Proofs with Predicate Calculus ITCS 2175 Revision: 1.0. Author: Zachary Wartell Copyright Zachary Wartell, UNCC, 2010 Contributors:?
|
|
- Henry Martin
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Proofs with Predicate Calculus ITCS 2175 Revision: 1.0 Author: Zachary Wartell Copyright Zachary Wartell, UNCC, 2010 Contributors:? This document supplements the course packets and the textbook. 1. Definitions: AF,AT,ALOF,ALOT Definitions: AF,AT,ALOF,ALOT Syntax Definition Contrapositive all false AF P(x) x P(x) x P(x) all true AT P(x) x P(x) x P(x) at least one false ALOF P(x) x P(x) x P(x) at least one true ALOT P(x) x P(x) x P(x) 2. Conclusions from Quantified Statements Question 1: If we know that P(x) is true for at least one x, denoted ALOT P(x), what can we say about the statement x P(x)? By definition we can conclude x P(x) T. What about x P(x)? From the contrapositive we can conclude x P(x) T. However, if we know that ALOT P(x), what can we say about the statement x P(x)? Here we cannot make any conclusion as to whether x P(x) is true or false. This is because the statement ALOT P(x) allows for x P(x) x P(x) which violates x P(x). (I.e. consider where P(x) = T for exactly one x.) More formally we only know that ALOT P(x) x P(x) ( x P(x) x P(x)), but it is not true that ALOT P(x) x P(x) nor that ALOT P(x) x P(x) x P(x). Frequently in predicate calculus proofs we will derive statements such as ALOT P(x) or AT P(x) and then have to try and make a conclusion regarding statements such as x P(x). In some cases the derived statement, ALOT/AT, etc., will allow us to make a firm conclusion regarding the quantified statement. (As in the above where ALOT P(x) x P(x)). But in other cases the derived statement will not allow us to make a firm
2 conclusion regarding the quantified statement. (As in the above where ALOT P(x) allowed no conclusion regarding x P(x)). Example 1: Consider the domain of real numbers and the predicate P(x): x > 5. We know that for x = 6, P(x) is true, so we have shown ALOT P(x). Having found ALOT P(x) we can assert x P(x). But having found ALOT P(x), we cannot assert x P(x). That is regarding the quantified statement, x P(x), we can draw no conclusion from our proof of ALOT P(x). We say that ALOT P(x) is insufficient for x P(x) or ALOT P(x) is inconclusive with respect to x P(x) If we did want to draw a conclusion regarding x P(x), we should show ALOF P(x). We can get ALOF P(x) by showing x = 4, P(x) is false. Then we can conclude x P(x) is false. To reiterate, in this example proving ALOT P(x) gave us no conclusion for the truth value of x P(x). But proving ALOF P(x) allow us to conclude that x P(x) F. The complete rules for drawing conclusions about quantified statements are summarized below. Note the cases which are inconclusive. Table: Conclusions from Quantified Statements AF P(x) x P(x) = F x P(x) = T // definition x P(x) = F // contrapositive x P(x) = T AT P(x) x P(x) = T // definition x P(x) = F x P(x) = T x P(x) = F // contrapositive ALOT P(x) x P(x) inconclusive //ALOT may have exactly one true x P(x) = F //contrapositive x P(x) = T //definition x P(x) inconclusive //ALOT maybe AT ALOF P(x) x P(x) = F x P(x) inconclusive x P(x) inconclusive x P(x) = T //contrapositive //ALOF P(x) may have exactly one false //ALOF P(x) may have AF P(x) //definition
3 3. Predicate Calculus Implication Rules for Question 2: Consider x,y in a single domain with predicates P(x) and Q(y). Let us form the conjunction P(x) Q(y). How can we quantify, P(x) Q(y), assuming that we add a quantifier {AF,AT,ALOF,ALOT} in front of each P(x) and Q(y)? For example, if we are given A.F. for P(x) and A.T. for Q(y), how can we quantify P(x) Q(y)? That is which one of the following are valid conclusions regarding P(x) Q(y) given AF P(x) and AT Q(x)? AF (P(x) Q(y)) AT (P(x) Q(y)) ALOF (P(x) Q(y)) ALOT (P(x) Q(y)) None of the above In the case of AF P(x) AT Q(y), we can conclude AF (P(x) Q(y)). Why? Because P(x) is always F and ing it with Q(y)--which is always true--still always gives us F (recall: F q F). Hence, we conclude that: AF P(x) AT Q(y) AF (P(x) Q(y)) Further, because is symmetric, (p q q p), we also conclude AT P(x) AF Q(y) AF (P(x) Q(y)) If we carefully consider all possible combinations of quantifiers for a P(x) and Q(y), we can derive the following table. In this table, as a short-hand notation, we only list the quantifiers at not the predicates; that is the short-hand: AT AF AF means: AT P(x) AF Q(y) AF (P(x) Q(y)) Table: Predicate Calculus Implication Rules for 1. AF q where q {AF,AT,ALOF,ALOT} AF //7 cases 2. AT ALOT ALOT //2 cases 3. AT AT AT //1 case 4. ALOF q where q {AT,ALOF,ALOT} ALOF //5 cases 5. ALOT ALOT inconclusive //1 case
4 Due to symmetry of, all the above rules are true if we swap the left and right operand of the. There are 16 combinations we can make of pairing AF/AT/etc. Checking the above and accounting for symmetry, we see these rules cover all possible cases Proofs of Predicate Calculus Implication Rules for Proof of Rule 1: The AF says for all x, P(x) is false. Earlier we showed that AF AT AF because the F always dominates (recall: F q F) in all possible combinations of P(x) and Q(y). Similarly if we keep AF P(x) but choose for Q(y) either ALOF or ALOT, then we still get AF for the complete conjunction due to domination of F. Proof of Rule 2: AT ALOT guarantees P(x) is true for all x and Q(y) is true for at least one y. This means there is at least one combination of x y where P(x) Q(y) is true. So we conclude: AT ALOT ALOT Proof of Rule 3: AT AT says P(x) is always true and Q(x) is always true therefore the conjunction is always true, i.e. AT AT AT Proof of Rule 4(a): AT ALOF guarantees P(x) is true for all x and Q(y) is false for at least one y. Which of AT,AF, ALOF and ALOT are guaranteed by this proposition? We exhaustively examine all options: ALOF: ALOF is guaranteed because AT ALOF guarantees at least one pair, P(x)=T and Q(y)=F, and T F is F. AT: AT is contradicted because we have ALOF above. AF: AF is not guaranteed because AT ALOF allows for a pair P(x)=T and Q(y)=T and T T is T. ALOT: ALOT is not guaranteed because AT ALOF allows for a pair P(x)=T and for Q(y)=F for all y and T F is F. Therefore we conclude: AT ALOF ALOF Proof of Rule 4(b): ALOT ALOF says P(x) is true for at least one x and Q(y) is false for at least one y. Which of AT,AF, ALOF and ALOT are guaranteed by this proposition? We exhaustively examine all options: ALOF: ALOF is guaranteed because ALOT ALOF guarantees that Q(y)=F for at least one y. P(x) F is F for all x. AT: AT is contradicted because we have ALOF above.
5 AF: AF is not guaranteed because ALOT ALOF allows for a pair P(x)=T and Q(y)=T and T T is T. ALOT: ALOT is not guaranteed because ALOT ALOF allows that Q(y)=F for all y and P(x) F is F for any x. So we conclude: ALOT ALOF ALOF Proof of Rule 4(c): ALOF ALOF says P(x) is false at least once and Q(y) is false at least once. ALOF: ALOF is guaranteed because ALOF ALOF guarantees that Q(y)=F for at least one y. P(x) F is F regardless of the true value of P(x). AT: AT is contradicted because we have ALOF above. AF: AF is not guaranteed because ALOF ALOF allows for some P(x) to be T and some Q(y) to be T. T T is T which violates AF. ALOT: ALOT is not contradicted but is not guaranteed because ALOF ALOF allows for P(x) to be always F and Q(y) to be always F which yields a conjunction which always false, violating ALOT. So we conclude: ALOF ALOF ALOF Proof of Rule 5: ALOT ALOT says P(x) is true at least once and Q(y) is true at least once. AT: AT is not guaranteed because ALOT ALOT allows for a P(x) to F for some x this makes the conjunction false regardless of the truth value of Q(y). This violates AT. AF: AF is not guaranteed because ALOT ALOT allows P(x) to be T for all x and Q(y) to be T for all y which would cause the conjunction to be AT, which violates AF. ALOT: ALOT is not guaranteed because ALOT ALOT allows the case where P(x) is T when Q(y) is F and P(x) is F when Q(y) is T. Both cases yield a false conjunction; hence ALOT ALOT allows a conjunction which is AF. ALOF: ALOF is not guaranteed because ALOT ALOT allows P(x) to T for all x and Q(y)=T for all y which could create a conjunction of AT, violating ALOF. Hence ALOT ALOT does not individually guarantee any of AT,AF,ALOT or ALOF. We denote this by writing: ALOT ALOT is inconclusive or just: ALOT ALOT?
6 [Strictly speaking the above is not a well-formed logic statement. More formally, the above should be: ALOT ALOT err.. I don t know]. 4. Predicate Calculus Implication Rules for Table: Predicate Calculus Implication Rules for 1. AT q where q {AF,AT,ALOF,ALOT} AT //7 cases 2. AF ALOF ALOF //2 cases 3. AF AF AF //1 case 4. ALOT q where q {AF,ALOF,ALOT} ALOT //5 cases 5. ALOF ALOF inconclusive //1 case Due to symmetry of, all the above rules are true if we swap the left and right operand of the. There are 16 combinations we can make of pairing AF/AT/etc. Checking the above and accounting for symmetry, we see these rules cover all possible cases Proof: Predicate Calculus Implication Rules for We could follow a similar pattern of proofs for as we did for. However, from the duality principle (see textbook), we can directly derive the table from the earlier table by swapping for and swapping all T and F s.
7 Definitions: AF,AT,ALOF,ALOT Definitions: AF,AT,ALOF,ALOT Predicate Calculus Axioms (Cheatsheet) Syntax Definition Contrapositive all false AF P(x) x P(x) x P(x) all true AT P(x) x P(x) x P(x) at least one false ALOF P(x) x P(x) x P(x) at least one true ALOT P(x) x P(x) x P(x) Conclusions from Quantified Statements AF P(x) x P(x) = F x P(x) = T // definition x P(x) = F x P(x) = T AT P(x) x P(x) = T // definition x P(x) = F x P(x) = T x P(x) = F ALOT P(x) x P(x) inconclusive //ALOT allows for exactly one true x P(x) = F //opposite x P(x) = T //definition x P(x) inconclusive //ALOT allows for AT ALOF P(x) x P(x) = F x P(x) inconclusive x P(x) inconclusive x P(x) = T //opposite //ALOF P(x) allows for exactly one false //ALOF P(x) allows for AF P(x) //definition Implication Rules for 1. AF q where q {AF,AT,ALOF,ALOT} AF 2. AT ALOT ALOT 3. AT AT AT 4. ALOF q where q {AT,ALOF,ALOT} ALOF 5. ALOT ALOT inconclusive Due to symmetry of, all the above rules are true if we swap the left and right operand of the.
8 Table: Predicate Calculus Implication Rules for 1. AT q where q {AF,AT,ALOF,ALOT} AT //7 cases 2. AF ALOF ALOF //2 cases 3. AF AF AF //1 case 4. ALOT q where q {AF,ALOF,ALOT} ALOT //5 cases 5. ALOF ALOF inconclusive //1 case Due to symmetry of, all the above rules are true if we swap the left and right operand of the.
1. Propositions: Contrapositives and Converses
Preliminaries 1 1. Propositions: Contrapositives and Converses Given two propositions P and Q, the statement If P, then Q is interpreted as the statement that if the proposition P is true, then the statement
More informationLearning Goals of CS245 Logic and Computation
Learning Goals of CS245 Logic and Computation Alice Gao April 27, 2018 Contents 1 Propositional Logic 2 2 Predicate Logic 4 3 Program Verification 6 4 Undecidability 7 1 1 Propositional Logic Introduction
More informationDiscrete Mathematics & Mathematical Reasoning Predicates, Quantifiers and Proof Techniques
Discrete Mathematics & Mathematical Reasoning Predicates, Quantifiers and Proof Techniques Colin Stirling Informatics Some slides based on ones by Myrto Arapinis Colin Stirling (Informatics) Discrete Mathematics
More information2 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 informationCOMP 182 Algorithmic Thinking. Proofs. Luay Nakhleh Computer Science Rice University
COMP 182 Algorithmic Thinking Proofs Luay Nakhleh Computer Science Rice University 1 Reading Material Chapter 1, Section 3, 6, 7, 8 Propositional Equivalences The compound propositions p and q are called
More informationPacket #2: Set Theory & Predicate Calculus. Applied Discrete Mathematics
CSC 224/226 Notes Packet #2: Set Theory & Predicate Calculus Barnes Packet #2: Set Theory & Predicate Calculus Applied Discrete Mathematics Table of Contents Full Adder Information Page 1 Predicate Calculus
More informationProofs. Joe Patten August 10, 2018
Proofs Joe Patten August 10, 2018 1 Statements and Open Sentences 1.1 Statements A statement is a declarative sentence or assertion that is either true or false. They are often labelled with a capital
More informationTHE LOGIC OF QUANTIFIED STATEMENTS
CHAPTER 3 THE LOGIC OF QUANTIFIED STATEMENTS Copyright Cengage Learning. All rights reserved. SECTION 3.2 Predicates and Quantified Statements II Copyright Cengage Learning. All rights reserved. Negations
More informationProof. 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 informationMath 10850, fall 2017, University of Notre Dame
Math 10850, fall 2017, University of Notre Dame Notes on first exam September 22, 2017 The key facts The first midterm will be on Thursday, September 28, 6.15pm-7.45pm in Hayes-Healy 127. What you need
More informationDirect Proof and Proof by Contrapositive
Dr. Nahid Sultana October 14, 2012 Consider an implication: p q. Then p q p q T T T T F F F T T F F T Consider an implication: p q. Then p q p q T T T T F F F T T F F T Consider x D, p(x) q(x). It can
More informationa. See the textbook for examples of proving logical equivalence using truth tables. b. There is a real number x for which f (x) < 0. (x 1) 2 > 0.
For some problems, several sample proofs are given here. Problem 1. a. See the textbook for examples of proving logical equivalence using truth tables. b. There is a real number x for which f (x) < 0.
More informationConjunction: p q is true if both p, q are true, and false if at least one of p, q is false. The truth table for conjunction is as follows.
Chapter 1 Logic 1.1 Introduction and Definitions Definitions. A sentence (statement, proposition) is an utterance (that is, a string of characters) which is either true (T) or false (F). A predicate is
More informationSection 1.2 Propositional Equivalences. A tautology is a proposition which is always true. A contradiction is a proposition which is always false.
Section 1.2 Propositional Equivalences A tautology is a proposition which is always true. Classic Example: P P A contradiction is a proposition which is always false. Classic Example: P P A contingency
More informationMath 300 Introduction to Mathematical Reasoning Autumn 2017 Proof Templates 1
Math 300 Introduction to Mathematical Reasoning Autumn 2017 Proof Templates 1 In its most basic form, a mathematical proof is just a sequence of mathematical statements, connected to each other by strict
More informationcse 311: foundations of computing Fall 2015 Lecture 6: Predicate Logic, Logical Inference
cse 311: foundations of computing Fall 2015 Lecture 6: Predicate Logic, Logical Inference quantifiers x P(x) P(x) is true for every x in the domain read as for all x, P of x x P x There is an x in the
More informationPacket #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 information2.2: 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 informationLecture 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 informationSome Review Problems for Exam 1: Solutions
Math 3355 Fall 2018 Some Review Problems for Exam 1: Solutions Here is my quick review of proof techniques. I will focus exclusively on propositions of the form p q, or more properly, x P (x) Q(x) or x
More informationFoundations of Mathematics MATH 220 FALL 2017 Lecture Notes
Foundations of Mathematics MATH 220 FALL 2017 Lecture Notes These notes form a brief summary of what has been covered during the lectures. All the definitions must be memorized and understood. Statements
More informationAN INTRODUCTION TO SEPARATION LOGIC. 2. Assertions
AN INTRODUCTION TO SEPARATION LOGIC 2. Assertions John C. Reynolds Carnegie Mellon University January 7, 2011 c 2011 John C. Reynolds Pure Assertions An assertion p is pure iff, for all stores s and all
More informationDepartment of Computer Science & Software Engineering Comp232 Mathematics for Computer Science
Department of Computer Science & Software Engineering Comp232 Mathematics for Computer Science Fall 2018 Assignment 1. Solutions 1. For each of the following statements use a truth table to determine whether
More informationPart I: Propositional Calculus
Logic Part I: Propositional Calculus Statements Undefined Terms True, T, #t, 1 False, F, #f, 0 Statement, Proposition Statement/Proposition -- Informal Definition Statement = anything that can meaningfully
More informationTHE LOGIC OF QUANTIFIED STATEMENTS. Predicates and Quantified Statements I. Predicates and Quantified Statements I CHAPTER 3 SECTION 3.
CHAPTER 3 THE LOGIC OF QUANTIFIED STATEMENTS SECTION 3.1 Predicates and Quantified Statements I Copyright Cengage Learning. All rights reserved. Copyright Cengage Learning. All rights reserved. Predicates
More informationSection 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 information3. The Logic of Quantified Statements Summary. Aaron Tan August 2017
3. The Logic of Quantified Statements Summary Aaron Tan 28 31 August 2017 1 3. The Logic of Quantified Statements 3.1 Predicates and Quantified Statements I Predicate; domain; truth set Universal quantifier,
More informationIntroduction to Sets and Logic (MATH 1190)
Introduction to Sets Logic () Instructor: Email: shenlili@yorku.ca Department of Mathematics Statistics York University Sept 18, 2014 Outline 1 2 Tautologies Definition A tautology is a compound proposition
More informationCSE 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 informationFor all For every For each For any There exists at least one There exists There is Some
Section 1.3 Predicates and Quantifiers Assume universe of discourse is all the people who are participating in this course. Also let us assume that we know each person in the course. Consider the following
More informationCSC 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 informationPropositional 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 information1.1 Language and Logic
c Oksana Shatalov, Spring 2018 1 1.1 Language and Logic Mathematical Statements DEFINITION 1. A proposition is any declarative sentence (i.e. it has both a subject and a verb) that is either true or false,
More informationToday. Proof using contrapositive. Compound Propositions. Manipulating Propositions. Tautology
1 Math/CSE 1019N: Discrete Mathematics for Computer Science Winter 2007 Suprakash Datta datta@cs.yorku.ca Office: CSEB 3043 Phone: 416-736-2100 ext 77875 Course page: http://www.cs.yorku.ca/course/1019
More informationLogic 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 informationLogical Operators. Conjunction Disjunction Negation Exclusive Or Implication Biconditional
Logical Operators Conjunction Disjunction Negation Exclusive Or Implication Biconditional 1 Statement meaning p q p implies q if p, then q if p, q when p, q whenever p, q q if p q when p q whenever p p
More informationMAT 243 Test 1 SOLUTIONS, FORM A
t MAT 243 Test 1 SOLUTIONS, FORM A 1. [10 points] Rewrite the statement below in positive form (i.e., so that all negation symbols immediately precede a predicate). ( x IR)( y IR)((T (x, y) Q(x, y)) R(x,
More informationLogic and Modelling. Introduction to Predicate Logic. Jörg Endrullis. VU University Amsterdam
Logic and Modelling Introduction to Predicate Logic Jörg Endrullis VU University Amsterdam Predicate Logic In propositional logic there are: propositional variables p, q, r,... that can be T or F In predicate
More informationCSE 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 informationProofs. 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 informationExercises 1 - Solutions
Exercises 1 - Solutions SAV 2013 1 PL validity For each of the following propositional logic formulae determine whether it is valid or not. If it is valid prove it, otherwise give a counterexample. Note
More informationCSCE 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 informationCSC165 Mathematical Expression and Reasoning for Computer Science
CSC165 Mathematical Expression and Reasoning for Computer Science Lisa Yan Department of Computer Science University of Toronto January 21, 2015 Lisa Yan (University of Toronto) Mathematical Expression
More informationICS141: 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 informationMore examples of mathematical. Lecture 4 ICOM 4075
More examples of mathematical proofs Lecture 4 ICOM 4075 Proofs by construction A proof by construction is one in which anobjectthat proves the truth value of an statement is built, or found There are
More informationMathematics for Computer Science Exercises from Chapter 3
Mathematics for Computer Science Exercises from Chapter 3 Silvio Capobianco Last update: 19 September 2018 Problems from Section 3.1 Problem 3.2. Your class has a textbook and a final exam. Let P, Q, and
More informationWeakest Precondition Calculus
Weakest Precondition Calculus COMP2600 Formal Methods for Software Engineering Rajeev Goré Australian National University Semester 2, 2016 (Most lecture slides due to Ranald Clouston) COMP 2600 Weakest
More informationLogic, 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 informationMAT2345 Discrete Math
Fall 2013 General Syllabus Schedule (note exam dates) Homework, Worksheets, Quizzes, and possibly Programs & Reports Academic Integrity Do Your Own Work Course Web Site: www.eiu.edu/~mathcs Course Overview
More informationCS 173: Induction. Madhusudan Parthasarathy University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. February 7, 2016
CS 173: Induction Madhusudan Parthasarathy University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 1 Induction February 7, 016 This chapter covers mathematical induction, and is an alternative resource to the one in
More informationTopics 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 informationPredicate Logic: Sematics Part 1
Predicate Logic: Sematics Part 1 CS402, Spring 2018 Shin Yoo Predicate Calculus Propositional logic is also called sentential logic, i.e. a logical system that deals with whole sentences connected with
More information1 The Foundation: Logic and Proofs
1 The Foundation: Logic and Proofs 1.1 Propositional Logic Propositions( 명제 ) a declarative sentence that is either true or false, but not both nor neither letters denoting propositions p, q, r, s, T:
More information2. 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 information1.1 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 informationMath 230 Final Exam, Spring 2009
IIT Dept. Applied Mathematics, May 13, 2009 1 PRINT Last name: Signature: First name: Student ID: Math 230 Final Exam, Spring 2009 Conditions. 2 hours. No book, notes, calculator, cell phones, etc. Part
More informationDISCRETE MATHEMATICS BA202
TOPIC 1 BASIC LOGIC This topic deals with propositional logic, logical connectives and truth tables and validity. Predicate logic, universal and existential quantification are discussed 1.1 PROPOSITION
More informationMath.3336: Discrete Mathematics. Nested Quantifiers/Rules of Inference
Math.3336: Discrete Mathematics Nested Quantifiers/Rules of Inference Instructor: Dr. Blerina Xhabli Department of Mathematics, University of Houston https://www.math.uh.edu/ blerina Email: blerina@math.uh.edu
More informationSection Summary. Section 1.5 9/9/2014
Section 1.5 Section Summary Nested Quantifiers Order of Quantifiers Translating from Nested Quantifiers into English Translating Mathematical Statements into Statements involving Nested Quantifiers Translated
More informationChapter 4: Classical Propositional Semantics
Chapter 4: Classical Propositional Semantics Language : L {,,, }. Classical Semantics assumptions: TWO VALUES: there are only two logical values: truth (T) and false (F), and EXTENSIONALITY: the logical
More informationLecture 3. Logic Predicates and Quantified Statements Statements with Multiple Quantifiers. Introduction to Proofs. Reading (Epp s textbook)
Lecture 3 Logic Predicates and Quantified Statements Statements with Multiple Quantifiers Reading (Epp s textbook) 3.1-3.3 Introduction to Proofs Reading (Epp s textbook) 4.1-4.2 1 Propositional Functions
More informationON1 Big Mock Test 4 October 2013 Answers This test counts 4% of assessment for the course. Time allowed: 10 minutes
ON1 Big Mock Test 4 October 2013 Answers This test counts 4% of assessment for the course. Time allowed: 10 minutes The actual test will contain only 2 questions. Marking scheme: In each multiple choice
More information1 The Foundation: Logic and Proofs
1 The Foundation: Logic and Proofs 1.1 Propositional Logic Propositions( ) a declarative sentence that is either true or false, but not both nor neither letters denoting propostions p, q, r, s, T: true
More informationTheory of Computation
Theory of Computation Prof. Michael Mascagni Florida State University Department of Computer Science 1 / 33 This course aims to cover... the development of computability theory using an extremely simple
More informationLecture 5 : Proofs DRAFT
CS/Math 240: Introduction to Discrete Mathematics 2/3/2011 Lecture 5 : Proofs Instructor: Dieter van Melkebeek Scribe: Dalibor Zelený DRAFT Up until now, we have been introducing mathematical notation
More informationCSE 20 DISCRETE MATH WINTER
CSE 20 DISCRETE MATH WINTER 2016 http://cseweb.ucsd.edu/classes/wi16/cse20-ab/ Today's learning goals Evaluate which proof technique(s) is appropriate for a given proposition Direct proof Proofs by contraposition
More informationMath Real Analysis
1 / 28 Math 370 - Real Analysis G.Pugh Sep 3 2013 Real Analysis 2 / 28 3 / 28 What is Real Analysis? Wikipedia: Real analysis... has its beginnings in the rigorous formulation of calculus. It is a branch
More informationReview. Propositional Logic. Propositions atomic and compound. Operators: negation, and, or, xor, implies, biconditional.
Review Propositional Logic Propositions atomic and compound Operators: negation, and, or, xor, implies, biconditional Truth tables A closer look at implies Translating from/ to English Converse, inverse,
More informationCSE 20 DISCRETE MATH SPRING
CSE 20 DISCRETE MATH SPRING 2016 http://cseweb.ucsd.edu/classes/sp16/cse20-ac/ Today's learning goals Evaluate which proof technique(s) is appropriate for a given proposition Direct proof Proofs by contraposition
More informationArgument. 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 informationMat 243 Exam 1 Review
OBJECTIVES (Review problems: on next page) 1.1 Distinguish between propositions and non-propositions. Know the truth tables (i.e., the definitions) of the logical operators,,,, and Write truth tables for
More informationElementary Linear Algebra, Second Edition, by Spence, Insel, and Friedberg. ISBN Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ.
2008 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ. All rights reserved. APPENDIX: Mathematical Proof There are many mathematical statements whose truth is not obvious. For example, the French mathematician
More informationBasic Logic and Proof Techniques
Chapter 3 Basic Logic and Proof Techniques Now that we have introduced a number of mathematical objects to study and have a few proof techniques at our disposal, we pause to look a little more closely
More informationLogic. Definition [1] A logic is a formal language that comes with rules for deducing the truth of one proposition from the truth of another.
Math 0413 Appendix A.0 Logic Definition [1] A logic is a formal language that comes with rules for deducing the truth of one proposition from the truth of another. This type of logic is called propositional.
More informationShow 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 informationRecall that the expression x > 3 is not a proposition. Why?
Predicates and Quantifiers Predicates and Quantifiers 1 Recall that the expression x > 3 is not a proposition. Why? Notation: We will use the propositional function notation to denote the expression "
More informationNatural Deduction for Propositional Logic
Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic Bow-Yaw Wang Institute of Information Science Academia Sinica, Taiwan September 10, 2018 Bow-Yaw Wang (Academia Sinica) Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic
More informationFoundations of Artificial Intelligence
Foundations of Artificial Intelligence 7. Propositional Logic Rational Thinking, Logic, Resolution Joschka Boedecker and Wolfram Burgard and Frank Hutter and Bernhard Nebel Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg
More informationn 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 informationCMPSCI 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 informationLogic. 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 informationPredicate Calculus - Syntax
Predicate Calculus - Syntax Lila Kari University of Waterloo Predicate Calculus - Syntax CS245, Logic and Computation 1 / 26 The language L pred of Predicate Calculus - Syntax L pred, the formal language
More information2-4: The Use of Quantifiers
2-4: The Use of Quantifiers The number x + 2 is an even integer is not a statement. When x is replaced by 1, 3 or 5 the resulting statement is false. However, when x is replaced by 2, 4 or 6 the resulting
More informationLogic 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 informationPropositional Logic Not Enough
Section 1.4 Propositional Logic Not Enough If we have: All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Does it follow that Socrates is mortal? Can t be represented in propositional logic. Need a language that talks
More informationFirst-Order Logic First-Order Theories. Roopsha Samanta. Partly based on slides by Aaron Bradley and Isil Dillig
First-Order Logic First-Order Theories Roopsha Samanta Partly based on slides by Aaron Bradley and Isil Dillig Roadmap Review: propositional logic Syntax and semantics of first-order logic (FOL) Semantic
More informationTautologies, Contradictions, and Contingencies
Section 1.3 Tautologies, Contradictions, and Contingencies A tautology is a proposition which is always true. Example: p p A contradiction is a proposition which is always false. Example: p p A contingency
More informationDiscrete Mathematical Structures. Chapter 1 The Foundation: Logic
Discrete Mathematical Structures Chapter 1 he oundation: Logic 1 Lecture Overview 1.1 Propositional Logic 1.2 Propositional Equivalences 1.3 Quantifiers l l l l l Statement Logical Connectives Conjunction
More information173 Logic and Prolog 2013 With Answers and FFQ
173 Logic and Prolog 2013 With Answers and FFQ Please write your name on the bluebook. You may have two sides of handwritten notes. There are 75 points (minutes) total. Stay cool and please write neatly.
More informationPredicate Calculus - Semantics 1/4
Predicate Calculus - Semantics 1/4 Moonzoo Kim CS Dept. KAIST moonzoo@cs.kaist.ac.kr 1 Introduction to predicate calculus (1/2) Propositional logic (sentence logic) dealt quite satisfactorily with sentences
More informationA Guide to Proof-Writing
A Guide to Proof-Writing 437 A Guide to Proof-Writing by Ron Morash, University of Michigan Dearborn Toward the end of Section 1.5, the text states that there is no algorithm for proving theorems.... Such
More informationPropositional logic (revision) & semantic entailment. p. 1/34
Propositional logic (revision) & semantic entailment p. 1/34 Reading The background reading for propositional logic is Chapter 1 of Huth/Ryan. (This will cover approximately the first three lectures.)
More informationFoundations of Logic Programming
Foundations of Logic Programming Deductive Logic e.g. of use: Gypsy specifications and proofs About deductive logic (Gödel, 1931) Interesting systems (with a finite number of axioms) are necessarily either:
More informationmeans 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 informationWith Question/Answer Animations. Chapter 2
With Question/Answer Animations Chapter 2 Chapter Summary Sets The Language of Sets Set Operations Set Identities Functions Types of Functions Operations on Functions Sequences and Summations Types of
More informationTecniche di Verifica. Introduction to Propositional Logic
Tecniche di Verifica Introduction to Propositional Logic 1 Logic A formal logic is defined by its syntax and semantics. Syntax An alphabet is a set of symbols. A finite sequence of these symbols is called
More informationSolutions to Problem Set 1
Massachusetts Institute of Technology 6.042J/18.062J, Fall 05: Mathematics for Computer Science September 21 Prof. Albert R. Meyer and Prof. Ronitt Rubinfeld revised September 21, 2005, 1076 minutes Problem
More information2/2/2018. CS 103 Discrete Structures. Chapter 1. Propositional Logic. Chapter 1.1. Propositional Logic
CS 103 Discrete Structures Chapter 1 Propositional Logic Chapter 1.1 Propositional Logic 1 1.1 Propositional Logic Definition: A proposition :is a declarative sentence (that is, a sentence that declares
More informationFirst Order Logic (1A) Young W. Lim 11/18/13
Copyright (c) 2013. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software
More informationUniversity of California, San Diego Department of Computer Science and Engineering CSE 20. Solutions to Midterm Exam Winter 2018
University of California, San Diego Department of Computer Science and Engineering CSE 20 Solutions to Midterm Exam Winter 2018 Problem 1 (30 points) a. The boolean function f(p, q) = (q p) ( q p) is specified
More information