The Runtime Complexity (innermost) of the given CpxRelTRS could be proven to be BOUNDS(n^1, INF).

0 CpxRelTRS
↳1 DecreasingLoopProof (⇔, 290 ms)
↳2 BOUNDS(n^1, INF)
↳3 RenamingProof (⇔, 0 ms)
↳4 CpxRelTRS
    ↳5 TypeInferenceProof (BOTH BOUNDS(ID, ID), 0 ms)
    ↳6 typed CpxTrs
    ↳7 OrderProof (LOWER BOUND(ID), 0 ms)
    ↳8 typed CpxTrs
    ↳9 RewriteLemmaProof (LOWER BOUND(ID), 274 ms)
    ↳10 BEST
        ↳11 typed CpxTrs
            ↳12 NoRewriteLemmaProof (LOWER BOUND(ID), 13 ms)
            ↳13 typed CpxTrs
            ↳14 LowerBoundsProof (⇔, 0 ms)
            ↳15 BOUNDS(1, INF)
        ↳16 typed CpxTrs
            ↳17 LowerBoundsProof (⇔, 0 ms)
            ↳18 BOUNDS(1, INF)

(0) Obligation:

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

ordered(Cons(x', Cons(x, xs))) → ordered[Ite](<(x', x), Cons(x', Cons(x, xs)))
ordered(Cons(x, Nil)) → True
ordered(Nil) → True
notEmpty(Cons(x, xs)) → True
notEmpty(Nil) → False
goal(xs) → ordered(xs)

The (relative) TRS S consists of the following rules:

<(S(x), S(y)) → <(x, y)
<(0, S(y)) → True
<(x, 0) → False
ordered[Ite](True, Cons(x', Cons(x, xs))) → ordered(xs)
ordered[Ite](False, xs) → False

Rewrite Strategy: INNERMOST

(1) DecreasingLoopProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The following loop(s) give(s) rise to the lower bound Ω(n1):
The rewrite sequence
ordered(Cons(0, Cons(S(y10_1), xs))) →+ ordered(xs)
gives rise to a decreasing loop by considering the right hand sides subterm at position [].
The pumping substitution is [xs / Cons(0, Cons(S(y10_1), xs))].
The result substitution is [ ].

(2) BOUNDS(n^1, INF)

(3) RenamingProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

Renamed function symbols to avoid clashes with predefined symbol.

(4) Obligation:

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

ordered(Cons(x', Cons(x, xs))) → ordered[Ite](<(x', x), Cons(x', Cons(x, xs)))
ordered(Cons(x, Nil)) → True
ordered(Nil) → True
notEmpty(Cons(x, xs)) → True
notEmpty(Nil) → False
goal(xs) → ordered(xs)

The (relative) TRS S consists of the following rules:

<(S(x), S(y)) → <(x, y)
<(0', S(y)) → True
<(x, 0') → False
ordered[Ite](True, Cons(x', Cons(x, xs))) → ordered(xs)
ordered[Ite](False, xs) → False

Rewrite Strategy: INNERMOST

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

Infered types.

(6) Obligation:

Innermost TRS:
Rules:
ordered(Cons(x', Cons(x, xs))) → ordered[Ite](<(x', x), Cons(x', Cons(x, xs)))
ordered(Cons(x, Nil)) → True
ordered(Nil) → True
notEmpty(Cons(x, xs)) → True
notEmpty(Nil) → False
goal(xs) → ordered(xs)
<(S(x), S(y)) → <(x, y)
<(0', S(y)) → True
<(x, 0') → False
ordered[Ite](True, Cons(x', Cons(x, xs))) → ordered(xs)
ordered[Ite](False, xs) → False

Types:
ordered :: Cons:Nil → True:False
Cons :: S:0' → Cons:Nil → Cons:Nil
ordered[Ite] :: True:False → Cons:Nil → True:False
< :: S:0' → S:0' → True:False
Nil :: Cons:Nil
True :: True:False
notEmpty :: Cons:Nil → True:False
False :: True:False
goal :: Cons:Nil → True:False
S :: S:0' → S:0'
0' :: S:0'
hole_True:False1_0 :: True:False
hole_Cons:Nil2_0 :: Cons:Nil
hole_S:0'3_0 :: S:0'
gen_Cons:Nil4_0 :: Nat → Cons:Nil
gen_S:0'5_0 :: Nat → S:0'

(7) OrderProof (LOWER BOUND(ID) transformation)

Heuristically decided to analyse the following defined symbols:
ordered, <

They will be analysed ascendingly in the following order:
< < ordered

(8) Obligation:

Innermost TRS:
Rules:
ordered(Cons(x', Cons(x, xs))) → ordered[Ite](<(x', x), Cons(x', Cons(x, xs)))
ordered(Cons(x, Nil)) → True
ordered(Nil) → True
notEmpty(Cons(x, xs)) → True
notEmpty(Nil) → False
goal(xs) → ordered(xs)
<(S(x), S(y)) → <(x, y)
<(0', S(y)) → True
<(x, 0') → False
ordered[Ite](True, Cons(x', Cons(x, xs))) → ordered(xs)
ordered[Ite](False, xs) → False

Types:
ordered :: Cons:Nil → True:False
Cons :: S:0' → Cons:Nil → Cons:Nil
ordered[Ite] :: True:False → Cons:Nil → True:False
< :: S:0' → S:0' → True:False
Nil :: Cons:Nil
True :: True:False
notEmpty :: Cons:Nil → True:False
False :: True:False
goal :: Cons:Nil → True:False
S :: S:0' → S:0'
0' :: S:0'
hole_True:False1_0 :: True:False
hole_Cons:Nil2_0 :: Cons:Nil
hole_S:0'3_0 :: S:0'
gen_Cons:Nil4_0 :: Nat → Cons:Nil
gen_S:0'5_0 :: Nat → S:0'

Generator Equations:
gen_Cons:Nil4_0(0) ⇔ Nil
gen_Cons:Nil4_0(+(x, 1)) ⇔ Cons(0', gen_Cons:Nil4_0(x))
gen_S:0'5_0(0) ⇔ 0'
gen_S:0'5_0(+(x, 1)) ⇔ S(gen_S:0'5_0(x))

The following defined symbols remain to be analysed:
<, ordered

They will be analysed ascendingly in the following order:
< < ordered

(9) RewriteLemmaProof (LOWER BOUND(ID) transformation)

Proved the following rewrite lemma:
<(gen_S:0'5_0(n7_0), gen_S:0'5_0(+(1, n7_0))) → True, rt ∈ Ω(0)

Induction Base:
<(gen_S:0'5_0(0), gen_S:0'5_0(+(1, 0))) →RΩ(0)
True

Induction Step:
<(gen_S:0'5_0(+(n7_0, 1)), gen_S:0'5_0(+(1, +(n7_0, 1)))) →RΩ(0)
<(gen_S:0'5_0(n7_0), gen_S:0'5_0(+(1, n7_0))) →IH
True

We have rt ∈ Ω(1) and sz ∈ O(n). Thus, we have ircR ∈ Ω(n0).

(10) Complex Obligation (BEST)

(11) Obligation:

Innermost TRS:
Rules:
ordered(Cons(x', Cons(x, xs))) → ordered[Ite](<(x', x), Cons(x', Cons(x, xs)))
ordered(Cons(x, Nil)) → True
ordered(Nil) → True
notEmpty(Cons(x, xs)) → True
notEmpty(Nil) → False
goal(xs) → ordered(xs)
<(S(x), S(y)) → <(x, y)
<(0', S(y)) → True
<(x, 0') → False
ordered[Ite](True, Cons(x', Cons(x, xs))) → ordered(xs)
ordered[Ite](False, xs) → False

Types:
ordered :: Cons:Nil → True:False
Cons :: S:0' → Cons:Nil → Cons:Nil
ordered[Ite] :: True:False → Cons:Nil → True:False
< :: S:0' → S:0' → True:False
Nil :: Cons:Nil
True :: True:False
notEmpty :: Cons:Nil → True:False
False :: True:False
goal :: Cons:Nil → True:False
S :: S:0' → S:0'
0' :: S:0'
hole_True:False1_0 :: True:False
hole_Cons:Nil2_0 :: Cons:Nil
hole_S:0'3_0 :: S:0'
gen_Cons:Nil4_0 :: Nat → Cons:Nil
gen_S:0'5_0 :: Nat → S:0'

Lemmas:
<(gen_S:0'5_0(n7_0), gen_S:0'5_0(+(1, n7_0))) → True, rt ∈ Ω(0)

Generator Equations:
gen_Cons:Nil4_0(0) ⇔ Nil
gen_Cons:Nil4_0(+(x, 1)) ⇔ Cons(0', gen_Cons:Nil4_0(x))
gen_S:0'5_0(0) ⇔ 0'
gen_S:0'5_0(+(x, 1)) ⇔ S(gen_S:0'5_0(x))

The following defined symbols remain to be analysed:
ordered

(12) NoRewriteLemmaProof (LOWER BOUND(ID) transformation)

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

(13) Obligation:

Innermost TRS:
Rules:
ordered(Cons(x', Cons(x, xs))) → ordered[Ite](<(x', x), Cons(x', Cons(x, xs)))
ordered(Cons(x, Nil)) → True
ordered(Nil) → True
notEmpty(Cons(x, xs)) → True
notEmpty(Nil) → False
goal(xs) → ordered(xs)
<(S(x), S(y)) → <(x, y)
<(0', S(y)) → True
<(x, 0') → False
ordered[Ite](True, Cons(x', Cons(x, xs))) → ordered(xs)
ordered[Ite](False, xs) → False

Types:
ordered :: Cons:Nil → True:False
Cons :: S:0' → Cons:Nil → Cons:Nil
ordered[Ite] :: True:False → Cons:Nil → True:False
< :: S:0' → S:0' → True:False
Nil :: Cons:Nil
True :: True:False
notEmpty :: Cons:Nil → True:False
False :: True:False
goal :: Cons:Nil → True:False
S :: S:0' → S:0'
0' :: S:0'
hole_True:False1_0 :: True:False
hole_Cons:Nil2_0 :: Cons:Nil
hole_S:0'3_0 :: S:0'
gen_Cons:Nil4_0 :: Nat → Cons:Nil
gen_S:0'5_0 :: Nat → S:0'

Lemmas:
<(gen_S:0'5_0(n7_0), gen_S:0'5_0(+(1, n7_0))) → True, rt ∈ Ω(0)

Generator Equations:
gen_Cons:Nil4_0(0) ⇔ Nil
gen_Cons:Nil4_0(+(x, 1)) ⇔ Cons(0', gen_Cons:Nil4_0(x))
gen_S:0'5_0(0) ⇔ 0'
gen_S:0'5_0(+(x, 1)) ⇔ S(gen_S:0'5_0(x))

No more defined symbols left to analyse.

(14) LowerBoundsProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The lowerbound Ω(1) was proven with the following lemma:
<(gen_S:0'5_0(n7_0), gen_S:0'5_0(+(1, n7_0))) → True, rt ∈ Ω(0)

(15) BOUNDS(1, INF)

(16) Obligation:

Innermost TRS:
Rules:
ordered(Cons(x', Cons(x, xs))) → ordered[Ite](<(x', x), Cons(x', Cons(x, xs)))
ordered(Cons(x, Nil)) → True
ordered(Nil) → True
notEmpty(Cons(x, xs)) → True
notEmpty(Nil) → False
goal(xs) → ordered(xs)
<(S(x), S(y)) → <(x, y)
<(0', S(y)) → True
<(x, 0') → False
ordered[Ite](True, Cons(x', Cons(x, xs))) → ordered(xs)
ordered[Ite](False, xs) → False

Types:
ordered :: Cons:Nil → True:False
Cons :: S:0' → Cons:Nil → Cons:Nil
ordered[Ite] :: True:False → Cons:Nil → True:False
< :: S:0' → S:0' → True:False
Nil :: Cons:Nil
True :: True:False
notEmpty :: Cons:Nil → True:False
False :: True:False
goal :: Cons:Nil → True:False
S :: S:0' → S:0'
0' :: S:0'
hole_True:False1_0 :: True:False
hole_Cons:Nil2_0 :: Cons:Nil
hole_S:0'3_0 :: S:0'
gen_Cons:Nil4_0 :: Nat → Cons:Nil
gen_S:0'5_0 :: Nat → S:0'

Lemmas:
<(gen_S:0'5_0(n7_0), gen_S:0'5_0(+(1, n7_0))) → True, rt ∈ Ω(0)

Generator Equations:
gen_Cons:Nil4_0(0) ⇔ Nil
gen_Cons:Nil4_0(+(x, 1)) ⇔ Cons(0', gen_Cons:Nil4_0(x))
gen_S:0'5_0(0) ⇔ 0'
gen_S:0'5_0(+(x, 1)) ⇔ S(gen_S:0'5_0(x))

No more defined symbols left to analyse.

(17) LowerBoundsProof (EQUIVALENT transformation)

The lowerbound Ω(1) was proven with the following lemma:
<(gen_S:0'5_0(n7_0), gen_S:0'5_0(+(1, n7_0))) → True, rt ∈ Ω(0)

(18) BOUNDS(1, INF)