For a horseshoe statement, having the matching p (left side) gives you the q (right side) by itself. It does NOT work with matching q s.

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "For a horseshoe statement, having the matching p (left side) gives you the q (right side) by itself. It does NOT work with matching q s."

Transcription

1 7.1 The start of Proofs From now on the arguments we are working with are all VALID. There are 18 Rules of Inference (see the last 2 pages in Course Packet, or front of txt book). Each of these rules is itself a Valid argument. Remember that the lower case p,q,r, and s are statement variables, so can stand for any statement. These 18 rules are kind of like formula you will be using in the proof itself. In 7.1 we are going over the first 4 of the 18. These are the first 4/8 Rules of Implication. With these rules, you need to have every statement above the line to get the one statement below the line. Modus ponens (MP) If p, then q You have p Therefore, you have q p q p q If it s raining, then the ground gets wet It is raining Therefore the ground is wet. R W R W I.e. W K ~H J (U v B) (K F) W ~H U v B K J K F For a horseshoe statement, having the matching p (left side) gives you the q (right side) by itself. It does NOT work with matching q s. This is one of the 2 main ways to break a horseshoe statement down. Once you identify the main connective horseshoe, remember that you want to also find the matching left half of that horseshoe statement (the p ) by itself. Then using MP, you can get the right half (the q ) by itself. Modus Tollens (MT) If p, then q You don t have q (not q) Therefore you don t have p (not p) p q ~q ~p If it s raining, then the ground gets wet. R W The ground isn t wet ~W Therefore it s not raining. ~R I.e. I J ~O ~Y (I S) ~(H v B) ~J Y H v B ~I O ~(I S)

2 For a horseshoe statement, the opposite of the q (right side) gives you the opposite of the p (left side). It doesn t matter where the tilde is as long as one of them has one and the other one doesn t. MT only works this one way. Opposite p s gives you nothing. MT is the other of the 2 ways to break a horseshoe statement down. Once you identify the main connective horseshoe, remember that you want to also find the opposite of the RIGHT half of that horseshoe statement (the not-q) by itself. Then using MT, you can get the opposite of the LEFT half (the not-p) by itself. Hypothetical Syllogism (HS) If p, then q p q or q I.e. r Ex ~Y (K L) If q, then r q r p q M ~Y Therefore, if p then r p r p r M (K L) If it s raining, then the ground gets wet. If the ground gets wet, then the flowers will bloom Therefore, if it s raining, then the flowers will bloom. R W W F R F If you have 2 horseshoe statements with a match along either diagonal, the matching statements get crossed out and you re left with the p on the left, and the q on the right. Disjunctive syllogism (DS) Either you have p or q You don t have p (not-p) Therefore you re left with q p v q or p v q ~p ~q q p Either it s raining, or it s snowing R v S It s not raining ~R Therefore it is snowing S I.e. U v W M v ~T (I v G) v ~F ~U T ~(I v G) W M ~F For a wedge statement, having the opposite of one side will give you what s left on the other side. This is the only way to break down a wedge statement. Once you identify the main connective wedge, remember that you want to also find the opposite of either the

3 RIGHT half OR LEFT half of that wedge statement (the not-p, or not-q) by itself. Then using DS, you can get what s left on the other side by itself. Exercises on the rules (fill in blank & state the rule): 1. L ~Y 2. J ~F 3. (U F) ~D 4. ~I v H ~L M ~F ~D H 1. Y (MT) 2. M J (HS) 3. U F (MP) 4. I (DS) Proofs: We will be given a set of premises and the conclusion. We will be proving that we can get from the premises to the conclusion step by step using the rules of inference. We can use the given premises in any order and any number of times. Any line that we prove becomes another premise that can be used. For now we only have 4 of the 18 rules of inference to work with: Ex. For this first example (below), we are given 3 premises and on the same line as the last premise, is also given the conclusion. You will copy the proof down exactly as it is written here. Make sure you number the lines and put the conclusion on the SAME line as the last premise. Now, we are trying to eventually get to ~R. We are finished the proof when the last line is ~R. We have 4 possible rules to work with. See if you can fit 2 lines of the proof to any of the 4 rules. Look at lines 1 and 3. Those two fit the MP rule because you have a p q, and also the matching p by itself. You will now supply the 3 rd line (conclusion) of that MP and write it down on line 4. On the same line, put the line # s used and the rule. Now you can use line 4 with line 2. Those two lines fit the MT rule because you have p q, and the opposite of the q by itself. That will give you the ~R you are looking for. Then you re done. A. 1. M 2. R H 3. M ~H / ~R 4. ~H 1,3 MP 5. ~R 2,4 MT

4 B. 1. J v ~T 2. T 3. J (Z ~T) / ~Z 4. J 1,2 DS (with wedge: opposite of q leaves me with p) 5. Z ~T 3,4 MP (with horseshoe: matching p gives me q) 6. ~Z 2,5 MT (with horseshoe: opposite of q gives me opposite of p) Do the next 2 in class: C. 1. T ~J 2. O (M T) 3. (M ~J) R 4. O / R D. (from textbook) 1. ~A [A v (T R)] 2. ~R [R v (A R)] 3. (T v D) ~R 4. T v D / D When you look at a statement, after identifying the main connective, you know that everything on the left is p, and everything on the right is q. Right now we can only break down statements at their main connectives. Thus when you have a statement like #1 in the above proof: ~A [A v (T R)] The only way to break this down (right now) is to have the matching p (~A), or to have the OPPOSITE of q ( ~[A v (T R)] ). That is because this statement is a p q statement. Having a T by itself won t help you until you can get the T R by itself. Then MP will give you R. 1. ~A [A v (T R)] 2. ~A 3. T / R 4. A v (T R) 1,2 MP (you half the entire left half of line 1 by itself on line 2.) 5. T R 2,4 DS (You have the opposite of one half of your wedge by itself) 6. R 3,6 MP (You have the entire left half of line 5 on line 3) Note that the main connectives for the larger statements are in blue. That completely separates the p side from the q side.

5 See if you can spot the Incorrect examples of the 4 rules: 1. ~U v ~F 2. Y ~G 3. ~R E 4. W G ~F ~Y ~R E G U DS G MT E MP W E HS The only correct one out of the four is #3. MP is matching the p or left half of a horseshoe statement to get the q right half by itself. #1 is incorrect because you would need an F to get ~U with DS, or you d need U to get ~F. #2 is incorrect because for MT you would need the OPPOSITE of q or G by itself to get the opposite of p or ~Y. For MP you would need a Y to get ~G. #4 is incorrect because you don t have a match on the diagonal.

Today s Lecture 2/25/10. Truth Tables Continued Introduction to Proofs (the implicational rules of inference)

Today s Lecture 2/25/10. Truth Tables Continued Introduction to Proofs (the implicational rules of inference) Today s Lecture 2/25/10 Truth Tables Continued Introduction to Proofs (the implicational rules of inference) Announcements Homework: -- Ex 7.3 pg. 320 Part B (2-20 Even). --Read chapter 8.1 pgs. 345-361.

More information

(ÀB Ä (A Â C)) (A Ä ÀC) Á B. This is our sample argument. Formal Proofs

(ÀB Ä (A Â C)) (A Ä ÀC) Á B. This is our sample argument. Formal Proofs (ÀB Ä (A Â C)) (A Ä ÀC) Á B This is our sample argument. Formal Proofs From now on, formal proofs will be our main way to test arguments. We ll begin with easier proofs. Our initial strategy for constructing

More information

Logical Form 5 Famous Valid Forms. Today s Lecture 1/26/10

Logical Form 5 Famous Valid Forms. Today s Lecture 1/26/10 Logical Form 5 Famous Valid Forms Today s Lecture 1/26/10 Announcements Homework: --Read Chapter 7 pp. 277-298 (doing the problems in parts A, B, and C pp. 298-300 are recommended but not required at this

More information

Natural Deduction is a method for deriving the conclusion of valid arguments expressed in the symbolism of propositional logic.

Natural Deduction is a method for deriving the conclusion of valid arguments expressed in the symbolism of propositional logic. Natural Deduction is a method for deriving the conclusion of valid arguments expressed in the symbolism of propositional logic. The method consists of using sets of Rules of Inference (valid argument forms)

More information

Proof Worksheet 2, Math 187 Fall 2017 (with solutions)

Proof Worksheet 2, Math 187 Fall 2017 (with solutions) Proof Worksheet 2, Math 187 Fall 2017 (with solutions) Dr. Holmes October 17, 2017 The instructions are the same as on the first worksheet, except you can use all the rules in the strategies handout. We

More information

i.e. The conclusion to the following argument says If you had an A, then you d have a ~(B v Z).

i.e. The conclusion to the following argument says If you had an A, then you d have a ~(B v Z). 7.5 Conditional Proof (CP): Conditional Proof is a different way to do proofs. Using CP will always get you a horseshoe statement, so the best time to use it is when your conclusion is either a horseshoe

More information

CS 2336 Discrete Mathematics

CS 2336 Discrete Mathematics CS 2336 Discrete Mathematics Lecture 3 Logic: Rules of Inference 1 Outline Mathematical Argument Rules of Inference 2 Argument In mathematics, an argument is a sequence of propositions (called premises)

More information

Answers to the Exercises -- Chapter 1

Answers to the Exercises -- Chapter 1 Answers to the Exercises -- Chapter 1 SECTION 1 1. a Sentence, official notation ~~~P ~~P ~P P Sentence, informal notation ~Q ~R /\ ~Q ~R Q R c d e Not a sentence; it is impossile to construct "~ " Not

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

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

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

Rules of Inference. Arguments and Validity

Rules of Inference. Arguments and Validity Arguments and Validity A formal argument in propositional logic is a sequence of propositions, starting with a premise or set of premises, and ending in a conclusion. We say that an argument is valid if

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

In this chapter, we specify a deductive apparatus for PL.

In this chapter, we specify a deductive apparatus for PL. Handout 5 PL Derivations In this chapter, we specify a deductive apparatus for PL Definition deductive apparatus A deductive apparatus for PL is a set of rules of inference (or derivation rules) that determine

More information

DERIVATIONS AND TRUTH TABLES

DERIVATIONS AND TRUTH TABLES DERIVATIONS AND TRUTH TABLES Tomoya Sato Department of Philosophy University of California, San Diego Phil120: Symbolic Logic Summer 2014 TOMOYA SATO LECTURE 3: DERIVATIONS AND TRUTH TABLES 1 / 65 WHAT

More information

Supplementary Logic Notes CSE 321 Winter 2009

Supplementary Logic Notes CSE 321 Winter 2009 1 Propositional Logic Supplementary Logic Notes CSE 321 Winter 2009 1.1 More efficient truth table methods The method of using truth tables to prove facts about propositional formulas can be a very tedious

More information

A Quick Lesson on Negation

A Quick Lesson on Negation A Quick Lesson on Negation Several of the argument forms we have looked at (modus tollens and disjunctive syllogism, for valid forms; denying the antecedent for invalid) involve a type of statement which

More information

Rules Build Arguments Rules Building Arguments

Rules Build Arguments Rules Building Arguments Section 1.6 1 Section Summary Valid Arguments Inference Rules for Propositional Logic Using Rules of Inference to Build Arguments Rules of Inference for Quantified Statements Building Arguments for Quantified

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

PROPOSITIONAL CALCULUS

PROPOSITIONAL CALCULUS PROPOSITIONAL CALCULUS A proposition is a complete declarative sentence that is either TRUE (truth value T or 1) or FALSE (truth value F or 0), but not both. These are not propositions! Connectives and

More information

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 - 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

Logic, Sets, and Proofs

Logic, Sets, and Proofs Logic, Sets, and Proofs David A. Cox and Catherine C. McGeoch Amherst College 1 Logic Logical Operators. A logical statement is a mathematical statement that can be assigned a value either true or false.

More information

ICS141: Discrete Mathematics for Computer Science I

ICS141: Discrete Mathematics for Computer Science I ICS141: Discrete Mathematics for Computer Science I Dept. Information & Computer Sci., Originals slides by Dr. Baek and Dr. Still, adapted by J. Stelovsky Based on slides Dr. M. P. Frank and Dr. J.L. Gross

More information

Proofs. Example of an axiom in this system: Given two distinct points, there is exactly one line that contains them.

Proofs. Example of an axiom in this system: Given two distinct points, there is exactly one line that contains them. Proofs A mathematical system consists of axioms, definitions and undefined terms. An axiom is assumed true. Definitions are used to create new concepts in terms of existing ones. Undefined terms are only

More information

Discrete Structures of Computer Science Propositional Logic III Rules of Inference

Discrete Structures of Computer Science Propositional Logic III Rules of Inference Discrete Structures of Computer Science Propositional Logic III Rules of Inference Gazihan Alankuş (Based on original slides by Brahim Hnich) July 30, 2012 1 Previous Lecture 2 Summary of Laws of Logic

More information

Intermediate Logic. Natural Deduction for TFL

Intermediate Logic. Natural Deduction for TFL Intermediate Logic Lecture Two Natural Deduction for TFL Rob Trueman rob.trueman@york.ac.uk University of York The Trouble with Truth Tables Natural Deduction for TFL The Trouble with Truth Tables The

More information

Proof strategies, or, a manual of logical style

Proof strategies, or, a manual of logical style Proof strategies, or, a manual of logical style Dr Holmes September 27, 2017 This is yet another version of the manual of logical style I have been working on for many years This semester, instead of posting

More information

Proofs. Introduction II. Notes. Notes. Notes. Slides by Christopher M. Bourke Instructor: Berthe Y. Choueiry. Fall 2007

Proofs. Introduction II. Notes. Notes. Notes. Slides by Christopher M. Bourke Instructor: Berthe Y. Choueiry. Fall 2007 Proofs Slides by Christopher M. Bourke Instructor: Berthe Y. Choueiry Fall 2007 Computer Science & Engineering 235 Introduction to Discrete Mathematics Sections 1.5, 1.6, and 1.7 of Rosen cse235@cse.unl.edu

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

Math 3336: Discrete Mathematics Practice Problems for Exam I

Math 3336: Discrete Mathematics Practice Problems for Exam I Math 3336: Discrete Mathematics Practice Problems for Exam I The upcoming exam on Tuesday, February 26, will cover the material in Chapter 1 and Chapter 2*. You will be provided with a sheet containing

More information

Warm-Up Problem. Write a Resolution Proof for. Res 1/32

Warm-Up Problem. Write a Resolution Proof for. Res 1/32 Warm-Up Problem Write a Resolution Proof for Res 1/32 A second Rule Sometimes throughout we need to also make simplifications: You can do this in line without explicitly mentioning it (just pretend you

More information

Propositional Logic. Chrysippos (3 rd Head of Stoic Academy). Main early logician. AKA Modern Logic AKA Symbolic Logic. AKA Boolean Logic.

Propositional Logic. Chrysippos (3 rd Head of Stoic Academy). Main early logician. AKA Modern Logic AKA Symbolic Logic. AKA Boolean Logic. Propositional Logic. Modern Logic. Boolean Logic. AKA Modern Logic AKA Symbolic Logic. AKA Boolean Logic. Chrysippos (3 rd Head of Stoic Academy). Main early logician Stoic Philosophers Zeno ff301bc. Taught

More information

Manual of Logical Style (fresh version 2018)

Manual of Logical Style (fresh version 2018) Manual of Logical Style (fresh version 2018) Randall Holmes 9/5/2018 1 Introduction This is a fresh version of a document I have been working on with my classes at various levels for years. The idea that

More information

Outline. Rules of Inferences Discrete Mathematics I MATH/COSC 1056E. Example: Existence of Superman. Outline

Outline. Rules of Inferences Discrete Mathematics I MATH/COSC 1056E. Example: Existence of Superman. Outline Outline s Discrete Mathematics I MATH/COSC 1056E Julien Dompierre Department of Mathematics and Computer Science Laurentian University Sudbury, August 6, 2008 Using to Build Arguments and Quantifiers Outline

More information

THE LOGIC OF COMPOUND STATEMENTS

THE LOGIC OF COMPOUND STATEMENTS THE LOGIC OF COMPOUND STATEMENTS All dogs have four legs. All tables have four legs. Therefore, all dogs are tables LOGIC Logic is a science of the necessary laws of thought, without which no employment

More information

COMP Intro to Logic for Computer Scientists. Lecture 6

COMP Intro to Logic for Computer Scientists. Lecture 6 COMP 1002 Intro to Logic for Computer Scientists Lecture 6 B 5 2 J Treasure hunt In the back of an old cupboard you discover a note signed by a pirate famous for his bizarre sense of humour and love of

More information

2. The Logic of Compound Statements Summary. Aaron Tan August 2017

2. The Logic of Compound Statements Summary. Aaron Tan August 2017 2. The Logic of Compound Statements Summary Aaron Tan 21 25 August 2017 1 2. The Logic of Compound Statements 2.1 Logical Form and Logical Equivalence Statements; Compound Statements; Statement Form (Propositional

More information

Section 1.2: Propositional Logic

Section 1.2: Propositional Logic Section 1.2: Propositional Logic January 17, 2017 Abstract Now we re going to use the tools of formal logic to reach logical conclusions ( prove theorems ) based on wffs formed by some given statements.

More information

Sec$on Summary. Valid Arguments Inference Rules for Propositional Logic. Inference Rules for Quantified Statements. Building Arguments

Sec$on Summary. Valid Arguments Inference Rules for Propositional Logic. Inference Rules for Quantified Statements. Building Arguments Section 1.6 Sec$on Summary Valid Arguments Inference Rules for Propositional Logic Building Arguments Inference Rules for Quantified Statements Building Arguments 2 Revisi$ng the Socrates Example We have

More information

Chapter 1, Logic and Proofs (3) 1.6. Rules of Inference

Chapter 1, Logic and Proofs (3) 1.6. Rules of Inference CSI 2350, Discrete Structures Chapter 1, Logic and Proofs (3) Young-Rae Cho Associate Professor Department of Computer Science Baylor University 1.6. Rules of Inference Basic Terminology Axiom: a statement

More information

Valid Reasoning. Alice E. Fischer. CSCI 1166 Discrete Mathematics for Computing February, Outline Truth and Validity Valid Reasoning

Valid Reasoning. Alice E. Fischer. CSCI 1166 Discrete Mathematics for Computing February, Outline Truth and Validity Valid Reasoning Alice E. Fischer CSCI 1166 Discrete Mathematics for Computing February, 2018 Alice E. Fischer Reasoning... 1/23 1 Truth is not the same as Validity 2 Alice E. Fischer Reasoning... 2/23 Truth is not the

More information

Discrete Structures for Computer Science

Discrete Structures for Computer Science Discrete Structures for Computer Science William Garrison bill@cs.pitt.edu 6311 Sennott Square Lecture #6: Rules of Inference Based on materials developed by Dr. Adam Lee Today s topics n Rules of inference

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

PHI Propositional Logic Lecture 2. Truth Tables

PHI Propositional Logic Lecture 2. Truth Tables PHI 103 - Propositional Logic Lecture 2 ruth ables ruth ables Part 1 - ruth unctions for Logical Operators ruth unction - the truth-value of any compound proposition determined solely by the truth-value

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

INTRODUCTION. Tomoya Sato. Department of Philosophy University of California, San Diego. Phil120: Symbolic Logic Summer 2014

INTRODUCTION. Tomoya Sato. Department of Philosophy University of California, San Diego. Phil120: Symbolic Logic Summer 2014 INTRODUCTION Tomoya Sato Department of Philosophy University of California, San Diego Phil120: Symbolic Logic Summer 2014 TOMOYA SATO LECTURE 1: INTRODUCTION 1 / 51 WHAT IS LOGIC? LOGIC Logic is the study

More information

DEDUCTIVE REASONING Propositional Logic

DEDUCTIVE REASONING Propositional Logic 7 DEDUCTIVE REASONING Propositional Logic Chapter Objectives Connectives and Truth Values You will be able to understand the purpose and uses of propositional logic. understand the meaning, symbols, and

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

Adam Blank Spring 2017 CSE 311. Foundations of Computing I

Adam Blank Spring 2017 CSE 311. Foundations of Computing I Adam Blank Spring 2017 CSE 311 Foundations of Computing I Pre-Lecture Problem Suppose that p, and p (q r) are true. Is q true? Can you prove it with equivalences? CSE 311: Foundations of Computing Lecture

More information

CSCI.6962/4962 Software Verification Fundamental Proof Methods in Computer Science (Arkoudas and Musser) Chapter p. 1/33

CSCI.6962/4962 Software Verification Fundamental Proof Methods in Computer Science (Arkoudas and Musser) Chapter p. 1/33 CSCI.6962/4962 Software Verification Fundamental Proof Methods in Computer Science (Arkoudas and Musser) Chapter 4.1-4.8 p. 1/33 CSCI.6962/4962 Software Verification Fundamental Proof Methods in Computer

More information

REVIEW. Logical Equivalences Table 6 from book. Logical Equivalences and Proofs With them. Some more proofs (and useful equivalences)

REVIEW. Logical Equivalences Table 6 from book. Logical Equivalences and Proofs With them. Some more proofs (and useful equivalences) REVIEW Logical Equivalences Table 6 from book T F Identity ( B) C (B C) ( B) C (B C) ssociative T T F F Dominati (B C) ( B) ( C) (B C) ( B) ( C) Distributive Idempot ent ( B) B ( B) B De Morgan s ( ) Double

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

Inference and Proofs (1.6 & 1.7)

Inference and Proofs (1.6 & 1.7) EECS 203 Spring 2016 Lecture 4 Page 1 of 9 Introductory problem: Inference and Proofs (1.6 & 1.7) As is commonly the case in mathematics, it is often best to start with some definitions. An argument for

More information

Reexam in Discrete Mathematics

Reexam in Discrete Mathematics Reexam in Discrete Mathematics First Year at the Faculty of Engineering and Science and the Technical Faculty of IT and Design August 15th, 2017, 9.00-13.00 This exam consists of 11 numbered pages with

More information

3/29/2017. Logic. Propositions and logical operations. Main concepts: propositions truth values propositional variables logical operations

3/29/2017. Logic. Propositions and logical operations. Main concepts: propositions truth values propositional variables logical operations Logic Propositions and logical operations Main concepts: propositions truth values propositional variables logical operations 1 Propositions and logical operations A proposition is the most basic element

More information

Methods of Proof. 1.6 Rules of Inference. Argument and inference 12/8/2015. CSE2023 Discrete Computational Structures

Methods of Proof. 1.6 Rules of Inference. Argument and inference 12/8/2015. CSE2023 Discrete Computational Structures Methods of Proof CSE0 Discrete Computational Structures Lecture 4 When is a mathematical argument correct? What methods can be used to construct mathematical arguments? Important in many computer science

More information

Proof Tactics, Strategies and Derived Rules. CS 270 Math Foundations of CS Jeremy Johnson

Proof Tactics, Strategies and Derived Rules. CS 270 Math Foundations of CS Jeremy Johnson Proof Tactics, Strategies and Derived Rules CS 270 Math Foundations of CS Jeremy Johnson Outline 1. Review Rules 2. Positive subformulas and extraction 3. Proof tactics Extraction, Conversion, Inversion,

More information

Resolution (7A) Young Won Lim 4/21/18

Resolution (7A) Young Won Lim 4/21/18 (7A) Coyright (c) 215 218 Young W. Lim. Permission is granted to coy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version ublished

More information

Resolution (14A) Young W. Lim 8/15/14

Resolution (14A) Young W. Lim 8/15/14 Resolution (14A) Young W. Lim Copyright (c) 2013-2014 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

15414/614 Optional Lecture 1: Propositional Logic

15414/614 Optional Lecture 1: Propositional Logic 15414/614 Optional Lecture 1: Propositional Logic Qinsi Wang Logic is the study of information encoded in the form of logical sentences. We use the language of Logic to state observations, to define concepts,

More information

Review The Conditional Logical symbols Argument forms. Logic 5: Material Implication and Argument Forms Jan. 28, 2014

Review The Conditional Logical symbols Argument forms. Logic 5: Material Implication and Argument Forms Jan. 28, 2014 Logic 5: Material Implication and Argument Forms Jan. 28, 2014 Overview I Review The Conditional Conditional statements Material implication Logical symbols Argument forms Disjunctive syllogism Disjunctive

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

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

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

(p == train arrives late) (q == there are taxis) (r == If p and not q, then r. Not r. p. Therefore, q. Propositional Logic

(p == train arrives late) (q == there are taxis) (r == If p and not q, then r. Not r. p. Therefore, q. Propositional Logic Propositional Logic The aim of logic in computer science is to develop languages to model the situations we encounter as computer science professionals Want to do that in such a way that we can reason

More information

1.1 Statements and Compound Statements

1.1 Statements and Compound Statements Chapter 1 Propositional Logic 1.1 Statements and Compound Statements A statement or proposition is an assertion which is either true or false, though you may not know which. That is, a statement is something

More information

Fuzzy Expert Systems Lecture 6 (Fuzzy Logic )

Fuzzy Expert Systems Lecture 6 (Fuzzy Logic ) Fuzzy Expert Systems Lecture 6 (Fuzzy Logic ) Unlike Classical Logic, Fuzzy Logic is concerned, in the main, with modes of reasoning which are approximate rather than exact L. A. Zadeh Lecture 6 صفحه Summary

More information

Derivations, part 2. Let s dive in to some derivations that require the use of the last four rules:

Derivations, part 2. Let s dive in to some derivations that require the use of the last four rules: Derivations, part 2 Let s dive in to some derivations that require the use of the last four rules: 1. I Derivations: Let s start with some derivations that use conditional-introduction. (a) Here s an easy

More information

Sample Problems for all sections of CMSC250, Midterm 1 Fall 2014

Sample Problems for all sections of CMSC250, Midterm 1 Fall 2014 Sample Problems for all sections of CMSC250, Midterm 1 Fall 2014 1. Translate each of the following English sentences into formal statements using the logical operators (,,,,, and ). You may also use mathematical

More information

KS MATEMATIKA DISKRIT (DISCRETE MATHEMATICS ) RULES OF INFERENCE. Discrete Math Team

KS MATEMATIKA DISKRIT (DISCRETE MATHEMATICS ) RULES OF INFERENCE. Discrete Math Team KS091201 MATEMATIKA DISKRIT (DISCRETE MATHEMATICS ) RULES OF INFERENCE Discrete Math Team 2 -- KS091201 MD W-04 Outline Valid Arguments Modus Ponens Modus Tollens Addition and Simplification More Rules

More information

4 Derivations in the Propositional Calculus

4 Derivations in the Propositional Calculus 4 Derivations in the Propositional Calculus 1. Arguments Expressed in the Propositional Calculus We have seen that we can symbolize a wide variety of statement forms using formulas of the propositional

More information

Review. Propositions, propositional operators, truth tables. Logical Equivalences. Tautologies & contradictions

Review. Propositions, propositional operators, truth tables. Logical Equivalences. Tautologies & contradictions Review Propositions, propositional operators, truth tables Logical Equivalences. Tautologies & contradictions Some common logical equivalences Predicates & quantifiers Some logical equivalences involving

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

MACM 101 Discrete Mathematics I. Exercises on Propositional Logic. Due: Tuesday, September 29th (at the beginning of the class)

MACM 101 Discrete Mathematics I. Exercises on Propositional Logic. Due: Tuesday, September 29th (at the beginning of the class) MACM 101 Discrete Mathematics I Exercises on Propositional Logic. Due: Tuesday, September 29th (at the beginning of the class) SOLUTIONS 1. Construct a truth table for the following compound proposition:

More information

Predicate Logic & Quantification

Predicate Logic & Quantification Predicate Logic & Quantification Things you should do Homework 1 due today at 3pm Via gradescope. Directions posted on the website. Group homework 1 posted, due Tuesday. Groups of 1-3. We suggest 3. In

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

Manual of Logical Style

Manual of Logical Style Manual of Logical Style Dr. Holmes January 9, 2015 Contents 1 Introduction 2 2 Conjunction 3 2.1 Proving a conjunction...................... 3 2.2 Using a conjunction........................ 3 3 Implication

More information

CSE 20 DISCRETE MATH. Winter

CSE 20 DISCRETE MATH. Winter CSE 20 DISCRETE MATH Winter 2017 http://cseweb.ucsd.edu/classes/wi17/cse20-ab/ Today's learning goals Distinguish between a theorem, an axiom, lemma, a corollary, and a conjecture. Recognize direct proofs

More information

Last Time. Inference Rules

Last Time. Inference Rules Last Time When program S executes it switches to a different state We need to express assertions on the states of the program S before and after its execution We can do it using a Hoare triple written

More information

Propositional Logic. Argument Forms. Ioan Despi. University of New England. July 19, 2013

Propositional Logic. Argument Forms. Ioan Despi. University of New England. July 19, 2013 Propositional Logic Argument Forms Ioan Despi despi@turing.une.edu.au University of New England July 19, 2013 Outline Ioan Despi Discrete Mathematics 2 of 1 Order of Precedence Ioan Despi Discrete Mathematics

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

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

Analyzing Extended Arguments

Analyzing Extended Arguments Logic Analyzing Extended Arguments Four Basic Patterns Horizontal Vertical Conjoint Premises Multiple Conclusions Extended Argument: horizontal (1) The selling of human organs should be outlawed. (2) If

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 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

n logical not (negation) n logical or (disjunction) n logical and (conjunction) n logical exclusive or n logical implication (conditional)

n logical not (negation) n logical or (disjunction) n logical and (conjunction) n logical exclusive or n logical implication (conditional) Discrete Math Review Discrete Math Review (Rosen, Chapter 1.1 1.6) TOPICS Propositional Logic Logical Operators Truth Tables Implication Logical Equivalence Inference Rules What you should know about propositional

More information

cis32-ai lecture # 18 mon-3-apr-2006

cis32-ai lecture # 18 mon-3-apr-2006 cis32-ai lecture # 18 mon-3-apr-2006 today s topics: propositional logic cis32-spring2006-sklar-lec18 1 Introduction Weak (search-based) problem-solving does not scale to real problems. To succeed, problem

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

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

CITS2211 Discrete Structures Proofs

CITS2211 Discrete Structures Proofs CITS2211 Discrete Structures Proofs Unit coordinator: Rachel Cardell-Oliver August 13, 2017 Highlights 1 Arguments vs Proofs. 2 Proof strategies 3 Famous proofs Reading Chapter 1: What is a proof? Mathematics

More information

Section 1.1 Propositions

Section 1.1 Propositions Set Theory & Logic Section 1.1 Propositions Fall, 2009 Section 1.1 Propositions In Chapter 1, our main goals are to prove sentences about numbers, equations or functions and to write the proofs. Definition.

More information

CMPSCI 250: Introduction to Computation. Lecture 11: Proof Techniques David Mix Barrington 5 March 2013

CMPSCI 250: Introduction to Computation. Lecture 11: Proof Techniques David Mix Barrington 5 March 2013 CMPSCI 250: Introduction to Computation Lecture 11: Proof Techniques David Mix Barrington 5 March 2013 Proof Techniques Review: The General Setting for Proofs Types of Proof: Direct, Contraposition, Contradiction

More information

CSCE 222 Discrete Structures for Computing. Review for Exam 1. Dr. Hyunyoung Lee !!!

CSCE 222 Discrete Structures for Computing. Review for Exam 1. Dr. Hyunyoung Lee !!! CSCE 222 Discrete Structures for Computing Review for Exam 1 Dr. Hyunyoung Lee 1 Topics Propositional Logic (Sections 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3) Predicate Logic (Sections 1.4 and 1.5) Rules of Inferences and Proofs

More information

The Foundations: Logic and Proofs. Chapter 1, Part III: Proofs

The Foundations: Logic and Proofs. Chapter 1, Part III: Proofs The Foundations: Logic and Proofs Chapter 1, Part III: Proofs Summary Valid Arguments and Rules of Inference Proof Methods Proof Strategies Rules of Inference Section 1.6 Section Summary Valid Arguments

More information

10/13/15. Proofs: what and why. Proposi<onal Logic Proofs. 1 st Proof Method: Truth Table. A sequence of logical arguments such that:

10/13/15. Proofs: what and why. Proposi<onal Logic Proofs. 1 st Proof Method: Truth Table. A sequence of logical arguments such that: Proofs: what and why Rules of Inference (Rosen, Section 1.6) TOPICS Logic Proofs ² via Truth Tables ² via Algebraic Simplification ² via Inference Rules A sequence of logical arguments such that: each

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

Propositional Logic: Syntax

Propositional Logic: Syntax 4 Propositional Logic: Syntax Reading: Metalogic Part II, 22-26 Contents 4.1 The System PS: Syntax....................... 49 4.1.1 Axioms and Rules of Inference................ 49 4.1.2 Definitions.................................

More information

Mathematical Logic Prof. Arindama Singh Department of Mathematics Indian Institute of Technology, Madras. Lecture - 15 Propositional Calculus (PC)

Mathematical Logic Prof. Arindama Singh Department of Mathematics Indian Institute of Technology, Madras. Lecture - 15 Propositional Calculus (PC) Mathematical Logic Prof. Arindama Singh Department of Mathematics Indian Institute of Technology, Madras Lecture - 15 Propositional Calculus (PC) So, now if you look back, you can see that there are three

More information

Lecture 2. Logic Compound Statements Conditional Statements Valid & Invalid Arguments Digital Logic Circuits. Reading (Epp s textbook)

Lecture 2. Logic Compound Statements Conditional Statements Valid & Invalid Arguments Digital Logic Circuits. Reading (Epp s textbook) Lecture 2 Logic Compound Statements Conditional Statements Valid & Invalid Arguments Digital Logic Circuits Reading (Epp s textbook) 2.1-2.4 1 Logic Logic is a system based on statements. A statement (or

More information