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(x, nil) → g(nil, x)
f(x, g(y, z)) → g(f(x, y), z)
++(x, nil) → x
++(x, g(y, z)) → g(++(x, y), z)
null(nil) → true
null(g(x, y)) → false
mem(nil, y) → false
mem(g(x, y), z) → or(=(y, z), mem(x, z))
mem(x, max(x)) → not(null(x))
max(g(g(nil, x), y)) → max'(x, y)
max(g(g(g(x, y), z), u)) → max'(max(g(g(x, y), z)), u)

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(x, nil) → g(nil, x)
f(x, g(y, z)) → g(f(x, y), z)
++(x, nil) → x
++(x, g(y, z)) → g(++(x, y), z)
null(nil) → true
null(g(x, y)) → false
mem(nil, y) → false
mem(g(x, y), z) → or(=(y, z), mem(x, z))
mem(x, max(x)) → not(null(x))
max(g(g(nil, x), y)) → max'(x, y)
max(g(g(g(x, y), z), u)) → max'(max(g(g(x, y), z)), u)

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

(4) BOUNDS(n^1, INF)