Proving simple set properties...

Similar documents
Propositional Logic. Fall () Propositional Logic Fall / 30

With Question/Answer Animations. Chapter 2

Propositional Logic. Spring Propositional Logic Spring / 32

Show Your Work! Point values are in square brackets. There are 35 points possible. Some facts about sets are on the last page.

Problem 1: Suppose A, B, C and D are finite sets such that A B = C D and C = D. Prove or disprove: A = B.

Topics in Logic and Proofs

Lecture 11: Measuring the Complexity of Proofs

3.4 Set Operations Given a set A, the complement (in the Universal set U) A c is the set of all elements of U that are not in A. So A c = {x x / A}.

SET THEORY. Disproving an Alleged Set Property. Disproving an Alleged Set. Example 1 Solution CHAPTER 6

Mathematical Preliminaries. Sipser pages 1-28

Lecture Notes 1 Basic Concepts of Mathematics MATH 352

CM10196 Topic 2: Sets, Predicates, Boolean algebras

Review CHAPTER. 2.1 Definitions in Chapter Sample Exam Questions. 2.1 Set; Element; Member; Universal Set Partition. 2.

Math 10850, fall 2017, University of Notre Dame

Fundamentals of Probability CE 311S

A B is shaded A B A B

Automata Theory and Formal Grammars: Lecture 1

A Guide to Proof-Writing

LECTURE 1. 1 Introduction. 1.1 Sample spaces and events

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

PHIL 422 Advanced Logic Inductive Proof

Discrete Mathematics. (c) Marcin Sydow. Sets. Set operations. Sets. Set identities Number sets. Pair. Power Set. Venn diagrams

Logic for Computer Science - Week 4 Natural Deduction

PRINCIPLE OF MATHEMATICAL INDUCTION

Equivalence and Implication

Discrete Mathematics and Probability Theory Spring 2016 Rao and Walrand Note 14

AMTH140 Lecture 8. Symbolic Logic

Set theory. Math 304 Spring 2007

1. Propositions: Contrapositives and Converses

Packet #2: Set Theory & Predicate Calculus. Applied Discrete Mathematics

We want to show P (n) is true for all integers

Packet #1: Logic & Proofs. Applied Discrete Mathematics

CSE 20 DISCRETE MATH WINTER

HOW TO CREATE A PROOF. Writing proofs is typically not a straightforward, algorithmic process such as calculating

Propositional Logic, Predicates, and Equivalence

In N we can do addition, but in order to do subtraction we need to extend N to the integers

PHIL12A Section answers, 16 February 2011

CSE 20 DISCRETE MATH. Winter

Axiomatic set theory. Chapter Why axiomatic set theory?

Mid-Semester Quiz Second Semester, 2012

n Empty Set:, or { }, subset of all sets n Cardinality: V = {a, e, i, o, u}, so V = 5 n Subset: A B, all elements in A are in B

Propositional natural deduction

Propositional Logics and their Algebraic Equivalents

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

PROBLEM SET 3: PROOF TECHNIQUES

Logic, Sets, and Proofs

Section 4.2: Mathematical Induction 1

Sets. Slides by Christopher M. Bourke Instructor: Berthe Y. Choueiry. Fall 2007

Notes 1 Autumn Sample space, events. S is the number of elements in the set S.)

Sample Space: Specify all possible outcomes from an experiment. Event: Specify a particular outcome or combination of outcomes.

Linear Classifiers: Expressiveness

Propositional Logic and Semantics

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

18.600: Lecture 3 What is probability?

CA320 - Computability & Complexity

Sets. Slides by Christopher M. Bourke Instructor: Berthe Y. Choueiry. Spring 2006

Solutions to Homework I (1.1)

Natural Deduction. Formal Methods in Verification of Computer Systems Jeremy Johnson

Logic Synthesis and Verification

Section 1.2: Propositional Logic

2-1. Inductive Reasoning and Conjecture. Lesson 2-1. What You ll Learn. Active Vocabulary

A set is an unordered collection of objects.

Preliminaries to the Theory of Computation

Sets and Motivation for Boolean algebra

Review 1. Andreas Klappenecker

Equivalence of Propositions

HANDOUT AND SET THEORY. Ariyadi Wijaya

In N we can do addition, but in order to do subtraction we need to extend N to the integers

Propositional Logic: Syntax

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

4. Sets The language of sets. Describing a Set. c Oksana Shatalov, Fall

Equational Logic: Part 2. Roland Backhouse March 6, 2001

5 Set Operations, Functions, and Counting

CMPSCI 240: Reasoning about Uncertainty

CSE 20 DISCRETE MATH WINTER

CSE 20 DISCRETE MATH SPRING

SETS AND FUNCTIONS JOSHUA BALLEW

Set Theory. CSE 215, Foundations of Computer Science Stony Brook University

A generalization of modal definability

Foundations of Mathematics MATH 220 FALL 2017 Lecture Notes

Syntax of propositional logic. Syntax tree of a formula. Semantics of propositional logic (I) Subformulas

Notes for Science and Engineering Foundation Discrete Mathematics

Tecniche di Verifica. Introduction to Propositional Logic

Axioms of Probability

2. Probability. Chris Piech and Mehran Sahami. Oct 2017

Discrete Mathematics. W. Ethan Duckworth. Fall 2017, Loyola University Maryland

Intro to Logic and Proofs

Proofs. Joe Patten August 10, 2018

Outline. Complexity Theory. Introduction. What is abduction? Motivation. Reference VU , SS Logic-Based Abduction

CHAPTER 10. Gentzen Style Proof Systems for Classical Logic

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

Propositional Equivalence

Sets are one of the basic building blocks for the types of objects considered in discrete mathematics.

Discrete Basic Structure: Sets

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

MATH 120. Test 1 Spring, 2012 DO ALL ASSIGNED PROBLEMS. Things to particularly study

Lecture : Set Theory and Logic

Math 3338: Probability (Fall 2006)

Mathematical Logic Part One

Formal Epistemology: Lecture Notes. Horacio Arló-Costa Carnegie Mellon University

Transcription:

Proving simple set properties... Part 1: Some examples of proofs over sets Fall 2013 Proving simple set properties... Fall 2013 1 / 17

Introduction Overview: Learning outcomes In this session we will... Outline proof schemes commonly used to prove primitive properties of abstract sets. Provide examples of some common, but important proofs using sets. Proving simple set properties... Fall 2013 2 / 17

Introduction Relationship between sets and formal logic Note that the definitions of constructions in sets are expressed using logical operators, such as,, and, in conjunction with the operator. For example, the intersection of two sets, A and B, is defined as: A B = {e e A e B} Proving simple set properties... Fall 2013 3 / 17

Introduction Relationship between sets and formal logic Note that the definitions of constructions in sets are expressed using logical operators, such as,, and, in conjunction with the operator. For example, the intersection of two sets, A and B, is defined as: A B = {e e A e B} Such definitions enable constructive (direct) proofs of many properties. Proving simple set properties... Fall 2013 3 / 17

De Morgan s Laws De Morgan s laws... Recall from earlier in the semester De Morgan s laws were used to transform conjunctive and disjunctive statements by distributing negation: (a b) a b and (a b) a b. Proving simple set properties... Fall 2013 4 / 17

De Morgan s Laws De Morgan s laws... Recall from earlier in the semester De Morgan s laws were used to transform conjunctive and disjunctive statements by distributing negation: (a b) a b and (a b) a b. It so happens that the same law appears in abstract sets: A B Ā B and A B Ā B. Proving simple set properties... Fall 2013 4 / 17

De Morgan s Laws De Morgan s laws... Recall from earlier in the semester De Morgan s laws were used to transform conjunctive and disjunctive statements by distributing negation: (a b) a b and (a b) a b. It so happens that the same law appears in abstract sets: How would we prove it? A B Ā B and A B Ā B. Proving simple set properties... Fall 2013 4 / 17

De Morgan s Laws Ways of seeing De Morgan s laws Proof. The proof is directly obtained by definition: We prove the first part and leave the second part as an exercise. To show that A B = Ā B: A B = {x (x (A B))} = {x (x A x B)} = {x (x A) (x B)} = {x (x A) (x B)} = {x (x Ā) (x B)} = Ā B. Proving simple set properties... Fall 2013 5 / 17

De Morgan s Laws Revisiting that last proof... Notice that early in the sequence of reductions, we used the logical equivalent of De Morgan s laws to replace the disjunction with a conjunction. The step is justified by truth-values, but is somewhat troubling as it appears to assume what it s trying to prove. = {x (x A x B)} and then... = {x (x A) (x B)} Proving simple set properties... Fall 2013 6 / 17

De Morgan s Laws Revisiting that last proof... Notice that early in the sequence of reductions, we used the logical equivalent of De Morgan s laws to replace the disjunction with a conjunction. The step is justified by truth-values, but is somewhat troubling as it appears to assume what it s trying to prove. = {x (x A x B)} and then... = {x (x A) (x B)} An alternative proof is obtained by showing that A B = Ā B by showing that each set (occurring on the left and the right of the equals sign) is a subset of the other hence are equal. Proving simple set properties... Fall 2013 6 / 17

De Morgan s Laws Arguably, a more set-theoretic proof... Show that A B = Ā B by showing that each set is a subset of the other thus, we can say that they are equal. Proof. Let x A B, then x A B, meaning that x A or x B. Hence, x Ā or x B, which is to say that x Ā B. Thus, A B Ā B. To prove the other side: Suppose that x Ā B, then x Ā or x B. But then, x A or x B, which means that x A B. Therefore, x A B. Because A B Ā B and Ā B A B, they are equal. Proving simple set properties... Fall 2013 7 / 17

Preliminary observations Definition The power set of the set S, written P(S) is the set of all subsets contained within S. Thus, the power set is a set of sets. Later, when we explore functions, we will re-visit powersets in fuller generality, but for the present, we are asked to prove that the number of subsets contained within the powerset of a set is 2 S, where S is the cardinality of the set S. Proving simple set properties... Fall 2013 8 / 17

Proving by induction The proof is by induction on the cardinality of S. Basis: Observe that when S =, then S = 0, thus P(S) = { } = 1 = 2 0. Proving simple set properties... Fall 2013 9 / 17

Proving by induction The proof is by induction on the cardinality of S. Basis: Observe that when S =, then S = 0, thus P(S) = { } = 1 = 2 0. Hypothesis: Assume that P(k) holds for some k 1; show that P(k + 1) follows. Written in terms of the problem, and we need to show S = k P(S) = 2 k, S = k + 1 P(S) = 2 k+1. Proving simple set properties... Fall 2013 9 / 17

Power sets, inductively... Let S = k + 1. Proving simple set properties... Fall 2013 10 / 17

Power sets, inductively... Let S = k + 1. Let x S and consider the set S which is S {x}. Note that S = k. Proving simple set properties... Fall 2013 10 / 17

Power sets, inductively... Let S = k + 1. Let x S and consider the set S which is S {x}. Note that S = k. Rejoin x to each subset of S. Proving simple set properties... Fall 2013 10 / 17

Power sets, inductively... Let S = k + 1. Let x S and consider the set S which is S {x}. Note that S = k. Rejoin x to each subset of S. By the induction hypothesis, S contains 2 k elements. But, adding x to each of these give 2 k + 2 k elements, which is 2 k+1 elements in S. Proving simple set properties... Fall 2013 10 / 17

Power sets, inductively... Let S = k + 1. Let x S and consider the set S which is S {x}. Note that S = k. Rejoin x to each subset of S. By the induction hypothesis, S contains 2 k elements. But, adding x to each of these give 2 k + 2 k elements, which is 2 k+1 elements in S. This last expression is what I needed to show and we re done. Proving simple set properties... Fall 2013 10 / 17

Power sets, inductively... Let S = k + 1. Let x S and consider the set S which is S {x}. Note that S = k. Rejoin x to each subset of S. By the induction hypothesis, S contains 2 k elements. But, adding x to each of these give 2 k + 2 k elements, which is 2 k+1 elements in S. This last expression is what I needed to show and we re done. Thus, for any set S, P(S) = 2 S. Proving simple set properties... Fall 2013 10 / 17

Proofs with constructions A great number of proofs about sets utilize set constructions, union, intersection, set complement, etc. At least three methods are commonly employed when constructing proofs about sets: Arbitrary Particular Choose an arbitrary particular and use the definition of the constructs to prove the assertion. Derivation Employ the definitions and logical connectives to display the derivation. Diagrams For three or fewer sets, draw Venn diagrams. Proving simple set properties... Fall 2013 11 / 17

Examples of proof schemas... Proposition Suppose that A, B and C are sets. Show that A (B C) (A B) C. Proof. Choose x A (B C). Then x A and x B C. Proving simple set properties... Fall 2013 12 / 17

Examples of proof schemas... Proposition Suppose that A, B and C are sets. Show that A (B C) (A B) C. Proof. Choose x A (B C). Then x A and x B C. But, since x B C, it must be that either x B or x C: Proving simple set properties... Fall 2013 12 / 17

Examples of proof schemas... Proposition Suppose that A, B and C are sets. Show that A (B C) (A B) C. Proof. Choose x A (B C). Then x A and x B C. But, since x B C, it must be that either x B or x C: Case: x B. Because x A B then x (A B) C. Proving simple set properties... Fall 2013 12 / 17

Examples of proof schemas... Proposition Suppose that A, B and C are sets. Show that A (B C) (A B) C. Proof. Choose x A (B C). Then x A and x B C. But, since x B C, it must be that either x B or x C: Case: x B. Because x A B then x (A B) C. Case: x C. Then x (A B) C. Proving simple set properties... Fall 2013 12 / 17

Examples of proof schemas... Proposition Suppose that A, B and C are sets. Show that A (B C) (A B) C. Proof. Choose x A (B C). Then x A and x B C. But, since x B C, it must be that either x B or x C: Case: x B. Because x A B then x (A B) C. Case: x C. Then x (A B) C. Because x was arbitrary chosen in A (B C), we may conclude that A (B C) (A B) C. Proving simple set properties... Fall 2013 12 / 17

Sometimes, pictures help Example Construct two Venn diagrams: one for the left hand side, the other for the right hand side of the subset relation. Compare Proving simple set properties... Fall 2013 13 / 17

Proving equivalence If we choose an arbitrary particular, as we did in the previous slide, then we need to show both sides, i.e., show that the proof works both ways because equality is symmetric. Consider: Proposition Suppose A, B and C are sets. Then A (B C) = (A B) C. Instead of choosing an arbitrary x A (B C) and showing that it is found in (A B) C, and then vice versa, we will start with one side and derive the other, using definitions, axiom, and the properties of boolean logic. Proving simple set properties... Fall 2013 14 / 17

Deriving a proof of equality... Proof. Let x be arbitrary, then x A (B C) x A x B C x A x B x C x (A B) x C x (A B) C. Since for all x A (B C) x (A B) C, we may conclude that A (B C) = (A B) C. Proving simple set properties... Fall 2013 15 / 17

Convince yourself... Reconstruct the proof by choosing an arbitrary element in the left hand expression, showing that it appears in the right hand side. Then, show the proof the other way. Which requires less writing? Which is clearer? (By what criteria?) Which do you find more convincing? Proving simple set properties... Fall 2013 16 / 17

[Optional] Other constructions Power sets and Cartesian Products are often subjects of non-trivial propositions. Time permitting, let s try some of these: Proposition (Intersections over Power Sets) For any sets A and B: P(A B) = P(A) P(B). Proposition (Intersections over Products) For any sets A, B and C: A (B C) = (A B) (A C). Proposition (Products are Nilpotent) For any set A: A = = A. Proving simple set properties... Fall 2013 17 / 17