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:

a____(__(X, Y), Z) → a____(mark(X), a____(mark(Y), mark(Z)))
a____(X, nil) → mark(X)
a____(nil, X) → mark(X)
a__and(tt, X) → mark(X)
a__isNePal(__(I, __(P, I))) → tt
mark(__(X1, X2)) → a____(mark(X1), mark(X2))
mark(and(X1, X2)) → a__and(mark(X1), X2)
mark(isNePal(X)) → a__isNePal(mark(X))
mark(nil) → nil
mark(tt) → tt
a____(X1, X2) → __(X1, X2)
a__and(X1, X2) → and(X1, X2)
a__isNePal(X) → isNePal(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:

a____(__(X, Y), Z) → a____(mark(X), a____(mark(Y), mark(Z)))
a____(X, nil) → mark(X)
a____(nil, X) → mark(X)
a__and(tt, X) → mark(X)
a__isNePal(__(I, __(P, I))) → tt
mark(__(X1, X2)) → a____(mark(X1), mark(X2))
mark(and(X1, X2)) → a__and(mark(X1), X2)
mark(isNePal(X)) → a__isNePal(mark(X))
mark(nil) → nil
mark(tt) → tt
a____(X1, X2) → __(X1, X2)
a__and(X1, X2) → and(X1, X2)
a__isNePal(X) → isNePal(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
a__and(tt, and(tt, X24836_0)) →⁺ a__and(tt, X24836_0)
gives rise to a decreasing loop by considering the right hand sides subterm at position [].
The pumping substitution is [X24836_0 / and(tt, X24836_0)].
The result substitution is [ ].

(4) BOUNDS(n^1, INF)