CITS2211 Discrete Structures Proofs

Save this PDF as:
 WORD  PNG  TXT  JPG

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "CITS2211 Discrete Structures Proofs"

Transcription

1 CITS2211 Discrete Structures Proofs Unit coordinator: Rachel Cardell-Oliver August 13, 2017

2 Highlights 1 Arguments vs Proofs. 2 Proof strategies 3 Famous proofs

3 Reading Chapter 1: What is a proof? Mathematics for Computer Science by Lehman, Leighton and Meyer

4 Why 1 Theoretical Computer Science based on Mathematics. 2 Most famous problem about proofs: P=NP? 3 Automatic proofs = AI? https://www.umsu.de/logik/trees/ 4 Critical Thinking.

5 Notes and examples selected by Profs Reynolds and Cardell-Oliver from Introductory Logic and Sets for Computer Scientists, N. Nissanke, Addison Wesley

6 Proofs in logic and maths A proof is a really good argument that something is true. In this unit we will see two different main sorts of proofs. In today s lecture we will see (formal) proofs by logical deduction. Then we will see rigorous (but informal) mathematical proofs. There are similarities and differences.

7 Direct Proof by Logical Deduction Definition: An axiom is a proposition that is simply accepted as true. Definition: A proof is a sequence of logical deductions from axioms and previously-proved statements that concludes with the proposition in question. Definition: Logical deductions or inference rules are used to prove new propositions using previously proved ones.

8 Inference Rules Inference rules are sometimes written using this notation: P, P Q Q When the statements above the line, called the antecedents, are proved, then we can consider the statement below the line, called the conclusion or consequent, to also be proved. Definition: The turnstile symbol,, means infer that. We write p, p q q instead of the fraction notation above.

9 Soundness and Completeness A key requirement of an inference rule is that it must be sound: any assignment of truth values that makes all the antecedents true must also make the consequent true. Definition: Soundness: Any statement you get by following the rules is true. Definition: Completeness: Any statement that is true, you can get by following the rules.

10 Arguments in Propositional Logic Definition: An argument is a collection of propositions, one of which, referred to as the conclusion is justified by the others, referred to as the premises. Definition: A valid argument is a set of propositions, the last of which follows from or is implied by the rest. Definition: All other arguments are invalid

11 Arguments in Propositional Logic Example: 1 If the patient has a pulse then the patient s heart is pumping. 2 The patient has a pulse. 3 Therefore, the patient s heart is pumping. The conclusion (3) is true whenever the premises are true. The argument is therefore valid.

12 Arguments in Propositional Logic Example: 1 If I win the lottery then I am lucky. 2 I do not win the lottery. 3 Therefore, I am unlucky. This argument is invalid. Can you see why?

13 Arguments in Propositional Logic Example: 1 If I win the lottery then I am lucky. 2 I do not win the lottery. 3 Therefore, I am unlucky. This argument is invalid. Can you see why? Because the conclusion (3) does not follow whenever the premises (1,2) are true. Suppose W is false and L is true. Then W L is true and W is true. So both premises are true. But the conclusion, L, is false. It is possible that I am lucky, but I did not win the lottery.

14 Inference Rules Definition: An inference rule is a primitive valid argument form. Each inference rule enables the elimination or introduction of a logical connective.

15 Some example rules Modus ponens {p q, p} q Modus tollens {p q, q} p Double negation p p Contradiction p, p q Conjunction introduction {p, q} (p q) Conjunction elimination (p q) p, (p q) q Disjunction introduction p (p q), q (p q) Disjunction elimination {p q, p r, q r} r Biconditional introduction {p q, q p} (p q) Biconditional elimination (p q) (p q), (p q) (q p)

16 Proof Example Example: From the premise (p q) r, derive p r 1 (p q) r premise 2 r (p q) from 1, commutativity 3 (r p) (r q) from 2, distributivity 4 (r p) from 3, conjunction elimination 5 p r from 4, commutativity 6 p r from 5, double negation 7 p r from 6, implication law QED

17 Proof Example Example: From the premises H C, (L Y ) and Y C, derive H L. Fill in the missing propositions and justifications from the following proof. 1. H C premise 2. (L Y ) premise C Y 3, contrapositive 5. L Y 6. 5, commutativity 7. Y L 6, implication law 8. 1,4, transitivity of implication 9. H L QED.

18 the complete proof 1. H C premise 2. (L Y ) premise 3. Y C premise 4. C Y 3, contrapositive 5. L Y 2, De Morgan 6. Y L 5, commutativity 7. Y L 6, implication law 8. H Y 1,4, transitivity of implication 9. H L 8,7, transitivity of implication QED.

19 Proofs with Predicates - elim and intro laws RTP x.(p(x) Q(x)) y.(q(y) R(y)) x.p(x) x.r(x) goal is to derive x.r(x) from the premises. 1. x.(p(x) Q(x)) premise 2. y.(q(y) R(y)) premise 3. x.p(x) premise 4. P(a) Q(a) 1, exist elimination 5. Q(a) R(a) 2, forall elimination 6. P(a) 3, forall elimination 7. Q(a) 6,4 modus ponens 8. R(a) 5,7, modus ponens 9. x.r(x) 8, exist introduction QED

20 Proof Templates In principle, a proof can be any sequence of logical deductions from axioms and previously proved statements that concludes with the proposition in question. Fortunately, many proofs follow one of a handful of standard templates such as proof by contradiction, proof by cases, reductio ad absurdum and proving the contrapositive. We will meet some of these when we study mathematical proofs. Note on abbreviations used above: write RTP at the beginning of proofs for required to prove and QED at the end for quod erat demonstrandum meaning which was to be demonstrated, or end of proof.

21 Proofs A proof is a logical argument that demonstrates the truth of some proposition. Ultimately, mathematics rests on a set of axioms, which are very simple propositions that are simply accepted as being true. Then a proof is a sequence of logical deductions using agreed-upon inference rules that leads from the axioms to the proposition in question. In practice, a proof will lead from previously-proved statements to the new proposition.

22 Axioms The axioms that are most broadly used (ZFC) are very low-level statements that encapsulate what we would normally consider to be obvious statements about sets. For example, what does say? x y [ z(z x z y) x = y]

23 Axioms The axioms that are most broadly used (ZFC) are very low-level statements that encapsulate what we would normally consider to be obvious statements about sets. For example, what does say? x y [ z(z x z y) x = y] It simply says that two sets x and y are equal if they have the same elements!

24 Inference Rules Inference rules are sometimes written using this notation: P, P Q Q When the statements above the line, called the antecedents, are proved, then we can consider the statement below the line, called the conclusion or consequent, to also be proved. Recall this inference rule is called modus ponens.

25 Modus tollens Another frequently used inference rule is modus tollens P Q, Q P For example, if P is It has rained recently and Q is The ground is wet, then if you observe that the ground is dry, then you can conclude that it has not rained recently.

26 Logical fallacies An incorrect rule of inference is P Q, P Q This is often called modus morons for obvious reasons. It has not rained recently and therefore the ground is not wet.

27 Logical Proof Hilbert asked whether it was possible to devise a (finite) set of axioms and inference rules such that Everything that can be formally logically proved is a true statement (Soundness) Every true statement (in number theory) can be formally logically proved from the axioms (Completeness) In essence, he wondered whether mathematics could be completely automated as a complicated string manipulation exercise. Gödel proved that any logical system that is complicated enough to formalise addition and multiplication cannot be proved to be consistent within the system itself. Or to put it another way, no such system can prove its own consistency.

28 Real world proofs Despite Gödel s result, the quest for formal proofs is not entirely dead Mathematicians and computer scientists are building systems such as HOL (hol-theorem-prover.org) and Coq (coq.inria.fr) to automate and validate proofs of important results. Computer scientists are working on systems to automatically reason about and prove program correctness. However proofs are still mostly expressed at a higher level with larger steps between each assertion.

29 The following sections describe some different proof strategies

30 Proving implications Many assertions are of the form P Q, though usually stated If P, then Q. For example, consider these simple statements If n is even, then n 2 is even If r is irrational, then r 1/5 is irrational

31 Direct Proof To prove that P Q, you should Start the proof with Assume P holds, Make logical deductions for a few steps, End the proof with and hence Q follows

32 Proof: If n is even, then n 2 is even. We use the definition of the word even: an integer multiple of 2, and then the proof proceeds: Let n be an even integer (Assumption)

33 Proof: If n is even, then n 2 is even. We use the definition of the word even: an integer multiple of 2, and then the proof proceeds: Let n be an even integer Then n = 2k for some integer k (Assumption) (Defn. of even)

34 Proof: If n is even, then n 2 is even. We use the definition of the word even: an integer multiple of 2, and then the proof proceeds: Let n be an even integer Then n = 2k for some integer k Then n 2 = 4k 2 (Assumption) (Defn. of even)

35 Proof: If n is even, then n 2 is even. We use the definition of the word even: an integer multiple of 2, and then the proof proceeds: Let n be an even integer Then n = 2k for some integer k Then n 2 = 4k 2 Then n 2 = 2(2k 2 ) (Assumption) (Defn. of even)

36 Proof: If n is even, then n 2 is even. We use the definition of the word even: an integer multiple of 2, and then the proof proceeds: Let n be an even integer Then n = 2k for some integer k Then n 2 = 4k 2 Then n 2 = 2(2k 2 ) Then n 2 = 2k where k = 2k 2 is an integer (Assumption) (Defn. of even) (Arithmetic - twice)

37 Proof: If n is even, then n 2 is even. We use the definition of the word even: an integer multiple of 2, and then the proof proceeds: Let n be an even integer Then n = 2k for some integer k Then n 2 = 4k 2 Then n 2 = 2(2k 2 ) Then n 2 = 2k where k = 2k 2 is an integer Therefore n 2 is even (Assumption) (Defn. of even) (Arithmetic - twice) (Defn. of even)

38 Contrapositive: If r is irrational, then r 1/5 is irrational To prove the second statement, the direct proof technique doesn t work as well the reason is that the statement Let r be irrational is really a negative statement. However, recall from propositional logic that the contrapositive of P Q, that is, the statement is logically equivalent to P Q. Q P

39 Working the contrapositive So the contrapositive statement is If r 1/5 is rational, then r is rational. We use the definition of the word rational: a number of the form p/q where p and q are integers and q 0. The proof proceeds: Assume that r 1/5 is rational (Assumption)

40 Working the contrapositive So the contrapositive statement is If r 1/5 is rational, then r is rational. We use the definition of the word rational: a number of the form p/q where p and q are integers and q 0. The proof proceeds: Assume that r 1/5 is rational Then r 1/5 = p/q for integers p, q 0 (Assumption) (Defn. of rational)

41 Working the contrapositive So the contrapositive statement is If r 1/5 is rational, then r is rational. We use the definition of the word rational: a number of the form p/q where p and q are integers and q 0. The proof proceeds: Assume that r 1/5 is rational Then r 1/5 = p/q for integers p, q 0 Then r = p 5 /q 5 (Assumption) (Defn. of rational)

42 Working the contrapositive So the contrapositive statement is If r 1/5 is rational, then r is rational. We use the definition of the word rational: a number of the form p/q where p and q are integers and q 0. The proof proceeds: Assume that r 1/5 is rational (Assumption) Then r 1/5 = p/q for integers p, q 0 (Defn. of rational) Then r = p 5 /q 5 Then r = p /q where p = p 5, q = q 5 0 are integers (Arithm.)

43 Working the contrapositive So the contrapositive statement is If r 1/5 is rational, then r is rational. We use the definition of the word rational: a number of the form p/q where p and q are integers and q 0. The proof proceeds: Assume that r 1/5 is rational (Assumption) Then r 1/5 = p/q for integers p, q 0 (Defn. of rational) Then r = p 5 /q 5 Then r = p /q where p = p 5, q = q 5 0 are integers (Arithm.) Therefore r is rational (Defn. of rational)

44 If and only if Mathematicians are particularly fond of if-and-only-if statements An integer is even if and only if its square is even. A matrix is invertible if and only if its determinant is non-zero. It is common to use the abbreviation iff instead of if and only if. However P if and only if Q just means that both the implications P Q, Q P hold, and so you can simply provide proofs for each separately.

45 If and only if Lemma. An integer is even if and only if its square is even. Proof. ( ) The forward implication is n even implies that n 2 is even, and was proved earlier. ( ) The reverse implication is n 2 even implies that n is even, but for this we choose to prove the contrapositive, namely that n odd implies that n 2 is odd. Let n be an odd integer (Assumption)

46 If and only if Lemma. An integer is even if and only if its square is even. Proof. ( ) The forward implication is n even implies that n 2 is even, and was proved earlier. ( ) The reverse implication is n 2 even implies that n is even, but for this we choose to prove the contrapositive, namely that n odd implies that n 2 is odd. Let n be an odd integer Then n = 2k + 1 for some integer k (Assumption) (Defn. of odd)

47 If and only if Lemma. An integer is even if and only if its square is even. Proof. ( ) The forward implication is n even implies that n 2 is even, and was proved earlier. ( ) The reverse implication is n 2 even implies that n is even, but for this we choose to prove the contrapositive, namely that n odd implies that n 2 is odd. Let n be an odd integer Then n = 2k + 1 for some integer k Then n 2 = 4k 2 + 4k + 1 (Assumption) (Defn. of odd)

48 If and only if Lemma. An integer is even if and only if its square is even. Proof. ( ) The forward implication is n even implies that n 2 is even, and was proved earlier. ( ) The reverse implication is n 2 even implies that n is even, but for this we choose to prove the contrapositive, namely that n odd implies that n 2 is odd. Let n be an odd integer Then n = 2k + 1 for some integer k Then n 2 = 4k 2 + 4k + 1 Then n 2 = 2(2k 2 + 2k) + 1 (Assumption) (Defn. of odd)

49 If and only if Lemma. An integer is even if and only if its square is even. Proof. ( ) The forward implication is n even implies that n 2 is even, and was proved earlier. ( ) The reverse implication is n 2 even implies that n is even, but for this we choose to prove the contrapositive, namely that n odd implies that n 2 is odd. Let n be an odd integer Then n = 2k + 1 for some integer k Then n 2 = 4k 2 + 4k + 1 Then n 2 = 2(2k 2 + 2k) + 1 Then n 2 = 2k + 1 where k = 2k 2 + 2k is an integer (Assumption) (Defn. of odd)

50 If and only if Lemma. An integer is even if and only if its square is even. Proof. ( ) The forward implication is n even implies that n 2 is even, and was proved earlier. ( ) The reverse implication is n 2 even implies that n is even, but for this we choose to prove the contrapositive, namely that n odd implies that n 2 is odd. Let n be an odd integer Then n = 2k + 1 for some integer k Then n 2 = 4k 2 + 4k + 1 Then n 2 = 2(2k 2 + 2k) + 1 Then n 2 = 2k + 1 where k = 2k 2 + 2k is an integer Therefore n 2 is odd (Assumption) (Defn. of odd) (Defn. of odd)

51 Proof by cases A common technique in proving is to divide the proof into separate cases and resolve each case separately. Theorem If the 15 edges of the graph shown below are coloured red or blue then there will either be a red triangle or a blue triangle.

52 Proof Consider an arbitrary vertex, and call it v. Now look at the five edges leading from v and notice that by the Pigeonhole Principle, either Case 1: At least three of the edges are red, or Case 2: At least three of the edges are blue. Now consider each case separately.

53 Case 1 Consider any three vertices at the other end of red edges from v, and consider the three edges joining them. v Then either : Case 1.1 One of these three edges is red, in which case it forms a red triangle using v, or Case 1.2 All of these three edges are blue, in which case they form a blue triangle.

54 Case 2 Consider any three vertices at the other end of blue edges from v, and consider the three edges joining them. v Then either : Case 2.1 One of these three edges is blue, in which case it forms a blue triangle using v, or Case 2.2 All of these three edges are red, in which case they form a red triangle.

55 Proof by Contradiction This is a type of indirect proof where you show that a proposition is true by demonstrating that its negation leads to something known to be false. Prove P by first assuming P and then deriving false. Prove P Q by first assuming P Q and then deriving false. For example, to prove proposition P you start by saying Write Assume, for a contradiction, that P holds Deduce something known to be false (which will take several steps) Conclude with This is a contradiction, and so P is false and P is true.

56 The most famous example Let P be the statement 2 is irrational and see how we can prove this by contradiction.

57 The most famous example Let P be the statement 2 is irrational and see how we can prove this by contradiction. Proof Assume, for a contradiction, that 2 is rational (Pf. by contradiction)

58 The most famous example Let P be the statement 2 is irrational and see how we can prove this by contradiction. Proof Assume, for a contradiction, that 2 is rational (Pf. by contradiction) Express 2 = p/q in lowest terms (Defn. of rational)

59 The most famous example Let P be the statement 2 is irrational and see how we can prove this by contradiction. Proof Assume, for a contradiction, that 2 is rational (Pf. by contradiction) Express 2 = p/q in lowest terms (Defn. of rational) Then p and q have no common factors (Defn of lowest terms)

60 The most famous example Let P be the statement 2 is irrational and see how we can prove this by contradiction. Proof Assume, for a contradiction, that 2 is rational (Pf. by contradiction) Express 2 = p/q in lowest terms (Defn. of rational) Then p and q have no common factors (Defn of lowest terms) Then p 2 /q 2 = 2

61 The most famous example Let P be the statement 2 is irrational and see how we can prove this by contradiction. Proof Assume, for a contradiction, that 2 is rational (Pf. by contradiction) Express 2 = p/q in lowest terms (Defn. of rational) Then p and q have no common factors (Defn of lowest terms) Then p 2 /q 2 = 2 Then p 2 = 2q 2

62 The most famous example Let P be the statement 2 is irrational and see how we can prove this by contradiction. Proof Assume, for a contradiction, that 2 is rational (Pf. by contradiction) Express 2 = p/q in lowest terms (Defn. of rational) Then p and q have no common factors (Defn of lowest terms) Then p 2 /q 2 = 2 Then p 2 = 2q 2 Then p is even (Earlier proof)

63 The most famous example Let P be the statement 2 is irrational and see how we can prove this by contradiction. Proof Assume, for a contradiction, that 2 is rational (Pf. by contradiction) Express 2 = p/q in lowest terms (Defn. of rational) Then p and q have no common factors (Defn of lowest terms) Then p 2 /q 2 = 2 Then p 2 = 2q 2 Then p is even (Earlier proof) Then p 2 is a multiple of 4

64 The most famous example Let P be the statement 2 is irrational and see how we can prove this by contradiction. Proof Assume, for a contradiction, that 2 is rational (Pf. by contradiction) Express 2 = p/q in lowest terms (Defn. of rational) Then p and q have no common factors (Defn of lowest terms) Then p 2 /q 2 = 2 Then p 2 = 2q 2 Then p is even (Earlier proof) Then p 2 is a multiple of 4 Then q 2 is even, so q is even (Earlier proof)

65 The most famous example Let P be the statement 2 is irrational and see how we can prove this by contradiction. Proof Assume, for a contradiction, that 2 is rational (Pf. by contradiction) Express 2 = p/q in lowest terms (Defn. of rational) Then p and q have no common factors (Defn of lowest terms) Then p 2 /q 2 = 2 Then p 2 = 2q 2 Then p is even (Earlier proof) Then p 2 is a multiple of 4 Then q 2 is even, so q is even (Earlier proof) Then p and q do have a common factor

66 The most famous example Let P be the statement 2 is irrational and see how we can prove this by contradiction. Proof Assume, for a contradiction, that 2 is rational (Pf. by contradiction) Express 2 = p/q in lowest terms (Defn. of rational) Then p and q have no common factors (Defn of lowest terms) Then p 2 /q 2 = 2 Then p 2 = 2q 2 Then p is even (Earlier proof) Then p 2 is a multiple of 4 Then q 2 is even, so q is even (Earlier proof) Then p and q do have a common factor This is a contradiction, and so P is false and P is true

67 Another famous example Let P be the statement There are infinitely many prime numbers and see how we can prove this by contradiction. Proof Assume, for a contradiction, that P holds (Pf. by contradiction)

68 Another famous example Let P be the statement There are infinitely many prime numbers and see how we can prove this by contradiction. Proof Assume, for a contradiction, that P holds (Pf. by contradiction) Then there are finitely many, say k, primes (Meaning of finite)

69 Another famous example Let P be the statement There are infinitely many prime numbers and see how we can prove this by contradiction. Proof Assume, for a contradiction, that P holds (Pf. by contradiction) Then there are finitely many, say k, primes (Meaning of finite) Let L = {p 1, p 2,..., p k } contain all primes (Using assumption)

70 Another famous example Let P be the statement There are infinitely many prime numbers and see how we can prove this by contradiction. Proof Assume, for a contradiction, that P holds (Pf. by contradiction) Then there are finitely many, say k, primes (Meaning of finite) Let L = {p 1, p 2,..., p k } contain all primes (Using assumption) Set n = p 1 p 2... p k + 1 (Using assumption)

71 Another famous example Let P be the statement There are infinitely many prime numbers and see how we can prove this by contradiction. Proof Assume, for a contradiction, that P holds (Pf. by contradiction) Then there are finitely many, say k, primes (Meaning of finite) Let L = {p 1, p 2,..., p k } contain all primes (Using assumption) Set n = p 1 p 2... p k + 1 (Using assumption) Then n = p 1 K 1 + 1, so p 1 does not divide n

72 Another famous example Let P be the statement There are infinitely many prime numbers and see how we can prove this by contradiction. Proof Assume, for a contradiction, that P holds (Pf. by contradiction) Then there are finitely many, say k, primes (Meaning of finite) Let L = {p 1, p 2,..., p k } contain all primes (Using assumption) Set n = p 1 p 2... p k + 1 (Using assumption) Then n = p 1 K 1 + 1, so p 1 does not divide n Then n = p 2 K 2 + 1, so p 2 does not divide n

73 Another famous example Let P be the statement There are infinitely many prime numbers and see how we can prove this by contradiction. Proof Assume, for a contradiction, that P holds (Pf. by contradiction) Then there are finitely many, say k, primes (Meaning of finite) Let L = {p 1, p 2,..., p k } contain all primes (Using assumption) Set n = p 1 p 2... p k + 1 (Using assumption) Then n = p 1 K 1 + 1, so p 1 does not divide n Then n = p 2 K 2 + 1, so p 2 does not divide n None of the primes in L divide n (Simple generalisation)

74 Another famous example Let P be the statement There are infinitely many prime numbers and see how we can prove this by contradiction. Proof Assume, for a contradiction, that P holds (Pf. by contradiction) Then there are finitely many, say k, primes (Meaning of finite) Let L = {p 1, p 2,..., p k } contain all primes (Using assumption) Set n = p 1 p 2... p k + 1 (Using assumption) Then n = p 1 K 1 + 1, so p 1 does not divide n Then n = p 2 K 2 + 1, so p 2 does not divide n None of the primes in L divide n (Simple generalisation) Therefore n has a prime factor not in L (Property of integers)

75 Another famous example Let P be the statement There are infinitely many prime numbers and see how we can prove this by contradiction. Proof Assume, for a contradiction, that P holds (Pf. by contradiction) Then there are finitely many, say k, primes (Meaning of finite) Let L = {p 1, p 2,..., p k } contain all primes (Using assumption) Set n = p 1 p 2... p k + 1 (Using assumption) Then n = p 1 K 1 + 1, so p 1 does not divide n Then n = p 2 K 2 + 1, so p 2 does not divide n None of the primes in L divide n (Simple generalisation) Therefore n has a prime factor not in L (Property of integers) This is a contradiction, so P is false and P is true

76 Strategies Choosing what proof strategy to use is not always obvious. Try writing down what you do know: assumptions and relevant properties. Then consider which proof strategies could be used.

77 Advice Advice from the text Mathematics for Computer Science by Lehman, Leighton and Meyer. 1 State your game plan 2 Keep a linear flow 3 A proof is an essay, not a calculation 4 Avoid excessive symbolism 5 Revise and simplify 6 Introduce notation thoughtfully 7 Structure long proofs 8 Be wary of the obvious 9 Finish

78 Exercise If a, b are irrational numbers, then is it ever possible for a b to be rational? Surprisingly, the answer is YES! Try to prove the statement There exist irrational numbers a and b such that a b is rational. Hint: consider c = d = 2 and start a proof-by-cases based on whether c d is rational or not.

Proofs: A General How To II. Rules of Inference. Rules of Inference Modus Ponens. Rules of Inference Addition. Rules of Inference Conjunction

Proofs: A General How To II. Rules of Inference. Rules of Inference Modus Ponens. Rules of Inference Addition. Rules of Inference Conjunction Introduction I Proofs Computer Science & Engineering 235 Discrete Mathematics Christopher M. Bourke cbourke@cse.unl.edu A proof is a proof. What kind of a proof? It s a proof. A proof is a proof. And when

More information

Chapter 1: The Logic of Compound Statements. January 7, 2008

Chapter 1: The Logic of Compound Statements. January 7, 2008 Chapter 1: The Logic of Compound Statements January 7, 2008 Outline 1 1.1 Logical Form and Logical Equivalence 2 1.2 Conditional Statements 3 1.3 Valid and Invalid Arguments Central notion of deductive

More information

Propositional Logic. Fall () Propositional Logic Fall / 30

Propositional Logic. Fall () Propositional Logic Fall / 30 Propositional Logic Fall 2013 () Propositional Logic Fall 2013 1 / 30 1 Introduction Learning Outcomes for this Presentation 2 Definitions Statements Logical connectives Interpretations, contexts,... Logically

More information

Propositional Logic. Spring Propositional Logic Spring / 32

Propositional Logic. Spring Propositional Logic Spring / 32 Propositional Logic Spring 2016 Propositional Logic Spring 2016 1 / 32 Introduction Learning Outcomes for this Presentation Learning Outcomes... At the conclusion of this session, we will Define the elements

More information

CHAPTER 1 - LOGIC OF COMPOUND STATEMENTS

CHAPTER 1 - LOGIC OF COMPOUND STATEMENTS CHAPTER 1 - LOGIC OF COMPOUND STATEMENTS 1.1 - Logical Form and Logical Equivalence Definition. A statement or proposition is a sentence that is either true or false, but not both. ex. 1 + 2 = 3 IS a statement

More information

Boolean Algebra and Proof. Notes. Proving Propositions. Propositional Equivalences. Notes. Notes. Notes. Notes. March 5, 2012

Boolean Algebra and Proof. Notes. Proving Propositions. Propositional Equivalences. Notes. Notes. Notes. Notes. March 5, 2012 March 5, 2012 Webwork Homework. The handout on Logic is Chapter 4 from Mary Attenborough s book Mathematics for Electrical Engineering and Computing. Proving Propositions We combine basic propositions

More information

Readings: Conjecture. Theorem. Rosen Section 1.5

Readings: Conjecture. Theorem. Rosen Section 1.5 Readings: Conjecture Theorem Lemma Lemma Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 : Step n-1 Step n a rule of inference an axiom a rule of inference Rosen Section 1.5 Provide justification of the steps used to show that a

More information

Argument. whenever all the assumptions are true, then the conclusion is true. If today is Wednesday, then yesterday is Tuesday. Today is Wednesday.

Argument. whenever all the assumptions are true, then the conclusion is true. If today is Wednesday, then yesterday is Tuesday. Today is Wednesday. Logic and Proof Argument An argument is a sequence of statements. All statements but the first one are called assumptions or hypothesis. The final statement is called the conclusion. An argument is valid

More information

Predicate Logic. Andreas Klappenecker

Predicate Logic. Andreas Klappenecker Predicate Logic Andreas Klappenecker Predicates A function P from a set D to the set Prop of propositions is called a predicate. The set D is called the domain of P. Example Let D=Z be the set of integers.

More information

Proof. Theorems. Theorems. Example. Example. Example. Part 4. The Big Bang Theory

Proof. Theorems. Theorems. Example. Example. Example. Part 4. The Big Bang Theory Proof Theorems Part 4 The Big Bang Theory Theorems A theorem is a statement we intend to prove using existing known facts (called axioms or lemmas) Used extensively in all mathematical proofs which should

More information

Natural deduction for truth-functional logic

Natural deduction for truth-functional logic Natural deduction for truth-functional logic Phil 160 - Boston University Why natural deduction? After all, we just found this nice method of truth-tables, which can be used to determine the validity or

More information

Propositional natural deduction

Propositional natural deduction Propositional natural deduction COMP2600 / COMP6260 Dirk Pattinson Australian National University Semester 2, 2016 Major proof techniques 1 / 25 Three major styles of proof in logic and mathematics Model

More information

CSC Discrete Math I, Spring Propositional Logic

CSC Discrete Math I, Spring Propositional Logic CSC 125 - Discrete Math I, Spring 2017 Propositional Logic Propositions A proposition is a declarative sentence that is either true or false Propositional Variables A propositional variable (p, q, r, s,...)

More information

Chapter 2. Mathematical Reasoning. 2.1 Mathematical Models

Chapter 2. Mathematical Reasoning. 2.1 Mathematical Models Contents Mathematical Reasoning 3.1 Mathematical Models........................... 3. Mathematical Proof............................ 4..1 Structure of Proofs........................ 4.. Direct Method..........................

More information

COMP219: Artificial Intelligence. Lecture 19: Logic for KR

COMP219: Artificial Intelligence. Lecture 19: Logic for KR COMP219: Artificial Intelligence Lecture 19: Logic for KR 1 Overview Last time Expert Systems and Ontologies Today Logic as a knowledge representation scheme Propositional Logic Syntax Semantics Proof

More information

LECTURE 1. Logic and Proofs

LECTURE 1. Logic and Proofs LECTURE 1 Logic and Proofs The primary purpose of this course is to introduce you, most of whom are mathematics majors, to the most fundamental skills of a mathematician; the ability to read, write, and

More information

Unit 1. Propositional Logic Reading do all quick-checks Propositional Logic: Ch. 2.intro, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4. Review 2.9

Unit 1. Propositional Logic Reading do all quick-checks Propositional Logic: Ch. 2.intro, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4. Review 2.9 Unit 1. Propositional Logic Reading do all quick-checks Propositional Logic: Ch. 2.intro, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4. Review 2.9 Typeset September 23, 2005 1 Statements or propositions Defn: A statement is an assertion

More information

3 The Semantics of the Propositional Calculus

3 The Semantics of the Propositional Calculus 3 The Semantics of the Propositional Calculus 1. Interpretations Formulas of the propositional calculus express statement forms. In chapter two, we gave informal descriptions of the meanings of the logical

More information

First order Logic ( Predicate Logic) and Methods of Proof

First order Logic ( Predicate Logic) and Methods of Proof First order Logic ( Predicate Logic) and Methods of Proof 1 Outline Introduction Terminology: Propositional functions; arguments; arity; universe of discourse Quantifiers Definition; using, mixing, negating

More information

Example ( x.(p(x) Q(x))) ( x.p(x) x.q(x)) premise. 2. ( x.(p(x) Q(x))) -elim, 1 3. ( x.p(x) x.q(x)) -elim, x. P(x) x.

Example ( x.(p(x) Q(x))) ( x.p(x) x.q(x)) premise. 2. ( x.(p(x) Q(x))) -elim, 1 3. ( x.p(x) x.q(x)) -elim, x. P(x) x. Announcements CS311H: Discrete Mathematics More Logic Intro to Proof Techniques Homework due next lecture Instructor: Işıl Dillig Instructor: Işıl Dillig, CS311H: Discrete Mathematics More Logic Intro

More information

CSE 20 DISCRETE MATH. Fall

CSE 20 DISCRETE MATH. Fall CSE 20 DISCRETE MATH Fall 2017 http://cseweb.ucsd.edu/classes/fa17/cse20-ab/ Today's learning goals Distinguish between a theorem, an axiom, lemma, a corollary, and a conjecture. Recognize direct proofs

More information

Normal Forms Note: all ppts about normal forms are skipped.

Normal Forms Note: all ppts about normal forms are skipped. Normal Forms Note: all ppts about normal forms are skipped. Well formed formula (wff) also called formula, is a string consists of propositional variables, connectives, and parenthesis used in the proper

More information

3 The language of proof

3 The language of proof 3 The language of proof After working through this section, you should be able to: (a) understand what is asserted by various types of mathematical statements, in particular implications and equivalences;

More information

Section 3.1: Direct Proof and Counterexample 1

Section 3.1: Direct Proof and Counterexample 1 Section 3.1: Direct Proof and Counterexample 1 In this chapter, we introduce the notion of proof in mathematics. A mathematical proof is valid logical argument in mathematics which shows that a given conclusion

More information

Advanced Topics in LP and FP

Advanced Topics in LP and FP Lecture 1: Prolog and Summary of this lecture 1 Introduction to Prolog 2 3 Truth value evaluation 4 Prolog Logic programming language Introduction to Prolog Introduced in the 1970s Program = collection

More information

The Logic of Compound Statements cont.

The Logic of Compound Statements cont. The Logic of Compound Statements cont. CSE 215, Computer Science 1, Fall 2011 Stony Brook University http://www.cs.stonybrook.edu/~cse215 Refresh from last time: Logical Equivalences Commutativity of :

More information

Deductive Systems. Lecture - 3

Deductive Systems. Lecture - 3 Deductive Systems Lecture - 3 Axiomatic System Axiomatic System (AS) for PL AS is based on the set of only three axioms and one rule of deduction. It is minimal in structure but as powerful as the truth

More information

Show Your Work! Point values are in square brackets. There are 35 points possible. Tables of tautologies and contradictions are on the last page.

Show Your Work! Point values are in square brackets. There are 35 points possible. Tables of tautologies and contradictions are on the last page. Formal Methods Midterm 1, Spring, 2007 Name Show Your Work! Point values are in square brackets. There are 35 points possible. Tables of tautologies and contradictions are on the last page. 1. Use truth

More information

Topic 1: Propositional logic

Topic 1: Propositional logic Topic 1: Propositional logic Guy McCusker 1 1 University of Bath Logic! This lecture is about the simplest kind of mathematical logic: propositional calculus. We discuss propositions, which are statements

More information

Axiomatic systems. Revisiting the rules of inference. Example: A theorem and its proof in an abstract axiomatic system:

Axiomatic systems. Revisiting the rules of inference. Example: A theorem and its proof in an abstract axiomatic system: Axiomatic systems Revisiting the rules of inference Material for this section references College Geometry: A Discovery Approach, 2/e, David C. Kay, Addison Wesley, 2001. In particular, see section 2.1,

More information

CSE 1400 Applied Discrete Mathematics Proofs

CSE 1400 Applied Discrete Mathematics Proofs CSE 1400 Applied Discrete Mathematics Proofs Department of Computer Sciences College of Engineering Florida Tech Fall 2011 Axioms 1 Logical Axioms 2 Models 2 Number Theory 3 Graph Theory 4 Set Theory 4

More information

Packet #1: Logic & Proofs. Applied Discrete Mathematics

Packet #1: Logic & Proofs. Applied Discrete Mathematics Packet #1: Logic & Proofs Applied Discrete Mathematics Table of Contents Course Objectives Page 2 Propositional Calculus Information Pages 3-13 Course Objectives At the conclusion of this course, you should

More information

CS100: DISCRETE STRUCTURES. Lecture 5: Logic (Ch1)

CS100: DISCRETE STRUCTURES. Lecture 5: Logic (Ch1) CS100: DISCREE SRUCURES Lecture 5: Logic (Ch1) Lecture Overview 2 Statement Logical Connectives Conjunction Disjunction Propositions Conditional Bio-conditional Converse Inverse Contrapositive Laws of

More information

Unit I LOGIC AND PROOFS. B. Thilaka Applied Mathematics

Unit I LOGIC AND PROOFS. B. Thilaka Applied Mathematics Unit I LOGIC AND PROOFS B. Thilaka Applied Mathematics UNIT I LOGIC AND PROOFS Propositional Logic Propositional equivalences Predicates and Quantifiers Nested Quantifiers Rules of inference Introduction

More information

Proof by Contradiction

Proof by Contradiction Proof by Contradiction MAT231 Transition to Higher Mathematics Fall 2014 MAT231 (Transition to Higher Math) Proof by Contradiction Fall 2014 1 / 12 Outline 1 Proving Statements with Contradiction 2 Proving

More information

Propositional Logic. Jason Filippou UMCP. ason Filippou UMCP) Propositional Logic / 38

Propositional Logic. Jason Filippou UMCP. ason Filippou UMCP) Propositional Logic / 38 Propositional Logic Jason Filippou CMSC250 @ UMCP 05-31-2016 ason Filippou (CMSC250 @ UMCP) Propositional Logic 05-31-2016 1 / 38 Outline 1 Syntax 2 Semantics Truth Tables Simplifying expressions 3 Inference

More information

Logic. Propositional Logic: Syntax

Logic. Propositional Logic: Syntax Logic Propositional Logic: Syntax Logic is a tool for formalizing reasoning. There are lots of different logics: probabilistic logic: for reasoning about probability temporal logic: for reasoning about

More information

DISCRETE MATH: LECTURE 3

DISCRETE MATH: LECTURE 3 DISCRETE MATH: LECTURE 3 DR. DANIEL FREEMAN 1. Chapter 2.2 Conditional Statements If p and q are statement variables, the conditional of q by p is If p then q or p implies q and is denoted p q. It is false

More information

MATHS 315 Mathematical Logic

MATHS 315 Mathematical Logic MATHS 315 Mathematical Logic Second Semester, 2007 Contents 1 Informal Statement Logic 1 1.1 Statements and truth tables............................... 1 1.2 Tautologies, logical equivalence and logical

More information

Logic and Propositional Calculus

Logic and Propositional Calculus CHAPTER 4 Logic and Propositional Calculus 4.1 INTRODUCTION Many algorithms and proofs use logical expressions such as: IF p THEN q or If p 1 AND p 2, THEN q 1 OR q 2 Therefore it is necessary to know

More information

Overview. Knowledge-Based Agents. Introduction. COMP219: Artificial Intelligence. Lecture 19: Logic for KR

Overview. Knowledge-Based Agents. Introduction. COMP219: Artificial Intelligence. Lecture 19: Logic for KR COMP219: Artificial Intelligence Lecture 19: Logic for KR Last time Expert Systems and Ontologies oday Logic as a knowledge representation scheme Propositional Logic Syntax Semantics Proof theory Natural

More information

Chapter 3. The Logic of Quantified Statements

Chapter 3. The Logic of Quantified Statements Chapter 3. The Logic of Quantified Statements 3.1. Predicates and Quantified Statements I Predicate in grammar Predicate refers to the part of a sentence that gives information about the subject. Example:

More information

FORMAL PROOFS DONU ARAPURA

FORMAL PROOFS DONU ARAPURA FORMAL PROOFS DONU ARAPURA This is a supplement for M385 on formal proofs in propositional logic. Rather than following the presentation of Rubin, I want to use a slightly different set of rules which

More information

CPSC 121: Models of Computation

CPSC 121: Models of Computation CPSC 121: Models of Computation Unit 6 Rewriting Predicate Logic Statements Based on slides by Patrice Belleville and Steve Wolfman Coming Up Pre-class quiz #7 is due Wednesday October 25th at 9:00 pm.

More information

Discrete Mathematics

Discrete Mathematics Discrete Mathematics Chih-Wei Yi Dept. of Computer Science National Chiao Tung University March 9, 2009 Overview of ( 1.5-1.7, ~2 hours) Methods of mathematical argument (i.e., proof methods) can be formalized

More information

PHIL012. SYMBOLIC LOGIC PROPOSITIONAL LOGIC DERIVATIONS

PHIL012. SYMBOLIC LOGIC PROPOSITIONAL LOGIC DERIVATIONS HIL012 SYMBOLIC LOGIC ROOSITIONL LOGIC DERIVTIONS When we argue, what we want are (i) clearly specifiable rules, (ii) that apply to any particular subject matter, and (iii) that legitimate transitions

More information

Direct Proof MAT231. Fall Transition to Higher Mathematics. MAT231 (Transition to Higher Math) Direct Proof Fall / 24

Direct Proof MAT231. Fall Transition to Higher Mathematics. MAT231 (Transition to Higher Math) Direct Proof Fall / 24 Direct Proof MAT231 Transition to Higher Mathematics Fall 2014 MAT231 (Transition to Higher Math) Direct Proof Fall 2014 1 / 24 Outline 1 Overview of Proof 2 Theorems 3 Definitions 4 Direct Proof 5 Using

More information

MACM 101 Discrete Mathematics I. Exercises on Predicates and Quantifiers. Due: Tuesday, October 13th (at the beginning of the class)

MACM 101 Discrete Mathematics I. Exercises on Predicates and Quantifiers. Due: Tuesday, October 13th (at the beginning of the class) MACM 101 Discrete Mathematics I Exercises on Predicates and Quantifiers. Due: Tuesday, October 13th (at the beginning of the class) Reminder: the work you submit must be your own. Any collaboration and

More information

ANS: If you are in Kwangju then you are in South Korea but not in Seoul.

ANS: If you are in Kwangju then you are in South Korea but not in Seoul. Math 15 - Spring 2017 - Homework 1.1 and 1.2 Solutions 1. (1.1#1) Let the following statements be given. p = There is water in the cylinders. q = The head gasket is blown. r = The car will start. (a) Translate

More information

DISCRETE MATH: FINAL REVIEW

DISCRETE MATH: FINAL REVIEW DISCRETE MATH: FINAL REVIEW DR. DANIEL FREEMAN 1) a. Does 3 = {3}? b. Is 3 {3}? c. Is 3 {3}? c. Is {3} {3}? c. Is {3} {3}? d. Does {3} = {3, 3, 3, 3}? e. Is {x Z x > 0} {x R x > 0}? 1. Chapter 1 review

More information

02 Propositional Logic

02 Propositional Logic SE 2F03 Fall 2005 02 Propositional Logic Instructor: W. M. Farmer Revised: 25 September 2005 1 What is Propositional Logic? Propositional logic is the study of the truth or falsehood of propositions or

More information

ECOM Discrete Mathematics

ECOM Discrete Mathematics ECOM 2311- Discrete Mathematics Chapter # 1 : The Foundations: Logic and Proofs Fall, 2013/2014 ECOM 2311- Discrete Mathematics - Ch.1 Dr. Musbah Shaat 1 / 85 Outline 1 Propositional Logic 2 Propositional

More information

Introduction to Metalogic

Introduction to Metalogic Philosophy 135 Spring 2008 Tony Martin Introduction to Metalogic 1 The semantics of sentential logic. The language L of sentential logic. Symbols of L: Remarks: (i) sentence letters p 0, p 1, p 2,... (ii)

More information

[Ch 3, 4] Logic and Proofs (2) 1. Valid and Invalid Arguments ( 2.3, 3.4) 400 lecture note #2. 1) Basics

[Ch 3, 4] Logic and Proofs (2) 1. Valid and Invalid Arguments ( 2.3, 3.4) 400 lecture note #2. 1) Basics 400 lecture note #2 [Ch 3, 4] Logic and Proofs (2) 1. Valid and Invalid Arguments ( 2.3, 3.4) 1) Basics An argument is a sequence of statements ( s1, s2,, sn). All statements in an argument, excet for

More information

Collins' notes on Lemmon's Logic

Collins' notes on Lemmon's Logic Collins' notes on Lemmon's Logic (i) Rule of ssumption () Insert any formula at any stage into a proof. The assumed formula rests upon the assumption of itself. (ii) Double Negation (DN) a. b. ( Two negations

More information

Propositional Logic Review

Propositional Logic Review Propositional Logic Review UC Berkeley, Philosophy 142, Spring 2016 John MacFarlane The task of describing a logical system comes in three parts: Grammar Describing what counts as a formula Semantics Defining

More information

Deductive and Inductive Logic

Deductive and Inductive Logic Deductive Logic Overview (1) Distinguishing Deductive and Inductive Logic (2) Validity and Soundness (3) A Few Practice Deductive Arguments (4) Testing for Invalidity (5) Practice Exercises Deductive and

More information

Topics in Logic and Proofs

Topics in Logic and Proofs Chapter 2 Topics in Logic and Proofs Some mathematical statements carry a logical value of being true or false, while some do not. For example, the statement 4 + 5 = 9 is true, whereas the statement 2

More information

Deduction by Daniel Bonevac. Chapter 3 Truth Trees

Deduction by Daniel Bonevac. Chapter 3 Truth Trees Deduction by Daniel Bonevac Chapter 3 Truth Trees Truth trees Truth trees provide an alternate decision procedure for assessing validity, logical equivalence, satisfiability and other logical properties

More information

CS70 is a course about on Discrete Mathematics for Computer Scientists. The purpose of the course is to teach you about:

CS70 is a course about on Discrete Mathematics for Computer Scientists. The purpose of the course is to teach you about: CS 70 Discrete Mathematics for CS Fall 2006 Papadimitriou & Vazirani Lecture 1 Course Outline CS70 is a course about on Discrete Mathematics for Computer Scientists. The purpose of the course is to teach

More information

Proposition logic and argument. CISC2100, Spring 2017 X.Zhang

Proposition logic and argument. CISC2100, Spring 2017 X.Zhang Proposition logic and argument CISC2100, Spring 2017 X.Zhang 1 Where are my glasses? I know the following statements are true. 1. If I was reading the newspaper in the kitchen, then my glasses are on the

More information

HANDOUT AND SET THEORY. Ariyadi Wijaya

HANDOUT AND SET THEORY. Ariyadi Wijaya HANDOUT LOGIC AND SET THEORY Ariyadi Wijaya Mathematics Education Department Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Science Yogyakarta State University 2009 1 Mathematics Education Department Faculty of Mathematics

More information

10/5/2012. Logic? What is logic? Propositional Logic. Propositional Logic (Rosen, Chapter ) Logic is a truth-preserving system of inference

10/5/2012. Logic? What is logic? Propositional Logic. Propositional Logic (Rosen, Chapter ) Logic is a truth-preserving system of inference Logic? Propositional Logic (Rosen, Chapter 1.1 1.3) TOPICS Propositional Logic Truth Tables Implication Logical Proofs 10/1/12 CS160 Fall Semester 2012 2 What is logic? Logic is a truth-preserving system

More information

Propositional Logic. Logic. Propositional Logic Syntax. Propositional Logic

Propositional Logic. Logic. Propositional Logic Syntax. Propositional Logic Propositional Logic Reading: Chapter 7.1, 7.3 7.5 [ased on slides from Jerry Zhu, Louis Oliphant and ndrew Moore] Logic If the rules of the world are presented formally, then a decision maker can use logical

More information

Logic of Sentences (Propositional Logic) is interested only in true or false statements; does not go inside.

Logic of Sentences (Propositional Logic) is interested only in true or false statements; does not go inside. You are a mathematician if 1.1 Overview you say to a car dealer, I ll take the red car or the blue one, but then you feel the need to add, but not both. --- 1. Logic and Mathematical Notation (not in the

More information

Logic As Algebra COMP1600 / COMP6260. Dirk Pattinson Australian National University. Semester 2, 2017

Logic As Algebra COMP1600 / COMP6260. Dirk Pattinson Australian National University. Semester 2, 2017 Logic As Algebra COMP1600 / COMP6260 Dirk Pattinson Australian National University Semester 2, 2017 Recap: And, Or, and Not x AND y x y x y 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 x OR y x y x y 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1

More information

Notes on Inference and Deduction

Notes on Inference and Deduction Notes on Inference and Deduction Consider the following argument 1 Assumptions: If the races are fixed or the gambling houses are crooked, then the tourist trade will decline. If the tourist trade declines

More information

Disjunction/Conjunction Normal Form

Disjunction/Conjunction Normal Form Normal Forms Well formed formula (wff) also called formula, is a string consists of propositional variables, connectives, and parenthesis used in the proper manner. E.g. ((p q) ( p r)) pq r is a disjunction

More information

CSCE 222 Discrete Structures for Computing. Predicate Logic. Dr. Hyunyoung Lee. !!!!! Based on slides by Andreas Klappenecker

CSCE 222 Discrete Structures for Computing. Predicate Logic. Dr. Hyunyoung Lee. !!!!! Based on slides by Andreas Klappenecker CSCE 222 Discrete Structures for Computing Predicate Logic Dr. Hyunyoung Lee Based on slides by Andreas Klappenecker 1 Predicates A function P from a set D to the set Prop of propositions is called a predicate.

More information

Proofs. Chapter 2 P P Q Q

Proofs. Chapter 2 P P Q Q Chapter Proofs In this chapter we develop three methods for proving a statement. To start let s suppose the statement is of the form P Q or if P, then Q. Direct: This method typically starts with P. Then,

More information

A. Propositional Logic

A. Propositional Logic CmSc 175 Discrete Mathematics A. Propositional Logic 1. Statements (Propositions ): Statements are sentences that claim certain things. Can be either true or false, but not both. Propositional logic deals

More information

1) Let h = John is healthy, w = John is wealthy and s = John is wise Write the following statement is symbolic form

1) Let h = John is healthy, w = John is wealthy and s = John is wise Write the following statement is symbolic form Math 378 Exam 1 Spring 2009 Show all Work Name 1) Let h = John is healthy, w = John is wealthy and s = John is wise Write the following statement is symbolic form a) In order for John to be wealthy it

More information

means is a subset of. So we say A B for sets A and B if x A we have x B holds. BY CONTRAST, a S means that a is a member of S.

means is a subset of. So we say A B for sets A and B if x A we have x B holds. BY CONTRAST, a S means that a is a member of S. 1 Notation For those unfamiliar, we have := means equal by definition, N := {0, 1,... } or {1, 2,... } depending on context. (i.e. N is the set or collection of counting numbers.) In addition, means for

More information

Lecture Notes 1 Basic Concepts of Mathematics MATH 352

Lecture Notes 1 Basic Concepts of Mathematics MATH 352 Lecture Notes 1 Basic Concepts of Mathematics MATH 352 Ivan Avramidi New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology Socorro, NM 87801 June 3, 2004 Author: Ivan Avramidi; File: absmath.tex; Date: June 11,

More information

Propositional Logic. CS 3234: Logic and Formal Systems. Martin Henz and Aquinas Hobor. August 26, Generated on Tuesday 31 August, 2010, 16:54

Propositional Logic. CS 3234: Logic and Formal Systems. Martin Henz and Aquinas Hobor. August 26, Generated on Tuesday 31 August, 2010, 16:54 Propositional Logic CS 3234: Logic and Formal Systems Martin Henz and Aquinas Hobor August 26, 2010 Generated on Tuesday 31 August, 2010, 16:54 1 Motivation In traditional logic, terms represent sets,

More information

Formal Logic. Critical Thinking

Formal Logic. Critical Thinking ormal Logic Critical hinking Recap: ormal Logic If I win the lottery, then I am poor. I win the lottery. Hence, I am poor. his argument has the following abstract structure or form: If P then Q. P. Hence,

More information

Chapter 9. Proofs. In this chapter we will demonstrate how this system works. The precise definition of 9-1

Chapter 9. Proofs. In this chapter we will demonstrate how this system works. The precise definition of 9-1 Chapter 9 Proofs In the first part of this book we have discussed complete axiomatic systems for propositional and predicate logic In the previous chapter we have introduced the tableau systems of Beth,

More information

A Guide for Making Proofs

A Guide for Making Proofs A Guide for Making Proofs Mathijs de Weerdt This document is loosely based on MIT OpenCourseWare [2] Abstract In principle, a proof can be any sequence of logical deductions from axioms, definitions, and

More information

5. Use a truth table to determine whether the two statements are equivalent. Let t be a tautology and c be a contradiction.

5. Use a truth table to determine whether the two statements are equivalent. Let t be a tautology and c be a contradiction. Statements Compounds and Truth Tables. Statements, Negations, Compounds, Conjunctions, Disjunctions, Truth Tables, Logical Equivalence, De Morgan s Law, Tautology, Contradictions, Proofs with Logical Equivalent

More information

Definition 2. Conjunction of p and q

Definition 2. Conjunction of p and q Proposition Propositional Logic CPSC 2070 Discrete Structures Rosen (6 th Ed.) 1.1, 1.2 A proposition is a statement that is either true or false, but not both. Clemson will defeat Georgia in football

More information

2 Truth Tables, Equivalences and the Contrapositive

2 Truth Tables, Equivalences and the Contrapositive 2 Truth Tables, Equivalences and the Contrapositive 12 2 Truth Tables, Equivalences and the Contrapositive 2.1 Truth Tables In a mathematical system, true and false statements are the statements of the

More information

8. Reductio ad absurdum

8. Reductio ad absurdum 8. Reductio ad absurdum 8.1 A historical example In his book, The Two New Sciences, 10 Galileo Galilea (1564-1642) gives several arguments meant to demonstrate that there can be no such thing as actual

More information

Section 1.3: Valid and Invalid Arguments

Section 1.3: Valid and Invalid Arguments Section 1.3: Valid and Invalid Arguments Now we have developed the basic language of logic, we shall start to consider how logic can be used to determine whether or not a given argument is valid. In order

More information

EECS 1028 M: Discrete Mathematics for Engineers

EECS 1028 M: Discrete Mathematics for Engineers EECS 1028 M: Discrete Mathematics for Engineers Suprakash Datta Office: LAS 3043 Course page: http://www.eecs.yorku.ca/course/1028 Also on Moodle S. Datta (York Univ.) EECS 1028 W 18 1 / 32 Proofs Proofs

More information

A Little Deductive Logic

A Little Deductive Logic A Little Deductive Logic In propositional or sentential deductive logic, we begin by specifying that we will use capital letters (like A, B, C, D, and so on) to stand in for sentences, and we assume that

More information

Logic and Proofs 1. 1 Overview. 2 Sentential Connectives. John Nachbar Washington University December 26, 2014

Logic and Proofs 1. 1 Overview. 2 Sentential Connectives. John Nachbar Washington University December 26, 2014 John Nachbar Washington University December 26, 2014 Logic and Proofs 1 1 Overview. These notes provide an informal introduction to some basic concepts in logic. For a careful exposition, see, for example,

More information

Propositional Logic Part 1

Propositional Logic Part 1 Propositional Logic Part 1 Yingyu Liang yliang@cs.wisc.edu Computer Sciences Department University of Wisconsin, Madison [Based on slides from Louis Oliphant, Andrew Moore, Jerry Zhu] slide 1 5 is even

More information

Announcements. CS311H: Discrete Mathematics. Propositional Logic II. Inverse of an Implication. Converse of a Implication

Announcements. CS311H: Discrete Mathematics. Propositional Logic II. Inverse of an Implication. Converse of a Implication Announcements CS311H: Discrete Mathematics Propositional Logic II Instructor: Işıl Dillig First homework assignment out today! Due in one week, i.e., before lecture next Wed 09/13 Remember: Due before

More information

MA103 STATEMENTS, PROOF, LOGIC

MA103 STATEMENTS, PROOF, LOGIC MA103 STATEMENTS, PROOF, LOGIC Abstract Mathematics is about making precise mathematical statements and establishing, by proof or disproof, whether these statements are true or false. We start by looking

More information

The Importance of Being Formal. Martin Henz. February 5, Propositional Logic

The Importance of Being Formal. Martin Henz. February 5, Propositional Logic The Importance of Being Formal Martin Henz February 5, 2014 Propositional Logic 1 Motivation In traditional logic, terms represent sets, and therefore, propositions are limited to stating facts on sets

More information

AI Programming CS S-09 Knowledge Representation

AI Programming CS S-09 Knowledge Representation AI Programming CS662-2013S-09 Knowledge Representation David Galles Department of Computer Science University of San Francisco 09-0: Overview So far, we ve talked about search, which is a means of considering

More information

MATH10040: Chapter 0 Mathematics, Logic and Reasoning

MATH10040: Chapter 0 Mathematics, Logic and Reasoning MATH10040: Chapter 0 Mathematics, Logic and Reasoning 1. What is Mathematics? There is no definitive answer to this question. 1 Indeed, the answer given by a 21st-century mathematician would differ greatly

More information

CHAPTER 1. MATHEMATICAL LOGIC 1.1 Fundamentals of Mathematical Logic

CHAPTER 1. MATHEMATICAL LOGIC 1.1 Fundamentals of Mathematical Logic CHAPER 1 MAHEMAICAL LOGIC 1.1 undamentals of Mathematical Logic Logic is commonly known as the science of reasoning. Some of the reasons to study logic are the following: At the hardware level the design

More information

Introduction Logic Inference. Discrete Mathematics Andrei Bulatov

Introduction Logic Inference. Discrete Mathematics Andrei Bulatov Introduction Logic Inference Discrete Mathematics Andrei Bulatov Discrete Mathematics - Logic Inference 6-2 Previous Lecture Laws of logic Expressions for implication, biconditional, exclusive or Valid

More information

8. Reductio ad absurdum

8. Reductio ad absurdum 8. Reductio ad absurdum 8.1 A historical example In his book, The Two New Sciences, Galileo Galilea (1564-1642) gives several arguments meant to demonstrate that there can be no such thing as actual infinities

More information

2.2: Logical Equivalence: The Laws of Logic

2.2: Logical Equivalence: The Laws of Logic Example (2.7) For primitive statement p and q, construct a truth table for each of the following compound statements. a) p q b) p q Here we see that the corresponding truth tables for two statement p q

More information

Mathematical Preliminaries. Sipser pages 1-28

Mathematical Preliminaries. Sipser pages 1-28 Mathematical Preliminaries Sipser pages 1-28 Mathematical Preliminaries This course is about the fundamental capabilities and limitations of computers. It has 3 parts 1. Automata Models of computation

More information

Applied Logic. Lecture 1 - Propositional logic. Marcin Szczuka. Institute of Informatics, The University of Warsaw

Applied Logic. Lecture 1 - Propositional logic. Marcin Szczuka. Institute of Informatics, The University of Warsaw Applied Logic Lecture 1 - Propositional logic Marcin Szczuka Institute of Informatics, The University of Warsaw Monographic lecture, Spring semester 2017/2018 Marcin Szczuka (MIMUW) Applied Logic 2018

More information

What is Logic? Introduction to Logic. Simple Statements. Which one is statement?

What is Logic? Introduction to Logic. Simple Statements. Which one is statement? What is Logic? Introduction to Logic Peter Lo Logic is the study of reasoning It is specifically concerned with whether reasoning is correct Logic is also known as Propositional Calculus CS218 Peter Lo

More information

Propositional Logic Arguments (5A) Young W. Lim 2/23/17

Propositional Logic Arguments (5A) Young W. Lim 2/23/17 Propositional Logic (5A) Young W. Lim Copyright (c) 2016 Young W. Lim. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version

More information