1A Logic 2015 Model Answers

Similar documents
1A Logic 2013 Model Answers

2010 Part IA Formal Logic, Model Answers

I thank the author of the examination paper on which sample paper is based. VH

The Natural Deduction Pack

Interpretations of PL (Model Theory)

DO NOT FORGET!!! WRITE YOUR NAME HERE. Philosophy 109 Final Exam, Spring 2007 (80 points total) ~ ( x)

CHAPTER 2. FIRST ORDER LOGIC

Announcements & Such

CPPE TURN OVER

13. APPENDIX 1: THE SYNTAX OF PREDICATE LOGIC

Overview of Today s Lecture

4 The semantics of full first-order logic

(c) Establish the following claims by means of counterexamples.

Notes for Math 601, Fall based on Introduction to Mathematical Logic by Elliott Mendelson Fifth edition, 2010, Chapman & Hall

FIRST PUBLIC EXAMINATION. Preliminary Examination in Philosophy, Politics and Economics INTRODUCTION TO PHILOSOPHY LONG VACATION 2014

Overview of Today s Lecture

Intermediate Logic. First-Order Logic

Completeness in the Monadic Predicate Calculus. We have a system of eight rules of proof. Let's list them:

Homework 1 2/7/2018 SOLUTIONS Exercise 1. (a) Graph the following sets (i) C = {x R x in Z} Answer:

Denote John by j and Smith by s, is a bachelor by predicate letter B. The statements (1) and (2) may be written as B(j) and B(s).

6. COMPLEX PREDICATES

The predicate calculus is complete

Ling 98a: The Meaning of Negation (Week 5)

Modal Logic: Exercises

Introduction to Predicate Logic Part 1. Professor Anita Wasilewska Lecture Notes (1)

Philosophy 240: Symbolic Logic

Completeness for FOL

Frege s Proofs of the Axioms of Arithmetic

To every formula scheme there corresponds a property of R. This relationship helps one to understand the logic being studied.

MATH 1090 Problem Set #3 Solutions March York University

Foundations of Mathematics MATH 220 FALL 2017 Lecture Notes

INTRODUCTION TO LOGIC 8 Identity and Definite Descriptions

Identity. "At least one dog has fleas" is translated by an existential quantifier"

Final Exam (100 points)

On sets, functions and relations

EXERCISES BOOKLET. for the Logic Manual. Volker Halbach. Oxford. There are no changes to the exercises from last year s edition

You may not start to read the questions printed on the subsequent pages of this question paper until instructed that you may do so by the Invigilator

Quantifiers Here is a (true) statement about real numbers: Every real number is either rational or irrational.

First-Order Logic with Identity

Section 1.1 Propositions

Lecture 2. x if x X B n f(x) = α(x) if x S n 1 D n

Peano Arithmetic. CSC 438F/2404F Notes (S. Cook) Fall, Goals Now

First-Order Logic. 1 Syntax. Domain of Discourse. FO Vocabulary. Terms

REVIEW FOR THIRD 3200 MIDTERM

Philosophy 240: Symbolic Logic

SYMBOLIC LOGIC UNIT 10: SINGULAR SENTENCES

Meta-logic derivation rules

Introduction to Metalogic

Peano Arithmetic. by replacing the schematic letter R with a formula, then prefixing universal quantifiers to bind

Modal Logic. UIT2206: The Importance of Being Formal. Martin Henz. March 19, 2014

Bertie3 Exercises. 1 Problem Set #3, PD Exercises

Generic Size Theory Gary Hardegree Department of Philosophy University of Massachusetts Amherst, MA 01003

Modal logics and their semantics

Lecture Notes 1 Basic Concepts of Mathematics MATH 352

Chapter 3. Rings. The basic commutative rings in mathematics are the integers Z, the. Examples

4 Quantifiers and Quantified Arguments 4.1 Quantifiers

Logic: First Order Logic

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

Predicate Calculus. CS 270 Math Foundations of Computer Science Jeremy Johnson

(1) Which of the following are propositions? If it is a proposition, determine its truth value: A propositional function, but not a proposition.

Motivation. CS389L: Automated Logical Reasoning. Lecture 10: Overview of First-Order Theories. Signature and Axioms of First-Order Theory

Mathematics 114L Spring 2018 D.A. Martin. Mathematical Logic

First-Order Logic (FOL)

INTRODUCTION TO LOGIC 8 Identity and Definite Descriptions


Relational Reasoning in Natural Language

Computation and Logic Definitions

Infinitary Equilibrium Logic and Strong Equivalence

arxiv:math/ v1 [math.lo] 5 Mar 2007

Foundations of algebra

Exercises. Exercise Sheet 1: Propositional Logic

Theorem. For every positive integer n, the sum of the positive integers from 1 to n is n(n+1)

Math 4606, Summer 2004: Inductive sets, N, the Peano Axioms, Recursive Sequences Page 1 of 10

Seminaar Abstrakte Wiskunde Seminar in Abstract Mathematics Lecture notes in progress (27 March 2010)

A Note on the Major Results of Begriffsschrift

Predicate Logic. 1 Predicate Logic Symbolization

An Introduction to Modal Logic V

Proseminar on Semantic Theory Fall 2013 Ling 720 First Order (Predicate) Logic: Syntax and Natural Deduction 1

173 Logic and Prolog 2013 With Answers and FFQ

Automated Reasoning Lecture 5: First-Order Logic

WUCT121. Discrete Mathematics. Logic. Tutorial Exercises

Semantics I, Rutgers University Week 3-1 Yimei Xiang September 17, Predicate logic

In this initial chapter, you will be introduced to, or more than likely be reminded of, a

Gödel s Completeness Theorem

CSE 544: Principles of Database Systems

Lecture 9. Model theory. Consistency, independence, completeness, categoricity of axiom systems. Expanded with algebraic view.

UC Berkeley, Philosophy 142, Spring 2016 John MacFarlane Philosophy 142

Logic for Computer Science Handout Week 8 DERIVED RULE MODUS TOLLENS DERIVED RULE RAA DERIVED RULE TND

TECHNISCHE UNIVERSITEIT EINDHOVEN Faculteit Wiskunde en Informatica. Final exam Logic & Set Theory (2IT61) (correction model)

COMP 409: Logic Homework 5

b. Induction (LfP 50 3)

Formal (Natural) Deduction for Predicate Calculus

Logical Structures in Natural Language: First order Logic (FoL)

09 Modal Logic II. CS 3234: Logic and Formal Systems. October 14, Martin Henz and Aquinas Hobor

03 Review of First-Order Logic

Foundation of proofs. Jim Hefferon.

PART II QUANTIFICATIONAL LOGIC

The Converse of Deducibility: C.I. Lewis and the Origin of Modern AAL/ALC Modal 2011 Logic 1 / 26

III. Elementary Logic

Sets, Logic, Relations, and Functions

Transcription:

1A Logic 2015 Model Answers Section A 1. (a) Show each of the following [40]: (i) P Q, Q R, P R P 1 P Q 2 Q R 3 P R 4 P 5 P R, 4 6 P 7 Q DS, 1, 6 8 R DS, 2, 7 9 R 10 I, 8, 9 11 R E, 9, 10 12 P MT, 3, 11 13 P DNE, 12 14 P TND, 4 5, 6 13 1

(ii) A B (B A) (A B) 1 A B 2 A 3 B E, 1, 2 4 A B I, 2, 3 5 (B A) (A B) I, 4 6 A 7 B 8 A E, 1, 7 9 I, 6, 8 10 B I, 7 9 11 B DNE, 10 12 B A I, 6, 11 13 (B A) (A B) I, 12 14 (B A) (A B) TND, 2 5, 6 13 2

(iii) (A B) C, B C, (C A) ( C A) A 1 (C A) ( C A) 2 B C 3 (A B) C 4 C A 5 C E, 4 6 B E, 2, 5 7 A E, 4 8 A B I, 6, 7 9 C E, 3, 8 10 I, 5, 9 11 (C A) I, 4 10 12 ( C A) DS, 1, 11 13 A E, 12 (iv) (P Q) ( P Q) 1 P Q 2 P 3 Q 4 P E, 1, 3 5 I, 2, 4 6 Q I, 3 5 7 Q 8 P 9 Q E, 1, 8 10 I, 7, 9 11 P I, 8 10 12 P Q I, 2 6, 7 11 13 (P Q) ( P Q) I, 1 12 3

(v) (P Q) (((P Q) (P Q)) (Q P )) 1 P Q 2 P 3 Q 4 P Q I, 2 3 5 (P Q) (P Q) I, 4 6 (((P Q) (P Q)) (Q P )) I, 5 7 Q 8 P Q I, 2, 7 9 (P Q) (P Q) I, 8 10 (((P Q) (P Q)) (Q P )) I, 9 11 (((P Q) (P Q)) (Q P )) TND, 3 6, 7 10 12 Q 13 P 14 P Q I, 12 13 15 (P Q) (P Q) I, 14 16 (((P Q) (P Q)) (Q P )) I, 15 17 P 18 Q P I, 12, 17 19 (((P Q) (P Q)) (Q P )) I, 18 20 (((P Q) (P Q)) (Q P )) TND, 13 16, 17 19 21 (((P Q) (P Q)) (Q P )) E, 2 11, 12 20 22 (P Q) (((P Q) (P Q)) (Q P )) I, 1 21 4

(b) Show each of the following [60]: (i) y(ryy Ga) ( x Rxx) Ga 1 y(ryy Ga) 2 Rbb Ga 3 Ga 4 ( x Rxx) Ga I, 3 5 Ga 6 Rbb E, 2, 5 7 xrxx I, 6 8 x Rxx CQ, 7 9 ( x Rxx) Ga) I, 8 10 ( x Rxx) Ga) TND, 3 4, 5 9 11 ( x Rxx) Ga) E, 1 10 (ii) x(( F x F x) (Gx Gx)) 1 F a F a 2 F a E, 1 3 F a E, 1 4 I, 1 3 5 Ga Ga E, 4 6 Ga Ga 7 Ga E, 6 8 Ga E, 6 9 I, 6 8 10 F a F a E, 9 11 ( F a F a) (Ga Ga) I, 1 5, 6 10 12 x(( F x F x) (Gx Gx)) I, 11 5

(iii) x(f x y(f y y = x)), F a F b a = b 1 x(f x y(f y y = x)) 2 F a 3 F b y(f y y = b) 4 F b E, 3 5 y(f y y = b) E, 3 6 F a a = b I, 5 7 a = b E, 2, 6 8 y(f y y = a) =E, 5, 7 9 y(f y y = a) E, 1, 3 8 10 F b b = a 11 F b 12 b = a E, 10 11 13 a = a =E, 12 14 a = b =E, 12 13 15 F b a = b I, 11 14 6

(iv) xgx, x(f x y(f y y = x)), y(gy F y) x y(gy x = y) 1 Gx 2 (F x y(f y y = x)) 3 y(gy F y) 4 Ga 5 Ga F a E, 3 6 F a 7 F b y(f y y = b) 8 F b E, 7 9 y(f y y = b) E, 7 10 F a a = b E, 9 11 a = b E, 6, 10 12 y(f y y = a) =E, 9, 11 13 y(f y y = a) E, 2, 7 12 14 F b b = a E, 13 15 Gb 16 Gb F b E, 3 17 F b E, 15 16 18 b = a E, 14, 17 19 b = a 20 Gb =E, 4, 19 21 Gb a = b I, 15 18, 19 20 22 y(gy a = y) I, 21 23 x y(gy x = y) I, 22 24 x y(gy x = y) E, 1, 4 23 7

2. Answer all Parts of this question. (a) Using the following symbolisation key: [60] Domain: all living creatures Bx: x is a bulldog Hx: x is a human Sx: x skateboards Axy: x admires y Bxy: x is better at skateboarding than y i: Tillman r: Rodney Symbolise the following English sentences as best you can in FOL, commenting on any difficulties or limitations you encounter: (i) Rodney is a human and Tillman is a bulldog, and both can skateboard. (Hr Bi) (Sr Si) (ii) Everybody admires Tillman, because he is a bulldog who can skateboard. x((si Bi) Axi) Comment: In the language of FOL, we have no means to capture the because of the original sentence, because all of our connectives are truth functional. (iii) Tillman is the skateboarding bulldog. x((sx Bx) x = i) (iv) There are skateboarding bulldogs besides Tillman. x y((sx Bx) (Sy By)) (( x = y x = i) y = i) Comment: More naturally read as there is more than one skateboarding bulldog that is not Tillman, but could be read as there is more than one skateboarding bulldog adjacent to Tillman, and we haven t been given a relation symbol for the adjacency relation. (v) Some human and some bulldog skateboard exactly as well as each other. x y(hx By) (Bxy Byx) Comment: It is unclear whether the English should be taken to imply that the equally skilled human and dog can skateboard at all. Here I ve taken that to not be 8

so, and that the English would be satisfied by any human and dog neither of whom can skateboard at all. (vi) Tillman is better at skateboarding than some humans, but he is not better than Rodney. x y( x = y (Hx Hy)) ((Bix Biy) Bir) (vii) When it comes to skateboarding, Tillman is the best bulldog. x((bx x = i) Bix) Comment: Unlike in the English sentence, in FOL we require a clause to express that Tillman is not better at skateboarding than himself, given that nothing in the language rules out Bii, the English counterpart of which borders on nonsense. (viii) No bulldog skateboards better than Tillman does. x(bx Bxi) (ix) Tillman admires all skateboarding bulldogs, whether or not they are better at skateboarding than him. x((bx Sx) Aix) Comment: Any clause in FOL we might add to the effect of whether or not they are better at skateboarding would not have the intended sense; the clause would be a tautology (Bxi Bxi), rather than convey the suggestion of Tillman s good character, as the English does. (x) Two humans who skateboard are better than Rodney at it. x y(((hx Hy) (( x = y x = r) y = r)) (Bxr Byr)) Comment: The English sentence is ambiguous between at least two and exactly two, and correspondingly one might formalise (x) either way. 9

(b) Show that each of the following claims is true: [30] (i) x(f x y( x = y Gy Rxy)), F a, F b, a = b = x y z( x = y x = z y = z) Domain: D = {1, 2} F = D G = D Rxy = D 2 a = 1 b = 2 In this interpretation, all the sentences to the left of the turnstile are true (since everything is F and bears R to some distinct G in the domain), but the sentence to the right is false, since the domain only has two elements. (ii) x y z( x = y y = z x = z (Rxy Ryx) (Rxy Rxz)) = x y(rxy Ryx) D = {1, 2, 3} R = {(1, 2), (2, 1), (1, 3)} In this interpretation, the sentence to the left of the turnstile is true, since there are three distinct elements in the domain and letting x = 1, y = 2, and z =, Rxy, Ryx, and Rxz all have the same truth value. However, 1 bears R to 3, but not vice versa, and hence the sentence to the right of the turnstile is false. (iii) x(x = a x = b x = c), x((x = a x = b) F x), x, ((x = b x = c) Gx), Rab, Rba = x y, z( x = y x = z y = z) D = {0, 1} F = {0} G = D R = {(0, 1)} a = b = 0 c = 1 In this interpretation, everything is a, b, or c. Everything is a or b iff it is F, and everything is b or c, and G. Rab and Rba, hence all the sentences to the left of the turnstile are true, and the sentence to the right is false, since the domain contains only two elements. 10

(iv) x yryx, x yrxy, x y z((rxy Ryz) Rxz) = x y z((rxy Rxz y = z) D = N (the natural numbers) Rxy = {(x, y) : x < y} In this interpretation, all of the sentences to the left of the turnstile are true: 0 is least in the natural numbers (i.e. nothing is smaller than it); every number is smaller than some other number; and the < relation is transitive over N. However, no number is smaller than exactly one number, so the sentence to the right of the turnstile is false. (c) Explain why we insist that the domain of quantification for any interpretation in FOL must always contain at least one object. [10] There are two primary motivations for this insistence; one proof theoretic, and one semantic. Our natural deduction system licences the following proof: 1 a = a =I 2 xx = x I, 1 So, if our domain were allowed to be empty, our proof system would be unsound, since xx = x is true iff there is some self identical object in the domain. Our second reason is semantic. If nothing in the domain is F, then x(f x...) is vacuously true. So if we allowed an empty domain, we would lose a good deal of our logical truths, for example x (x = x x = x) would no longer be logically true because any interpretation with an empty domain would validate x(x = x x = x); it would be vacuously true because the domain contains no self identical object. In other words, we insist on a non-empty domain because to do otherwise would require a wholesale revision of our logic, both semantics and deductive system. 3. (a) Define the following notions from set theory: Cartesian Product, Empty Set, Power Set, Proper Subset. [10] A B = {(a, b) a A b b} = {x x = x} P(A) = {x x A} A B (A B A = B) (b) Give examples of the following: [40] i. A set with exactly one subset. ii. A set with exactly one proper subset. { } iii. A set of which at least one member is also a subset. { } iv. Two sets whose Cartesian product has exactly six members. A = {0, 1}, B = 11

{2, 3, 4} v. A set whose power set has the set containing the empty set as a member. { } vi. A set whose intersection with its own power set is non-empty. { } vii. A finite, non-empty set whose members include all members of its own members. { } viii. A set whose members are all sets. { } (c) Define the following notions from the theory of relations: Ancestral, Converse, Equivalence relation, equivalence class. [20] R xy = {(x, y) z 1... z n (Rxz 1 Rz 1 z 2... Rz n y} R xy = {(x, y) Ryx} A relation is an equivalence relation over a given domain if and only if it is relfexive, symmetric and transitive over the domain, i.e. xrxx, x y(rxy Ryx), and x y z((rxy Ryz) Rxz). An equivalence class is a member of a partition of a set given by an equivalence relation. If a X and R is an equivalence relation, then [a] = {x X Rax}. Hence, for any a, b X [a] = [b] or [a] [b] =. (d) Each of the following statements is false. In each case give a counterexample, being careful to specify a domain for each answer. [30] In all cases, let D = N. i. Every relation is its own ancestral. Let R be the predecessor relation (i.e. Rxy if and only if x + 1 = y). The ancestral R is the relation <. ii. Every relation is its own converse. Let R be the relation x divides y. This relation includes every pair (n, 0) for all n = 0, but R includes no such pair, since 0 doesn t divide any number at all. iii. Every reflexive and symmetric relation is transitive. Let R = {(x, y) x = y x = y + 1 x + 1 = y}. This is reflexive since every number is self-identical, and symmetric, since if x = y + 1 then y + 1 = x and vice versa. But it isn t transitive, since R01 and R12 and R02. iv. Every symmetric and transitive relation is reflexive. Let R be the empty relation. v. Every reflexive and transitive relation is symmetric. Let R be. 12

4. (a) Write down the axioms of the probability calculus. Define Conditional probability. State any form of Bayes s Theorem. [15] Probability Axioms: P r(v ) = 1, where V is our sample space (set of possible outcomes). P r(x) 0 where X P(V ) if X Y = then P r(x Y ) = P r(x) + P r(y ) P r(a B) = P r(a B) P r(b) Bayes s Theorem: P r(h E) = (P r(e H)P r(h)) ((P re H)P r(h))+(p r(e H)P r( H)) (b) Condition C occurs in 0.01% of the population. Suppose that a test C is developed: It is positive on 95% of occasions when C is absent and on 1% of occasions when C is absent. You take the test and it is positive. What is the probability that you have C? [25] Letting C stand for You have C and P for You test positive for C, Bayes s theorem tells us that: P r(c P ) = So, P r(c P ) = P r(p C)P r(c) (P r(p C)P r(c))+(p r(p C)P r( C)) (0.95 0.0001) (0.95 0.0001)+(0.01 0.9999) i.e., P r(c P ) = 0.000095 0.000095+0.009999 Hence, P r(c P ) = 0.000095 0.010094 Giving us P r(c P ) 0.0094 (c) I draw two cards from a standard pack without replacement. Calculate the following probabilities [60]: Let H n be the n th drawn card is a heart, Q H n be the n th card drawn is the Queen of Hearts and A n be the n th card drawn is an ace. i. The probability that the second is a heart given that the first is. We have it that P r(h 2 H 1 ) = P r(h 2 H 1 ) P r(h 1. We also know that P r(h ) 1 ) = 1, given that 4 the pack is standard. There are 13 hearts in the pack, and we are drawing without replacement, so P r(h 2 H 1 ) = 13 12 = 156. Dividing by 1 for the answer gives us 52 51 2652 4 P r(h 2 H 1 ) = 624 0.24. 2652 13

ii. The probability that the second is a heart given that the first is the queen of hearts. P r(h 2 Q H 1 ) = P r(h 2 Q H 1 ). We know that P r(q H P r(q H 1 ) 1 ) = 1, and also that the number of 52 possible draws is 52 51. So, P r(h 2 Q H 1 ) = 12, given that there are 12 ordered 2652 pairs in our event space such that the first is the queen of hears and the second is any other heart. So we divide by 1 to get our answer: P r(h 52 2 Q H 1 ) = 624 0.24. 2652 iii. The probability that at least one of them is an ace. The pack contains 48 non-aces, and 4 aces. So we have 4 48 pairs where the first is an ace and the second isn t, the same number of pairs where the first isn t and the second is, and 12 pairs where both cards are aces. There are 51 52 outcomes, so P r(a 1 A 2 ) = (4 48)+(4 48)+12) = 396 0.15. 52 51 2652 iv. The probability that the second is at least as high as the first in the following ranking: 2 10, J, Q, J, A. Rank the cards from 1 through 13. For sequences beginning with a card of rank n, there are three pairs where the rank of the second member is n (i.e. where the second is the same picture for a different suit), and 4 (13 n) pairs where the second is greater than the first. Since there are four cards of any given rank, the number of pairs satisfying the hypothesis (i.e. the rank of the second is greater than or equal to the rank of the first) is given by: 13 n=1 (4 (3 + (4 (13 n)))). Going through the cases, this gives us 204 + 188 + 172 + 156 + 140 + 124 + 108 + 92 + 76 + 60 + 44 + 28 + 12 = 1404. Hence the probability that the second card is of equal to or greater rank than the first is 1404 2652 0.53 14