:
1035.60/297.34	           Processor only applicable for innermost runtime complexity analysis
1035.60/297.34	      
1035.60/297.34	      2) 'Polynomial Path Order (PS) (timeout of 297 seconds)' failed due
1035.60/297.34	         to the following reason:
1035.60/297.34	         
1035.60/297.34	         The processor is inapplicable, reason:
1035.60/297.34	           Processor only applicable for innermost runtime complexity analysis
1035.60/297.34	      
1035.60/297.34	   
1035.60/297.34	   3) 'Fastest (timeout of 24 seconds) (timeout of 297 seconds)'
1035.60/297.34	      failed due to the following reason:
1035.60/297.34	      
1035.60/297.34	      None of the processors succeeded.
1035.60/297.34	      
1035.60/297.34	      Details of failed attempt(s):
1035.60/297.34	      -----------------------------
1035.60/297.34	      1) 'Bounds with perSymbol-enrichment and initial automaton 'match''
1035.60/297.34	         failed due to the following reason:
1035.60/297.34	         
1035.60/297.34	         match-boundness of the problem could not be verified.
1035.60/297.34	      
1035.60/297.34	      2) 'Bounds with minimal-enrichment and initial automaton 'match''
1035.60/297.34	         failed due to the following reason:
1035.60/297.34	         
1035.60/297.34	         match-boundness of the problem could not be verified.
1035.60/297.34	      
1035.60/297.34	   
1035.60/297.34	
1035.60/297.34	3) 'Weak Dependency Pairs (timeout of 297 seconds)' failed due to
1035.60/297.34	   the following reason:
1035.60/297.34	   
1035.60/297.34	   We add the following weak dependency pairs:
1035.60/297.34	   
1035.60/297.34	   Strict DPs:
1035.60/297.34	     { f^#(s(a()), s(b()), x) -> c_1(f^#(x, x, x))
1035.60/297.34	     , g^#(f(s(x), s(y), z)) -> c_2(g^#(f(x, y, z)))
1035.60/297.34	     , cons^#(x, y) -> c_3(x)
1035.60/297.34	     , cons^#(x, y) -> c_4(y) }
1035.60/297.34	   
1035.60/297.34	   and mark the set of starting terms.
1035.60/297.34	   
1035.60/297.34	   We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the
1035.60/297.34	   certificate MAYBE.
1035.60/297.34	   
1035.60/297.34	   Strict DPs:
1035.60/297.34	     { f^#(s(a()), s(b()), x) -> c_1(f^#(x, x, x))
1035.60/297.34	     , g^#(f(s(x), s(y), z)) -> c_2(g^#(f(x, y, z)))
1035.60/297.34	     , cons^#(x, y) -> c_3(x)
1035.60/297.34	     , cons^#(x, y) -> c_4(y) }
1035.60/297.34	   Strict Trs:
1035.60/297.34	     { f(s(a()), s(b()), x) -> f(x, x, x)
1035.60/297.34	     , g(f(s(x), s(y), z)) -> g(f(x, y, z))
1035.60/297.34	     , cons(x, y) -> x
1035.60/297.34	     , cons(x, y) -> y }
1035.60/297.34	   Obligation:
1035.60/297.34	     runtime complexity
1035.60/297.34	   Answer:
1035.60/297.34	     MAYBE
1035.60/297.34	   
1035.60/297.34	   Empty strict component of the problem is NOT empty.
1035.60/297.34	
1035.60/297.34	
1035.60/297.34	Arrrr..
1037.72/299.36	EOF