%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CSI_E---1.1
% Problem : MGT022-2 : TPTP v9.3.0. Released v2.4.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% Computer : n020.cluster.edu
% Model : x86_64 x86_64
% CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 2.10GHz
% Memory : 8046.5625MB
% OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% CPULimit : 300s
% WCLimit : 300s
% DateTime : Tue Sep 8 06:04:29 AM UTC 2026
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.44s 0.56s
% Output : Assurance 0s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----No solution output by system
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.03 % Problem : MGT022-2 : TPTP v9.3.0. Released v2.4.0.
% 0.00/0.03 % Command : java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 0.08/0.34 % Computer : n020.cluster.edu
% 0.08/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.08/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.08/0.34 % Memory : 8046.5625MB
% 0.08/0.34 % OS : Linux 6.8.0-71-generic
% 0.08/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.08/0.34 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.08/0.34 % DateTime : Mon Sep 7 12:06:58 UTC 2026
% 0.08/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.24/0.47 start to proof:theBenchmark.p
% 0.44/0.56 % Version : CSI_E---1.1
% 0.44/0.56 % Problem : theBenchmark.p
% 0.44/0.56 % Proof found!
% 0.44/0.56 # SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.44/0.56 % SZS output start Proof
% 0.44/0.56 cnf(a6_3, hypothesis, (constant(difference(disbanding_rate(X2,X4),disbanding_rate(X3,X4)))|~environment(X1)|~subpopulations(X2,X3,X1,X4)|~greater(resilience(X3),resilience(X2))|~constant(resources(X1,X4))), file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p', a6_3)).
% 0.44/0.56 cnf(a2_4, hypothesis, (greater(resilience(efficient_producers),resilience(first_movers))), file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p', a2_4)).
% 0.44/0.56 cnf(mp_constant_not_decrease_1, axiom, (~constant(X1)|~decreases(X1)), file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p', mp_constant_not_decrease_1)).
% 0.44/0.56 cnf(prove_l4_6, negated_conjecture, (subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,sk1,sk2)), file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p', prove_l4_6)).
% 0.44/0.56 cnf(prove_l4_5, negated_conjecture, (environment(sk1)), file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p', prove_l4_5)).
% 0.44/0.56 cnf(a6_2, hypothesis, (increases(difference(disbanding_rate(X2,X4),disbanding_rate(X3,X4)))|~environment(X1)|~subpopulations(X2,X3,X1,X4)|~greater(resilience(X3),resilience(X2))|~decreases(resources(X1,X4))), file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p', a6_2)).
% 0.44/0.56 cnf(prove_l4_8, negated_conjecture, (decreases(resources(sk1,sk2))|decreases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,sk2),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,sk2)))), file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p', prove_l4_8)).
% 0.44/0.56 cnf(prove_l4_7, negated_conjecture, (decreases(resources(sk1,sk2))|constant(resources(sk1,sk2))), file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p', prove_l4_7)).
% 0.44/0.56 cnf(prove_l4_9, negated_conjecture, (constant(resources(sk1,sk2))|~increases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,sk2),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,sk2)))), file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p', prove_l4_9)).
% 0.44/0.56 cnf(c_0_9, hypothesis, (constant(difference(disbanding_rate(X2,X4),disbanding_rate(X3,X4)))|~environment(X1)|~subpopulations(X2,X3,X1,X4)|~greater(resilience(X3),resilience(X2))|~constant(resources(X1,X4))), inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[a6_3])).
% 0.44/0.56 cnf(c_0_10, hypothesis, (constant(difference(disbanding_rate(X2,X4),disbanding_rate(X3,X4)))|~environment(X1)|~subpopulations(X2,X3,X1,X4)|~greater(resilience(X3),resilience(X2))|~constant(resources(X1,X4))), c_0_9).
% 0.44/0.56 cnf(c_0_11, hypothesis, (greater(resilience(efficient_producers),resilience(first_movers))), a2_4).
% 0.44/0.56 cnf(c_0_12, plain, (~constant(X1)|~decreases(X1)), inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[mp_constant_not_decrease_1])).
% 0.44/0.56 cnf(c_0_13, hypothesis, (constant(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,X1),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,X1)))|~subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X2,X1)|~environment(X2)|~constant(resources(X2,X1))), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10, c_0_11])).
% 0.44/0.56 cnf(c_0_14, negated_conjecture, (subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,sk1,sk2)), prove_l4_6).
% 0.44/0.56 cnf(c_0_15, negated_conjecture, (environment(sk1)), prove_l4_5).
% 0.44/0.56 cnf(c_0_16, hypothesis, (increases(difference(disbanding_rate(X2,X4),disbanding_rate(X3,X4)))|~environment(X1)|~subpopulations(X2,X3,X1,X4)|~greater(resilience(X3),resilience(X2))|~decreases(resources(X1,X4))), inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[a6_2])).
% 0.44/0.56 cnf(c_0_17, plain, (~constant(X1)|~decreases(X1)), c_0_12).
% 0.44/0.56 cnf(c_0_18, negated_conjecture, (constant(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,sk2),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,sk2)))|~constant(resources(sk1,sk2))), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13, c_0_14]), c_0_15])])).
% 0.44/0.56 cnf(c_0_19, hypothesis, (increases(difference(disbanding_rate(X2,X4),disbanding_rate(X3,X4)))|~environment(X1)|~subpopulations(X2,X3,X1,X4)|~greater(resilience(X3),resilience(X2))|~decreases(resources(X1,X4))), c_0_16).
% 0.44/0.56 cnf(c_0_20, negated_conjecture, (~decreases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,sk2),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,sk2)))|~constant(resources(sk1,sk2))), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17, c_0_18])).
% 0.44/0.56 cnf(c_0_21, negated_conjecture, (decreases(resources(sk1,sk2))|decreases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,sk2),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,sk2)))), prove_l4_8).
% 0.44/0.56 cnf(c_0_22, negated_conjecture, (decreases(resources(sk1,sk2))|constant(resources(sk1,sk2))), prove_l4_7).
% 0.44/0.56 cnf(c_0_23, negated_conjecture, (constant(resources(sk1,sk2))|~increases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,sk2),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,sk2)))), inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[prove_l4_9])).
% 0.44/0.56 cnf(c_0_24, hypothesis, (increases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,X1),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,X1)))|~subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,X2,X1)|~environment(X2)|~decreases(resources(X2,X1))), inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19, c_0_11])).
% 0.44/0.56 cnf(c_0_25, negated_conjecture, (decreases(resources(sk1,sk2))), inference(csr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20, c_0_21]), c_0_22])).
% 0.44/0.56 cnf(c_0_26, negated_conjecture, (constant(resources(sk1,sk2))|~increases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,sk2),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,sk2)))), c_0_23).
% 0.44/0.56 cnf(c_0_27, negated_conjecture, (increases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,sk2),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,sk2)))), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_24, c_0_14]), c_0_15])]), c_0_25])])).
% 0.44/0.56 cnf(c_0_28, negated_conjecture, (constant(resources(sk1,sk2))), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_26, c_0_27])])).
% 0.44/0.56 cnf(c_0_29, negated_conjecture, ($false), inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_17, c_0_28]), c_0_25])]), ['proof']).
% 0.44/0.56 % SZS output end Proof
% 0.44/0.56 % User time : 0.003 s
% 0.44/0.56 % System time : 0.003 s
% 0.44/0.56 % Total time : 0.006 s
% 0.44/0.56 % User time : 0.004 s
% 0.44/0.56 % System time : 0.007 s
% 0.44/0.56 % Total time : 0.011 s
% 0.44/0.56
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------