TSTP Solution File: MGT032+2 by CSE---1.6
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : CSE---1.6
% Problem : MGT032+2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% Computer : n024.cluster.edu
% Model : x86_64 x86_64
% CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 2.10GHz
% Memory : 8042.1875MB
% OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% CPULimit : 300s
% WCLimit : 300s
% DateTime : Thu Aug 31 09:06:53 EDT 2023
% Result : Theorem 0.21s 0.62s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.21s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.13/0.13 % Problem : MGT032+2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.0.0.
% 0.13/0.13 % Command : java -jar /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/mcs_scs.jar %s %d
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n024.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.34 % WCLimit : 300
% 0.13/0.34 % DateTime : Mon Aug 28 06:35:23 EDT 2023
% 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.21/0.57 start to proof:theBenchmark
% 0.21/0.62 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.62 % File :CSE---1.6
% 0.21/0.62 % Problem :theBenchmark
% 0.21/0.62 % Transform :cnf
% 0.21/0.62 % Format :tptp:raw
% 0.21/0.62 % Command :java -jar mcs_scs.jar %d %s
% 0.21/0.62
% 0.21/0.62 % Result :Theorem 0.000000s
% 0.21/0.62 % Output :CNFRefutation 0.000000s
% 0.21/0.62 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.62 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.62 % File : MGT032+2 : TPTP v8.1.2. Released v2.0.0.
% 0.21/0.62 % Domain : Management (Organisation Theory)
% 0.21/0.62 % Problem : Selection favours EPs above FMs
% 0.21/0.62 % Version : [PM93] axioms.
% 0.21/0.62 % English : In stable environments, selection favors efficient producers
% 0.21/0.62 % above first movers past a certain point in time.
% 0.21/0.62
% 0.21/0.62 % Refs : [PM93] Peli & Masuch (1993), The Logic of Propogation Strateg
% 0.21/0.62 % : [PM94] Peli & Masuch (1994), The Logic of Propogation Strateg
% 0.21/0.62 % : [PB+94] Peli et al. (1994), A Logical Approach to Formalizing
% 0.21/0.62 % : [Kam95] Kamps (1995), Email to G. Sutcliffe
% 0.21/0.62 % Source : [PM93]
% 0.21/0.62 % Names : THEOREM 1 [PM93]
% 0.21/0.62 % : T1 [PB+94]
% 0.21/0.62
% 0.21/0.62 % Status : Theorem
% 0.21/0.62 % Rating : 0.00 v6.3.0, 0.08 v6.2.0, 0.00 v6.1.0, 0.04 v6.0.0, 0.25 v5.5.0, 0.04 v5.3.0, 0.13 v5.2.0, 0.00 v2.1.0
% 0.21/0.62 % Syntax : Number of formulae : 3 ( 0 unt; 0 def)
% 0.21/0.62 % Number of atoms : 16 ( 0 equ)
% 0.21/0.62 % Maximal formula atoms : 6 ( 5 avg)
% 0.21/0.62 % Number of connectives : 13 ( 0 ~; 0 |; 8 &)
% 0.21/0.62 % ( 0 <=>; 5 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% 0.21/0.62 % Maximal formula depth : 8 ( 8 avg)
% 0.21/0.62 % Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% 0.21/0.62 % Number of predicates : 7 ( 7 usr; 0 prp; 1-4 aty)
% 0.21/0.62 % Number of functors : 3 ( 3 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% 0.21/0.62 % Number of variables : 10 ( 8 !; 2 ?)
% 0.21/0.62 % SPC : FOF_THM_RFO_NEQ
% 0.21/0.62
% 0.21/0.62 % Comments :
% 0.21/0.62 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.62 %----MP1. Selection favors subpopulations with higher growth rates.
% 0.21/0.62 fof(mp1_high_growth_rates,axiom,
% 0.21/0.62 ! [E,S1,S2,T] :
% 0.21/0.62 ( ( environment(E)
% 0.21/0.62 & subpopulations(S1,S2,E,T)
% 0.21/0.62 & greater(growth_rate(S2,T),growth_rate(S1,T)) )
% 0.21/0.62 => selection_favors(S2,S1,T) ) ).
% 0.21/0.62
% 0.21/0.62 %----L1. The growth rate of efficient producers exceeds the growth rate of
% 0.21/0.62 %----first movers past a certain time in stable environments.
% 0.21/0.62 fof(l1,hypothesis,
% 0.21/0.62 ! [E] :
% 0.21/0.62 ( ( environment(E)
% 0.21/0.62 & stable(E) )
% 0.21/0.62 => ? [To] :
% 0.21/0.62 ( in_environment(E,To)
% 0.21/0.62 & ! [T] :
% 0.21/0.62 ( ( subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,E,T)
% 0.21/0.62 & greater_or_equal(T,To) )
% 0.21/0.62 => greater(growth_rate(efficient_producers,T),growth_rate(first_movers,T)) ) ) ) ).
% 0.21/0.62
% 0.21/0.62 %----GOAL: T1. Selection favors efficient producers above first movers
% 0.21/0.62 %----past a certain time in stable environments.
% 0.21/0.62 fof(prove_t1,conjecture,
% 0.21/0.62 ! [E] :
% 0.21/0.62 ( ( environment(E)
% 0.21/0.62 & stable(E) )
% 0.21/0.62 => ? [To] :
% 0.21/0.62 ( in_environment(E,To)
% 0.21/0.62 & ! [T] :
% 0.21/0.62 ( ( subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,E,T)
% 0.21/0.62 & greater_or_equal(T,To) )
% 0.21/0.62 => selection_favors(efficient_producers,first_movers,T) ) ) ) ).
% 0.21/0.62
% 0.21/0.62 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.62 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.62 % Proof found
% 0.21/0.62 % SZS status Theorem for theBenchmark
% 0.21/0.62 % SZS output start Proof
% 0.21/0.62 %ClaNum:8(EqnAxiom:0)
% 0.21/0.62 %VarNum:31(SingletonVarNum:10)
% 0.21/0.62 %MaxLitNum:5
% 0.21/0.62 %MaxfuncDepth:1
% 0.21/0.62 %SharedTerms:5
% 0.21/0.62 %goalClause: 1 2 4 5 6
% 0.21/0.62 %singleGoalClaCount:2
% 0.21/0.62 [1]P1(a1)
% 0.21/0.62 [2]P2(a1)
% 0.21/0.62 [4]~P3(a1,x41)+P4(f4(x41),x41)
% 0.21/0.62 [5]~P3(a1,x51)+~P6(a3,a5,f4(x51))
% 0.21/0.62 [6]~P3(a1,x61)+P7(a5,a3,a1,f4(x61))
% 0.21/0.62 [3]~P1(x31)+~P2(x31)+P3(x31,f2(x31))
% 0.21/0.62 [8]~P7(x82,x81,x84,x83)+P6(x81,x82,x83)+~P1(x84)+~P5(f6(x81,x83),f6(x82,x83))
% 0.21/0.62 [7]~P2(x72)+~P1(x72)+~P4(x71,f2(x72))+~P7(a5,a3,x72,x71)+P5(f6(a3,x71),f6(a5,x71))
% 0.21/0.62 %EqnAxiom
% 0.21/0.62
% 0.21/0.62 %-------------------------------------------
% 0.21/0.63 cnf(9,plain,
% 0.21/0.63 (P3(a1,f2(a1))),
% 0.21/0.63 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,2,3])).
% 0.21/0.63 cnf(10,plain,
% 0.21/0.63 (P6(x101,x102,x103)+~P7(x102,x101,a1,x103)+~P5(f6(x101,x103),f6(x102,x103))),
% 0.21/0.63 inference(scs_inference,[],[1,2,3,8])).
% 0.21/0.63 cnf(11,plain,
% 0.21/0.63 (P7(a5,a3,a1,f4(f2(a1)))),
% 0.21/0.63 inference(scs_inference,[],[9,6])).
% 0.21/0.63 cnf(13,plain,
% 0.21/0.63 (~P6(a3,a5,f4(f2(a1)))),
% 0.21/0.63 inference(scs_inference,[],[9,6,5])).
% 0.21/0.63 cnf(15,plain,
% 0.21/0.63 (P4(f4(f2(a1)),f2(a1))),
% 0.21/0.63 inference(scs_inference,[],[9,6,5,4])).
% 0.21/0.63 cnf(17,plain,
% 0.21/0.63 ($false),
% 0.21/0.63 inference(scs_inference,[],[13,11,15,1,2,10,7]),
% 0.21/0.63 ['proof']).
% 0.21/0.63 % SZS output end Proof
% 0.21/0.63 % Total time :0.000000s
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------