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:

min(x, 0) → 0
min(0, y) → 0
min(s(x), s(y)) → s(min(x, y))
max(x, 0) → x
max(0, y) → y
max(s(x), s(y)) → s(max(x, y))
minus(x, 0) → x
minus(s(x), s(y)) → s(minus(x, any(y)))
gcd(s(x), s(y)) → gcd(minus(max(x, y), min(x, y)), s(min(x, y)))
any(s(x)) → s(s(any(x)))
any(x) → 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:

min(x, 0) → 0
min(0, y) → 0
min(s(x), s(y)) → s(min(x, y))
max(x, 0) → x
max(0, y) → y
max(s(x), s(y)) → s(max(x, y))
minus(x, 0) → x
minus(s(x), s(y)) → s(minus(x, any(y)))
gcd(s(x), s(y)) → gcd(minus(max(x, y), min(x, y)), s(min(x, y)))
any(s(x)) → s(s(any(x)))
any(x) → 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
min(s(x), s(y)) →⁺ s(min(x, y))
gives rise to a decreasing loop by considering the right hand sides subterm at position [0].
The pumping substitution is [x / s(x), y / s(y)].
The result substitution is [ ].

(4) BOUNDS(n^1, INF)