{"pre_text": ["the aes corporation notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) december 31 , 2012 , 2011 , and 2010 ( 1 ) a u.s .", "subsidiary of the company has a defined benefit obligation of $ 764 million and $ 679 million as of december 31 , 2012 and 2011 , respectively , and uses salary bands to determine future benefit costs rather than rates of compensation increases .", "rates of compensation increases in the table above do not include amounts related to this specific defined benefit plan .", "( 2 ) includes an inflation factor that is used to calculate future periodic benefit cost , but is not used to calculate the benefit obligation .", "the company establishes its estimated long-term return on plan assets considering various factors , which include the targeted asset allocation percentages , historic returns and expected future returns .", "the measurement of pension obligations , costs and liabilities is dependent on a variety of assumptions .", "these assumptions include estimates of the present value of projected future pension payments to all plan participants , taking into consideration the likelihood of potential future events such as salary increases and demographic experience .", "these assumptions may have an effect on the amount and timing of future contributions .", "the assumptions used in developing the required estimates include the following key factors : 2022 discount rates ; 2022 salary growth ; 2022 retirement rates ; 2022 inflation ; 2022 expected return on plan assets ; and 2022 mortality rates .", "the effects of actual results differing from the company 2019s assumptions are accumulated and amortized over future periods and , therefore , generally affect the company 2019s recognized expense in such future periods .", "sensitivity of the company 2019s pension funded status to the indicated increase or decrease in the discount rate and long-term rate of return on plan assets assumptions is shown below .", "note that these sensitivities may be asymmetric and are specific to the base conditions at year-end 2012 .", "they also may not be additive , so the impact of changing multiple factors simultaneously cannot be calculated by combining the individual sensitivities shown .", "the funded status as of december 31 , 2012 is affected by the assumptions as of that date .", "pension expense for 2012 is affected by the december 31 , 2011 assumptions .", "the impact on pension expense from a one percentage point change in these assumptions is shown in the table below ( in millions ) : ."], "post_text": ["."], "table": [["increase of 1% ( 1 % ) in the discount rate", "$ -48 ( 48 )"], ["decrease of 1% ( 1 % ) in the discount rate", "38"], ["increase of 1% ( 1 % ) in the long-term rate of return on plan assets", "-47 ( 47 )"], ["decrease of 1% ( 1 % ) in the long-term rate of return on plan assets", "47"]], "table_ori": [["Increase of 1% in the discount rate", "$(48)"], ["Decrease of 1% in the discount rate", "38"], ["Increase of 1% in the long-term rate of return on plan assets", "(47)"], ["Decrease of 1% in the long-term rate of return on plan assets", "47"]]}

Question: was the impact of a decrease of 1% ( 1 % ) in the discount rate greater than the effect of a decrease of 1% ( 1 % ) in the long-term rate of return on plan assets?
Evidence:
table_1: increase of 1% ( 1 % ) in the discount rate the decrease of 1% ( 1 % ) in the discount rate of $ -48 ( 48 ) is 38 ;
table_3: increase of 1% ( 1 % ) in the discount rate the decrease of 1% ( 1 % ) in the long-term rate of return on plan assets of $ -48 ( 48 ) is 47 ;
Program: greater(38, 47)
Answer:
str_answer: no
exe_answer: no