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:

minus(0, x) → 0
minus(s(x), 0) → s(x)
minus(s(x), s(y)) → minus(x, y)
mod(x, 0) → 0
mod(x, s(y)) → if(lt(x, s(y)), x, s(y))
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → mod(minus(x, y), y)
gcd(x, 0) → x
gcd(0, s(y)) → s(y)
gcd(s(x), s(y)) → gcd(mod(s(x), s(y)), mod(s(y), s(x)))
lt(x, 0) → false
lt(0, s(x)) → true
lt(s(x), s(y)) → lt(x, y)

Rewrite Strategy: FULL

(1) RenamingProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

Renamed function symbols to avoid clashes with predefined symbol.

(2) Obligation:

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

minus(0', x) → 0'
minus(s(x), 0') → s(x)
minus(s(x), s(y)) → minus(x, y)
mod(x, 0') → 0'
mod(x, s(y)) → if(lt(x, s(y)), x, s(y))
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → mod(minus(x, y), y)
gcd(x, 0') → x
gcd(0', s(y)) → s(y)
gcd(s(x), s(y)) → gcd(mod(s(x), s(y)), mod(s(y), s(x)))
lt(x, 0') → false
lt(0', s(x)) → true
lt(s(x), s(y)) → lt(x, y)

S is empty.
Rewrite Strategy: FULL

(3) TypeInferenceProof (BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID) transformation)

Infered types.

(4) Obligation:

TRS:
Rules:
minus(0', x) → 0'
minus(s(x), 0') → s(x)
minus(s(x), s(y)) → minus(x, y)
mod(x, 0') → 0'
mod(x, s(y)) → if(lt(x, s(y)), x, s(y))
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → mod(minus(x, y), y)
gcd(x, 0') → x
gcd(0', s(y)) → s(y)
gcd(s(x), s(y)) → gcd(mod(s(x), s(y)), mod(s(y), s(x)))
lt(x, 0') → false
lt(0', s(x)) → true
lt(s(x), s(y)) → lt(x, y)

Types:
minus :: 0':s → 0':s → 0':s
0' :: 0':s
s :: 0':s → 0':s
mod :: 0':s → 0':s → 0':s
if :: true:false → 0':s → 0':s → 0':s
lt :: 0':s → 0':s → true:false
true :: true:false
false :: true:false
gcd :: 0':s → 0':s → 0':s
hole_0':s1_0 :: 0':s
hole_true:false2_0 :: true:false
gen_0':s3_0 :: Nat → 0':s

(5) OrderProof (LOWER BOUND(ID) transformation)

Heuristically decided to analyse the following defined symbols:
minus, mod, lt, gcd

They will be analysed ascendingly in the following order:
minus < mod
lt < mod
mod < gcd

(6) Obligation:

TRS:
Rules:
minus(0', x) → 0'
minus(s(x), 0') → s(x)
minus(s(x), s(y)) → minus(x, y)
mod(x, 0') → 0'
mod(x, s(y)) → if(lt(x, s(y)), x, s(y))
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → mod(minus(x, y), y)
gcd(x, 0') → x
gcd(0', s(y)) → s(y)
gcd(s(x), s(y)) → gcd(mod(s(x), s(y)), mod(s(y), s(x)))
lt(x, 0') → false
lt(0', s(x)) → true
lt(s(x), s(y)) → lt(x, y)

Types:
minus :: 0':s → 0':s → 0':s
0' :: 0':s
s :: 0':s → 0':s
mod :: 0':s → 0':s → 0':s
if :: true:false → 0':s → 0':s → 0':s
lt :: 0':s → 0':s → true:false
true :: true:false
false :: true:false
gcd :: 0':s → 0':s → 0':s
hole_0':s1_0 :: 0':s
hole_true:false2_0 :: true:false
gen_0':s3_0 :: Nat → 0':s

Generator Equations:
gen_0':s3_0(0) ⇔ 0'
gen_0':s3_0(+(x, 1)) ⇔ s(gen_0':s3_0(x))

The following defined symbols remain to be analysed:
minus, mod, lt, gcd

They will be analysed ascendingly in the following order:
minus < mod
lt < mod
mod < gcd

(7) RewriteLemmaProof (LOWER BOUND(ID) transformation)

Proved the following rewrite lemma:
minus(gen_0':s3_0(n5_0), gen_0':s3_0(n5_0)) → gen_0':s3_0(0), rt ∈ Ω(1 + n5₀)

Induction Base:
minus(gen_0':s3_0(0), gen_0':s3_0(0)) →_R^Ω(1)
0'

Induction Step:
minus(gen_0':s3_0(+(n5_0, 1)), gen_0':s3_0(+(n5_0, 1))) →_R^Ω(1)
minus(gen_0':s3_0(n5_0), gen_0':s3_0(n5_0)) →_IH
gen_0':s3_0(0)

We have rt ∈ Ω(n¹) and sz ∈ O(n). Thus, we have irc_R ∈ Ω(n).

(8) Complex Obligation (BEST)

(9) Obligation:

TRS:
Rules:
minus(0', x) → 0'
minus(s(x), 0') → s(x)
minus(s(x), s(y)) → minus(x, y)
mod(x, 0') → 0'
mod(x, s(y)) → if(lt(x, s(y)), x, s(y))
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → mod(minus(x, y), y)
gcd(x, 0') → x
gcd(0', s(y)) → s(y)
gcd(s(x), s(y)) → gcd(mod(s(x), s(y)), mod(s(y), s(x)))
lt(x, 0') → false
lt(0', s(x)) → true
lt(s(x), s(y)) → lt(x, y)

Types:
minus :: 0':s → 0':s → 0':s
0' :: 0':s
s :: 0':s → 0':s
mod :: 0':s → 0':s → 0':s
if :: true:false → 0':s → 0':s → 0':s
lt :: 0':s → 0':s → true:false
true :: true:false
false :: true:false
gcd :: 0':s → 0':s → 0':s
hole_0':s1_0 :: 0':s
hole_true:false2_0 :: true:false
gen_0':s3_0 :: Nat → 0':s

Lemmas:
minus(gen_0':s3_0(n5_0), gen_0':s3_0(n5_0)) → gen_0':s3_0(0), rt ∈ Ω(1 + n5₀)

Generator Equations:
gen_0':s3_0(0) ⇔ 0'
gen_0':s3_0(+(x, 1)) ⇔ s(gen_0':s3_0(x))

The following defined symbols remain to be analysed:
lt, mod, gcd

They will be analysed ascendingly in the following order:
lt < mod
mod < gcd

(10) RewriteLemmaProof (LOWER BOUND(ID) transformation)

Proved the following rewrite lemma:
lt(gen_0':s3_0(n428_0), gen_0':s3_0(n428_0)) → false, rt ∈ Ω(1 + n428₀)

Induction Base:
lt(gen_0':s3_0(0), gen_0':s3_0(0)) →_R^Ω(1)
false

Induction Step:
lt(gen_0':s3_0(+(n428_0, 1)), gen_0':s3_0(+(n428_0, 1))) →_R^Ω(1)
lt(gen_0':s3_0(n428_0), gen_0':s3_0(n428_0)) →_IH
false

We have rt ∈ Ω(n¹) and sz ∈ O(n). Thus, we have irc_R ∈ Ω(n).

(11) Complex Obligation (BEST)

(12) Obligation:

TRS:
Rules:
minus(0', x) → 0'
minus(s(x), 0') → s(x)
minus(s(x), s(y)) → minus(x, y)
mod(x, 0') → 0'
mod(x, s(y)) → if(lt(x, s(y)), x, s(y))
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → mod(minus(x, y), y)
gcd(x, 0') → x
gcd(0', s(y)) → s(y)
gcd(s(x), s(y)) → gcd(mod(s(x), s(y)), mod(s(y), s(x)))
lt(x, 0') → false
lt(0', s(x)) → true
lt(s(x), s(y)) → lt(x, y)

Types:
minus :: 0':s → 0':s → 0':s
0' :: 0':s
s :: 0':s → 0':s
mod :: 0':s → 0':s → 0':s
if :: true:false → 0':s → 0':s → 0':s
lt :: 0':s → 0':s → true:false
true :: true:false
false :: true:false
gcd :: 0':s → 0':s → 0':s
hole_0':s1_0 :: 0':s
hole_true:false2_0 :: true:false
gen_0':s3_0 :: Nat → 0':s

Lemmas:
minus(gen_0':s3_0(n5_0), gen_0':s3_0(n5_0)) → gen_0':s3_0(0), rt ∈ Ω(1 + n5₀)
lt(gen_0':s3_0(n428_0), gen_0':s3_0(n428_0)) → false, rt ∈ Ω(1 + n428₀)

Generator Equations:
gen_0':s3_0(0) ⇔ 0'
gen_0':s3_0(+(x, 1)) ⇔ s(gen_0':s3_0(x))

The following defined symbols remain to be analysed:
mod, gcd

They will be analysed ascendingly in the following order:
mod < gcd

(13) NoRewriteLemmaProof (LOWER BOUND(ID) transformation)

Could not prove a rewrite lemma for the defined symbol mod.

(14) Obligation:

TRS:
Rules:
minus(0', x) → 0'
minus(s(x), 0') → s(x)
minus(s(x), s(y)) → minus(x, y)
mod(x, 0') → 0'
mod(x, s(y)) → if(lt(x, s(y)), x, s(y))
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → mod(minus(x, y), y)
gcd(x, 0') → x
gcd(0', s(y)) → s(y)
gcd(s(x), s(y)) → gcd(mod(s(x), s(y)), mod(s(y), s(x)))
lt(x, 0') → false
lt(0', s(x)) → true
lt(s(x), s(y)) → lt(x, y)

Types:
minus :: 0':s → 0':s → 0':s
0' :: 0':s
s :: 0':s → 0':s
mod :: 0':s → 0':s → 0':s
if :: true:false → 0':s → 0':s → 0':s
lt :: 0':s → 0':s → true:false
true :: true:false
false :: true:false
gcd :: 0':s → 0':s → 0':s
hole_0':s1_0 :: 0':s
hole_true:false2_0 :: true:false
gen_0':s3_0 :: Nat → 0':s

Lemmas:
minus(gen_0':s3_0(n5_0), gen_0':s3_0(n5_0)) → gen_0':s3_0(0), rt ∈ Ω(1 + n5₀)
lt(gen_0':s3_0(n428_0), gen_0':s3_0(n428_0)) → false, rt ∈ Ω(1 + n428₀)

Generator Equations:
gen_0':s3_0(0) ⇔ 0'
gen_0':s3_0(+(x, 1)) ⇔ s(gen_0':s3_0(x))

The following defined symbols remain to be analysed:
gcd

(15) NoRewriteLemmaProof (LOWER BOUND(ID) transformation)

Could not prove a rewrite lemma for the defined symbol gcd.

(16) Obligation:

TRS:
Rules:
minus(0', x) → 0'
minus(s(x), 0') → s(x)
minus(s(x), s(y)) → minus(x, y)
mod(x, 0') → 0'
mod(x, s(y)) → if(lt(x, s(y)), x, s(y))
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → mod(minus(x, y), y)
gcd(x, 0') → x
gcd(0', s(y)) → s(y)
gcd(s(x), s(y)) → gcd(mod(s(x), s(y)), mod(s(y), s(x)))
lt(x, 0') → false
lt(0', s(x)) → true
lt(s(x), s(y)) → lt(x, y)

Types:
minus :: 0':s → 0':s → 0':s
0' :: 0':s
s :: 0':s → 0':s
mod :: 0':s → 0':s → 0':s
if :: true:false → 0':s → 0':s → 0':s
lt :: 0':s → 0':s → true:false
true :: true:false
false :: true:false
gcd :: 0':s → 0':s → 0':s
hole_0':s1_0 :: 0':s
hole_true:false2_0 :: true:false
gen_0':s3_0 :: Nat → 0':s

Lemmas:
minus(gen_0':s3_0(n5_0), gen_0':s3_0(n5_0)) → gen_0':s3_0(0), rt ∈ Ω(1 + n5₀)
lt(gen_0':s3_0(n428_0), gen_0':s3_0(n428_0)) → false, rt ∈ Ω(1 + n428₀)

Generator Equations:
gen_0':s3_0(0) ⇔ 0'
gen_0':s3_0(+(x, 1)) ⇔ s(gen_0':s3_0(x))

No more defined symbols left to analyse.

(17) LowerBoundsProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The lowerbound Ω(n¹) was proven with the following lemma:
minus(gen_0':s3_0(n5_0), gen_0':s3_0(n5_0)) → gen_0':s3_0(0), rt ∈ Ω(1 + n5₀)

(18) BOUNDS(n^1, INF)

(19) Obligation:

TRS:
Rules:
minus(0', x) → 0'
minus(s(x), 0') → s(x)
minus(s(x), s(y)) → minus(x, y)
mod(x, 0') → 0'
mod(x, s(y)) → if(lt(x, s(y)), x, s(y))
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → mod(minus(x, y), y)
gcd(x, 0') → x
gcd(0', s(y)) → s(y)
gcd(s(x), s(y)) → gcd(mod(s(x), s(y)), mod(s(y), s(x)))
lt(x, 0') → false
lt(0', s(x)) → true
lt(s(x), s(y)) → lt(x, y)

Types:
minus :: 0':s → 0':s → 0':s
0' :: 0':s
s :: 0':s → 0':s
mod :: 0':s → 0':s → 0':s
if :: true:false → 0':s → 0':s → 0':s
lt :: 0':s → 0':s → true:false
true :: true:false
false :: true:false
gcd :: 0':s → 0':s → 0':s
hole_0':s1_0 :: 0':s
hole_true:false2_0 :: true:false
gen_0':s3_0 :: Nat → 0':s

Lemmas:
minus(gen_0':s3_0(n5_0), gen_0':s3_0(n5_0)) → gen_0':s3_0(0), rt ∈ Ω(1 + n5₀)
lt(gen_0':s3_0(n428_0), gen_0':s3_0(n428_0)) → false, rt ∈ Ω(1 + n428₀)

Generator Equations:
gen_0':s3_0(0) ⇔ 0'
gen_0':s3_0(+(x, 1)) ⇔ s(gen_0':s3_0(x))

No more defined symbols left to analyse.

(20) LowerBoundsProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The lowerbound Ω(n¹) was proven with the following lemma:
minus(gen_0':s3_0(n5_0), gen_0':s3_0(n5_0)) → gen_0':s3_0(0), rt ∈ Ω(1 + n5₀)

(21) BOUNDS(n^1, INF)

(22) Obligation:

TRS:
Rules:
minus(0', x) → 0'
minus(s(x), 0') → s(x)
minus(s(x), s(y)) → minus(x, y)
mod(x, 0') → 0'
mod(x, s(y)) → if(lt(x, s(y)), x, s(y))
if(true, x, y) → x
if(false, x, y) → mod(minus(x, y), y)
gcd(x, 0') → x
gcd(0', s(y)) → s(y)
gcd(s(x), s(y)) → gcd(mod(s(x), s(y)), mod(s(y), s(x)))
lt(x, 0') → false
lt(0', s(x)) → true
lt(s(x), s(y)) → lt(x, y)

Types:
minus :: 0':s → 0':s → 0':s
0' :: 0':s
s :: 0':s → 0':s
mod :: 0':s → 0':s → 0':s
if :: true:false → 0':s → 0':s → 0':s
lt :: 0':s → 0':s → true:false
true :: true:false
false :: true:false
gcd :: 0':s → 0':s → 0':s
hole_0':s1_0 :: 0':s
hole_true:false2_0 :: true:false
gen_0':s3_0 :: Nat → 0':s

Lemmas:
minus(gen_0':s3_0(n5_0), gen_0':s3_0(n5_0)) → gen_0':s3_0(0), rt ∈ Ω(1 + n5₀)

Generator Equations:
gen_0':s3_0(0) ⇔ 0'
gen_0':s3_0(+(x, 1)) ⇔ s(gen_0':s3_0(x))

No more defined symbols left to analyse.

(23) LowerBoundsProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The lowerbound Ω(n¹) was proven with the following lemma:
minus(gen_0':s3_0(n5_0), gen_0':s3_0(n5_0)) → gen_0':s3_0(0), rt ∈ Ω(1 + n5₀)

(24) BOUNDS(n^1, INF)