The Runtime Complexity (full) of the given CpxTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(n^1, INF).

(0) Obligation:

Runtime Complexity TRS:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

f(f(x)) → f(c(f(x)))
f(f(x)) → f(d(f(x)))
g(c(x)) → x
g(d(x)) → x
g(c(h(0))) → g(d(1))
g(c(1)) → g(d(h(0)))
g(h(x)) → g(x)

Rewrite Strategy: FULL

(1) CpxTrsToCpxRelTrsProof (BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID) transformation)

Transformed TRS to relative TRS where S is empty.

(2) Obligation:

Runtime Complexity Relative TRS:
The TRS R consists of the following rules:

f(f(x)) → f(c(f(x)))
f(f(x)) → f(d(f(x)))
g(c(x)) → x
g(d(x)) → x
g(c(h(0))) → g(d(1))
g(c(1)) → g(d(h(0)))
g(h(x)) → g(x)

S is empty.
Rewrite Strategy: FULL

(3) DecreasingLoopProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The following loop(s) give(s) rise to the lower bound Ω(n¹):
The rewrite sequence
g(h(x)) →⁺ g(x)
gives rise to a decreasing loop by considering the right hand sides subterm at position [].
The pumping substitution is [x / h(x)].
The result substitution is [ ].

(4) BOUNDS(n^1, INF)