DISCRETE MATH: LECTURE Chapter 3.3 Statements with Multiple Quantifiers If you want to establish the truth of a statement of the form

Similar documents
THE LOGIC OF QUANTIFIED STATEMENTS. Statements with Multiple Quantifiers. Statements with Multiple Quantifiers CHAPTER 3 SECTION 3.

Chapter 2: The Logic of Quantified Statements

Chapter 3. The Logic of Quantified Statements

Tutorial 2 Logic of Quantified Statements

THE LOGIC OF QUANTIFIED STATEMENTS

3. The Logic of Quantified Statements Summary. Aaron Tan August 2017

Predicate Logic. Andreas Klappenecker

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

Exercise Set 2.1. Notes: is equivalent to AND ; both statements must be true for the statement to be true.

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

spaghetti fish pie cake Ann X X Tom X X X Paul X X X

Review: Potential stumbling blocks

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

WUCT121. Discrete Mathematics. Logic. Tutorial Exercises

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

At least one of us is a knave. What are A and B?

CS0441 Discrete Structures Recitation 3. Xiang Xiao

Rules Build Arguments Rules Building Arguments

THE LOGIC OF COMPOUND STATEMENTS

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

2. Use quantifiers to express the associative law for multiplication of real numbers.

Math 3336: Discrete Mathematics Practice Problems for Exam I

Chapter 1 Elementary Logic

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

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

DISCRETE MATH: LECTURE 6

COMP 182 Algorithmic Thinking. Proofs. Luay Nakhleh Computer Science Rice University

Negations of Quantifiers

2/2/2018. CS 103 Discrete Structures. Chapter 1. Propositional Logic. Chapter 1.1. Propositional Logic

1 Predicates and Quantifiers

Intro to Logic and Proofs

DISCRETE MATH: LECTURE 3

CSCI-2200 FOUNDATIONS OF COMPUTER SCIENCE

Supplementary Logic Notes CSE 321 Winter 2009

CPSC 121: Models of Computation

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

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

Predicates, Quantifiers and Nested Quantifiers

Test 1 Solutions(COT3100) (1) Prove that the following Absorption Law is correct. I.e, prove this is a tautology:

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

CPSC 121: Models of Computation. Module 6: Rewriting predicate logic statements

The Logic of Compound Statements cont.

Section 2.1: Introduction to the Logic of Quantified Statements

DISCRETE MATH: FINAL REVIEW

Math.3336: Discrete Mathematics. Nested Quantifiers/Rules of Inference

Mat 243 Exam 1 Review

A. Propositional Logic

Formal (Natural) Deduction for Predicate Calculus

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

MAT 243 Test 1 SOLUTIONS, FORM A

Review for Midterm 1. Andreas Klappenecker

Predicate Logic. Example. Statements in Predicate Logic. Some statements cannot be expressed in propositional logic, such as: Predicate Logic

Logic Overview, I. and T T T T F F F T F F F F

ICS141: Discrete Mathematics for Computer Science I

University of Ottawa CSI 2101 Midterm Test Instructor: Lucia Moura. March 1, :00 pm Duration: 1:15 hs

First order Logic ( Predicate Logic) and Methods of Proof

CSI30. Chapter 1. The Foundations: Logic and Proofs Nested Quantifiers

4 Quantifiers and Quantified Arguments 4.1 Quantifiers

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

Predicate Logic & Quantification

A Guide to Proof-Writing

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

Predicate in English. Predicates and Quantifiers. Predicate in Logic. Propositional Functions: Prelude. Propositional Function

Quantifiers. P. Danziger

A Quick Lesson on Negation

Propositional Logic: Syntax

Discrete Structures for Computer Science

Undergraduate Notes in Mathematics. Arkansas Tech University Department of Mathematics. Introductory Notes in Discrete Mathematics Solution Guide

1. Consider the conditional E = p q r. Use de Morgan s laws to write simplified versions of the following : The negation of E : 5 points

COMP Intro to Logic for Computer Scientists. Lecture 6

Formal Logic: Quantifiers, Predicates, and Validity. CS 130 Discrete Structures

A Little Deductive Logic

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

Section Summary. Section 1.5 9/9/2014

University of Ottawa CSI 2101 Midterm Test Instructor: Lucia Moura. February 9, :30 pm Duration: 1:50 hs. Closed book, no calculators

Section Summary. Predicate logic Quantifiers. Negating Quantifiers. Translating English to Logic. Universal Quantifier Existential Quantifier

CSC 125 :: Final Exam May 3 & 5, 2010

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

! Predicates! Variables! Quantifiers. ! Universal Quantifier! Existential Quantifier. ! Negating Quantifiers. ! De Morgan s Laws for Quantifiers

Logic, Sets, and Proofs

CS 2336 Discrete Mathematics

A Little Deductive Logic

Manual of Logical Style

Math 55 Homework 2 solutions

Lecture 5 : Proofs DRAFT

Discrete Mathematics for CS Spring 2006 Forbes HW 1 Solutions

2-4: The Use of Quantifiers

Rules of Inference. Arguments and Validity

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

Discrete Structures of Computer Science Propositional Logic III Rules of Inference

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

MATH 22 INFERENCE & QUANTIFICATION. Lecture F: 9/18/2003

CSC 125 :: Final Exam December 14, 2011

THE LOGIC OF QUANTIFIED STATEMENTS. Predicates and Quantified Statements I. Predicates and Quantified Statements I CHAPTER 3 SECTION 3.

Do not start until you are given the green signal

Handout on Logic, Axiomatic Methods, and Proofs MATH Spring David C. Royster UNC Charlotte

Section Summary. Predicates Variables Quantifiers. Negating Quantifiers. Translating English to Logic Logic Programming (optional)

CHAPTER 1 - LOGIC OF COMPOUND STATEMENTS

We have seen that the symbols,,, and can guide the logical

Tools for reasoning: Logic. Ch. 1: Introduction to Propositional Logic Truth values, truth tables Boolean logic: Implications:

Transcription:

DISCRETE MATH: LECTURE 5 DR. DANIEL FREEMAN 1. Chapter 3.3 Statements with Multiple Quantifiers If you want to establish the truth of a statement of the form x D, y E such that P (x, y) your challenge is to allow someone else to pick whatever element x in D they wish and then you must find an element y in E that works for that particular x. If you want to establish the truth of a statement of the form x D such that y E, P (x, y) your job is to find one particular x in D that will work no matter what y in E anyone might choose to challenge you with. Hence, in a statement containing both and, changing the order of the quantifiers usually changes the meaning of the statement! For example: Consider the statements: people x, a person y such that x loves y. a person y, such that people x, x loves y. 1.1. In Class Work. A college cafeteria line has four stations: salads, main courses, desserts, and beverages. The salad station offers a choice of green salad or fruit salad; the main course station offers spaghetti or fish; the dessert station offers pie or cake; and the beverage station offers milk, soda, or coffee. Three students, Uta, Tim, and Yuen, go through the line a make the following choices: Uta: green salad, spaghetti, pie, milk Tim: fruit salad, fish, pie, cake, milk, coffee Yuen: spaghetti, fish, pie, soda Write each of the following statements informally and find its truth value. (1) an item I such that students S, S choose I. (2) a student S such that items I, S choose I. (3) a student S such that stations Z, an item I in Z such that S choose I. (4) studets S and station Z, an item I in Z such that S choose I. 1

2 DR. DANIEL FREEMAN 1.2. Negations of Multiply-Quantified Statements. ( x D, y E such that P (x, y)) is equivalent to x D such that y E, P (x, y) ( x D such that y E, P (x, y)) is equivalent to x D, y E such that P (x, y) 1.3. Formal Logic Notation. In some areas of computer science, logical statements are expressed in purely symbolic notation. The formalism depends on the following facts: x in D, P (x) can be written as x(x D P (x)). x in D such thatp (x) can be written as x(x D P (x)). 1.4. In Class Work. Rewrite the statement formally using quantifiers and variables. Then, write a negation for each statement. (1) Everybody loves somebody. (2) Somebody loves everybody. (3) Any even integer equals twice some integer. (4) There is a program that gives the correct answer to every question that is posed to it.

DISCRETE MATH: LECTURE 5 3 2. Chapter 3.4 Arguments with Quantified Statements The rule of universal instantiation: If some property is true of everything in a set, then it is true of any particular thing in the set. For example: Suppose you are doing a math problem where you need to simplify r k+1 r, where r R and k is some integer. 2.1. Universal Modus Ponens. Universal Modus Ponens x if P (x) then Q(x). P (a) for a particular a. Q(a) For example: Write the conclusion that can be inferred using universal modus ponens. If T is any right triangle with hypotenuse c and legs a and b, then c 2 = a 2 + b 2. The triangle shown is a right triangle with both legs equal to 1 and hypotenuse c. 2.2. Universal Modus Tollens. Universal Modus Tollens x if P (x) then Q(x). Q(a) for a particular a. P (a) For example: Write the conclusion that can be inferred using universal modus tollens. All professors are absent-minded. Tom Hutchins is not absent-minded. 2.3. Proving Validity of Arguments with Quantified Statements. To say that an argument form is valid means the following: No matter what particular predicates are substituted for the predicate symbols in its premises, if the resulting premise statements area all true, then the conclusion is also true. An argument is called valid if, and only if, its form is valid.

4 DR. DANIEL FREEMAN 2.4. Using Diagrams to Test for Validity. To test the validity of an argument diagrammatically, represent the truth of both premises with diagrams. Then analyze the diagrams to see whether they necessarily represent the truth of the conclusion as well. For example: use diagrams to show the validity of the following syllogism: All humans beings are mortal. Zeus is not mortal. Zeus is not a human being.. For example: Use a diagram to show the invalidity of the following argument: All human beings are mortal. Felix is a mortal. Felix is a human being. The last example exhibits the converse error. The converse error has the following form: x, if P (x) then Q(x). Q(a) for a particular a. P (a).

DISCRETE MATH: LECTURE 5 5 2.5. In Class Work: Use a diagram to show the invalidity of the inverse error form which is: x, if P (x) then Q(x). P (a), for a particular a. Q(a). Use diagrams to test the following argument for validity: No polynomial functions have horizontal asymptotes. This function has a horizontal asymptote. This function is not a polynomial function. 2.6. Creating Additional Forms of Argument. Universal Transitivity xp (x) Q(x). xq(x) R(x). xp (x) R(x).