YES(?,O(n^1))
0.00/0.50	YES(?,O(n^1))
0.00/0.50	
0.00/0.50	We are left with following problem, upon which TcT provides the
0.00/0.50	certificate YES(?,O(n^1)).
0.00/0.50	
0.00/0.50	Strict Trs:
0.00/0.50	  { merge(x, nil()) -> x
0.00/0.50	  , merge(nil(), y) -> y
0.00/0.50	  , merge(++(x, y), ++(u(), v())) -> ++(x, merge(y, ++(u(), v())))
0.00/0.50	  , merge(++(x, y), ++(u(), v())) -> ++(u(), merge(++(x, y), v())) }
0.00/0.50	Obligation:
0.00/0.50	  innermost runtime complexity
0.00/0.50	Answer:
0.00/0.50	  YES(?,O(n^1))
0.00/0.50	
0.00/0.50	The input was oriented with the instance of 'Small Polynomial Path
0.00/0.50	Order (PS)' as induced by the safe mapping
0.00/0.50	
0.00/0.50	 safe(merge) = {}, safe(nil) = {}, safe(++) = {1, 2}, safe(u) = {},
0.00/0.50	 safe(v) = {}
0.00/0.50	
0.00/0.50	and precedence
0.00/0.50	
0.00/0.50	 empty .
0.00/0.50	
0.00/0.50	Following symbols are considered recursive:
0.00/0.50	
0.00/0.50	 {merge}
0.00/0.50	
0.00/0.50	The recursion depth is 1.
0.00/0.50	
0.00/0.50	For your convenience, here are the satisfied ordering constraints:
0.00/0.50	
0.00/0.50	                      merge(x,  nil();) > x                                    
0.00/0.50	                                                                               
0.00/0.50	                      merge(nil(),  y;) > y                                    
0.00/0.50	                                                                               
0.00/0.50	  merge(++(; x,  y),  ++(; u(),  v());) > ++(; x,  merge(y,  ++(; u(),  v());))
0.00/0.50	                                                                               
0.00/0.50	  merge(++(; x,  y),  ++(; u(),  v());) > ++(; u(),  merge(++(; x,  y),  v();))
0.00/0.50	                                                                               
0.00/0.50	
0.00/0.50	Hurray, we answered YES(?,O(n^1))
0.00/0.50	EOF