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:

double(0) → 0
double(s(x)) → s(s(double(x)))
del(x, nil) → nil
del(x, cons(y, xs)) → if(eq(x, y), x, y, xs)
if(true, x, y, xs) → xs
if(false, x, y, xs) → cons(y, del(x, xs))
eq(0, 0) → true
eq(0, s(y)) → false
eq(s(x), 0) → false
eq(s(x), s(y)) → eq(x, y)
first(nil) → 0
first(cons(x, xs)) → x
doublelist(nil) → nil
doublelist(cons(x, xs)) → cons(double(x), doublelist(del(first(cons(x, xs)), cons(x, xs))))

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:

double(0) → 0
double(s(x)) → s(s(double(x)))
del(x, nil) → nil
del(x, cons(y, xs)) → if(eq(x, y), x, y, xs)
if(true, x, y, xs) → xs
if(false, x, y, xs) → cons(y, del(x, xs))
eq(0, 0) → true
eq(0, s(y)) → false
eq(s(x), 0) → false
eq(s(x), s(y)) → eq(x, y)
first(nil) → 0
first(cons(x, xs)) → x
doublelist(nil) → nil
doublelist(cons(x, xs)) → cons(double(x), doublelist(del(first(cons(x, xs)), cons(x, xs))))

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

(4) BOUNDS(n^1, INF)