Mathematical logic and statement calculus
Rules of Inference (Lecture - 4)
S. Devi Yamini
July 18, 2020
Module - I July 18, 2020 1 / 19
Overview
1 Rules of Inference
Module - I July 18, 2020 2 / 19
Outline
1 Rules of Inference
Module - I July 18, 2020 3 / 19
Rules of Inference
Rules of inference is a step by step validation to arrive at conclusion q
logically from the premises p1 , p2 , . . . , pn in an implication of the form
(p1 ∧ p2 ∧ . . . ∧ pn ) → q
Module - I July 18, 2020 4 / 19
Rules of Inference
Rules of inference is a step by step validation to arrive at conclusion q
logically from the premises p1 , p2 , . . . , pn in an implication of the form
(p1 ∧ p2 ∧ . . . ∧ pn ) → q
An argument in propositional logic is a sequence of propositions. An
argument is valid if the premises imply the conclusion. That is, if all its
premises are true, then the conclusion is true.
Module - I July 18, 2020 4 / 19
Illustration- Valid and invalid logical arguments
Example
1. If you solve all the assignment questions, then you will get ’S’ grade in
my course
Module - I July 18, 2020 5 / 19
Illustration- Valid and invalid logical arguments
Example
1. If you solve all the assignment questions, then you will get ’S’ grade in
my course
2. You solve all the assignment questions
Module - I July 18, 2020 5 / 19
Illustration- Valid and invalid logical arguments
Example
1. If you solve all the assignment questions, then you will get ’S’ grade in
my course
2. You solve all the assignment questions
3. Therefore, you get ’S’ grade in my course
Module - I July 18, 2020 5 / 19
Illustration- Valid and invalid logical arguments
Example
1. If you solve all the assignment questions, then you will get ’S’ grade in
my course
2. You solve all the assignment questions
3. Therefore, you get ’S’ grade in my course
VALID
Module - I July 18, 2020 5 / 19
Illustration- Valid and invalid logical arguments
Example
1. If you solve all the assignment questions, then you will get ’S’ grade in
my course
2. You solve all the assignment questions
3. Therefore, you get ’S’ grade in my course
VALID
Example
1. If Jack lands the new account, then he will get a raise.
Module - I July 18, 2020 5 / 19
Illustration- Valid and invalid logical arguments
Example
1. If you solve all the assignment questions, then you will get ’S’ grade in
my course
2. You solve all the assignment questions
3. Therefore, you get ’S’ grade in my course
VALID
Example
1. If Jack lands the new account, then he will get a raise.
2. Jack got a raise.
Module - I July 18, 2020 5 / 19
Illustration- Valid and invalid logical arguments
Example
1. If you solve all the assignment questions, then you will get ’S’ grade in
my course
2. You solve all the assignment questions
3. Therefore, you get ’S’ grade in my course
VALID
Example
1. If Jack lands the new account, then he will get a raise.
2. Jack got a raise.
3. Therefore, he landed the new account.
Module - I July 18, 2020 5 / 19
Illustration- Valid and invalid logical arguments
Example
1. If you solve all the assignment questions, then you will get ’S’ grade in
my course
2. You solve all the assignment questions
3. Therefore, you get ’S’ grade in my course
VALID
Example
1. If Jack lands the new account, then he will get a raise.
2. Jack got a raise.
3. Therefore, he landed the new account.
INVALID
Module - I July 18, 2020 5 / 19
Illustration- Valid and invalid logical arguments
Example
1. If the dog eats the cat food or scratches at the door, then the parrot
will bark.
Module - I July 18, 2020 6 / 19
Illustration- Valid and invalid logical arguments
Example
1. If the dog eats the cat food or scratches at the door, then the parrot
will bark.
2. If the cat eats the parrot, then the parrot will not bark.
Module - I July 18, 2020 6 / 19
Illustration- Valid and invalid logical arguments
Example
1. If the dog eats the cat food or scratches at the door, then the parrot
will bark.
2. If the cat eats the parrot, then the parrot will not bark.
3. If the cat does not eat the parrot, then it will eat the cat food.
Module - I July 18, 2020 6 / 19
Illustration- Valid and invalid logical arguments
Example
1. If the dog eats the cat food or scratches at the door, then the parrot
will bark.
2. If the cat eats the parrot, then the parrot will not bark.
3. If the cat does not eat the parrot, then it will eat the cat food.
4. The cat did not eat the cat food.
Module - I July 18, 2020 6 / 19
Illustration- Valid and invalid logical arguments
Example
1. If the dog eats the cat food or scratches at the door, then the parrot
will bark.
2. If the cat eats the parrot, then the parrot will not bark.
3. If the cat does not eat the parrot, then it will eat the cat food.
4. The cat did not eat the cat food.
5. Therefore, the dog does not eat the cat food either.
Module - I July 18, 2020 6 / 19
Illustration- Valid and invalid logical arguments
Example
1. If the dog eats the cat food or scratches at the door, then the parrot
will bark.
2. If the cat eats the parrot, then the parrot will not bark.
3. If the cat does not eat the parrot, then it will eat the cat food.
4. The cat did not eat the cat food.
5. Therefore, the dog does not eat the cat food either.
VALID
Module - I July 18, 2020 6 / 19
Rules of Inference
Rule Tautology Name
p p → (p ∨ q) Addition
∴p∨q
p∧q (p ∧ q) → p Simplification
∴p
p (p) ∧ (q) → (p ∧ q) Conjunction
q
∴p∧q
p (p ∧ (p → q)) → q Modus Ponens
p→q
∴q
Module - I July 18, 2020 7 / 19
Rules of Inference
Rule Tautology Name
¬q (¬q ∧ (p → q)) → ¬p Modus Tollens
p→q
∴ ¬p
p→q [(p → q) ∧ (q → r )] → (p → r )] Hypothetical Syllogism
q→r
∴p→r
p∨q [(p ∨ q) ∧ ¬p] → q Disjunctive syllogism
¬p
∴q
Table 1: Rules of Inference
Module - I July 18, 2020 8 / 19
Consider the implication
P⇒C
where
P = P1 ∧ P2 ∧ . . . ∧ Pn
is the conjunction of premises and C is the conclusion to be proven.
Module - I July 18, 2020 9 / 19
Consider the implication
P⇒C
where
P = P1 ∧ P2 ∧ . . . ∧ Pn
is the conjunction of premises and C is the conclusion to be proven.
To prove that the argument is Valid
- direct proof (using P to directly show C )
Module - I July 18, 2020 9 / 19
Consider the implication
P⇒C
where
P = P1 ∧ P2 ∧ . . . ∧ Pn
is the conjunction of premises and C is the conclusion to be proven.
To prove that the argument is Valid
- direct proof (using P to directly show C )
- indirect proof
proof by contrapositive argument (¬C ⇒ ¬P)
proof by contradiction ( showing that P ∧ ¬C leads to false )
Module - I July 18, 2020 9 / 19
Basic rules of inference
- Rule P: A premise may be introduced at any step in the derivation
Module - I July 18, 2020 10 / 19
Basic rules of inference
- Rule P: A premise may be introduced at any step in the derivation
- Rule T: A formula S may be introduced in the derivation, if S is
tautologically implied by one or more preceding formulas in the
derivation
Module - I July 18, 2020 10 / 19
Basic rules of inference
- Rule P: A premise may be introduced at any step in the derivation
- Rule T: A formula S may be introduced in the derivation, if S is
tautologically implied by one or more preceding formulas in the
derivation
- Rule CP: If a formula S can be derived from another formula R and
a set of premises, then the statement R → S can be derived from the
set of premises alone. This is also called as Conditional Proof.
Module - I July 18, 2020 10 / 19
Basic rules of inference
- Rule P: A premise may be introduced at any step in the derivation
- Rule T: A formula S may be introduced in the derivation, if S is
tautologically implied by one or more preceding formulas in the
derivation
- Rule CP: If a formula S can be derived from another formula R and
a set of premises, then the statement R → S can be derived from the
set of premises alone. This is also called as Conditional Proof.
Observation
A set of premises H1 , H2 , . . . , Hn are said to be inconsistent, if their
conjunction implies a contradiction.
Module - I July 18, 2020 10 / 19
Problems using rules of inference
1. Show that t ∧ s can be derived from the premises
p → q, q → ¬r , r , p ∨ (t ∧ s)
Module - I July 18, 2020 11 / 19
Problems using rules of inference
1. Show that t ∧ s can be derived from the premises
p → q, q → ¬r , r , p ∨ (t ∧ s)
Solution
Steps Logical Statement Reason
1 q → ¬r Rule P, Premise
Module - I July 18, 2020 11 / 19
Problems using rules of inference
1. Show that t ∧ s can be derived from the premises
p → q, q → ¬r , r , p ∨ (t ∧ s)
Solution
Steps Logical Statement Reason
1 q → ¬r Rule P, Premise
2 r Rule P, Premise
Module - I July 18, 2020 11 / 19
Problems using rules of inference
1. Show that t ∧ s can be derived from the premises
p → q, q → ¬r , r , p ∨ (t ∧ s)
Solution
Steps Logical Statement Reason
1 q → ¬r Rule P, Premise
2 r Rule P, Premise
3 ¬q Rule T, Modus tollens of 1 and 2
Module - I July 18, 2020 11 / 19
Problems using rules of inference
1. Show that t ∧ s can be derived from the premises
p → q, q → ¬r , r , p ∨ (t ∧ s)
Solution
Steps Logical Statement Reason
1 q → ¬r Rule P, Premise
2 r Rule P, Premise
3 ¬q Rule T, Modus tollens of 1 and 2
4 p→q Rule P, Premise
Module - I July 18, 2020 11 / 19
Problems using rules of inference
1. Show that t ∧ s can be derived from the premises
p → q, q → ¬r , r , p ∨ (t ∧ s)
Solution
Steps Logical Statement Reason
1 q → ¬r Rule P, Premise
2 r Rule P, Premise
3 ¬q Rule T, Modus tollens of 1 and 2
4 p→q Rule P, Premise
5 ¬p Rule T, Modus tollens of 3 and 4
Module - I July 18, 2020 11 / 19
Problems using rules of inference
1. Show that t ∧ s can be derived from the premises
p → q, q → ¬r , r , p ∨ (t ∧ s)
Solution
Steps Logical Statement Reason
1 q → ¬r Rule P, Premise
2 r Rule P, Premise
3 ¬q Rule T, Modus tollens of 1 and 2
4 p→q Rule P, Premise
5 ¬p Rule T, Modus tollens of 3 and 4
6 p ∨ (t ∧ s) Rule P, Premise
Module - I July 18, 2020 11 / 19
Problems using rules of inference
1. Show that t ∧ s can be derived from the premises
p → q, q → ¬r , r , p ∨ (t ∧ s)
Solution
Steps Logical Statement Reason
1 q → ¬r Rule P, Premise
2 r Rule P, Premise
3 ¬q Rule T, Modus tollens of 1 and 2
4 p→q Rule P, Premise
5 ¬p Rule T, Modus tollens of 3 and 4
6 p ∨ (t ∧ s) Rule P, Premise
7 t ∧s Rule T, Disjunctive Syllogism of 5 and 6
Module - I July 18, 2020 11 / 19
Problems
2. Show that r → ¬q, r ∨ s, s → ¬q, p → q =⇒ ¬p
Module - I July 18, 2020 12 / 19
Problems
2. Show that r → ¬q, r ∨ s, s → ¬q, p → q =⇒ ¬p
Solution
Steps Logical Statement Reason
1 r → ¬q Rule P, Premise
2 s → ¬q Rule P, Premise
3 r ∨ s → ¬q Rule T, Logical equivalence using 1 and 2
4 r ∨s Rule P, Premise
5 ¬q Rule T, Modus ponens of 3 and 4
6 p→q Rule P, Premise
7 ¬p Rule T, Modus tollens of 5 and 6
Module - I July 18, 2020 12 / 19
Problems
3. Prove the following using the rules of inferences:If it reains heavily, then
travelling will be difficult. If students arrive on time, then travelling is not
difficult. They arrived on time. Therefore, it didnot rain heavily
Solution:
Let P : It rains heavily, Q : Travelling is difficult, R : Students arrive on
time.
P → Q, R → ¬Q, R are the premises
Steps Logical Statement Reason
1 R → ¬Q Rule P, Premise
2 R Rule P, Premise
3 ¬Q Rule T, Modus ponens of 1 and 2
4 P→Q Rule P, Premise
5 ¬P Rule T, Modus tollens of 3 and 4
Module - I July 18, 2020 13 / 19
Indirect method
4. Prove the following using indirect method:
p → q, q → r , ¬(p ∧ r ), p ∨ r ⇒ r
Module - I July 18, 2020 14 / 19
Indirect method
4. Prove the following using indirect method:
p → q, q → r , ¬(p ∧ r ), p ∨ r ⇒ r
Solution
For indirect method, we consider the negation of the conclusion as an
additional premise and arrive at a contradiction.
Module - I July 18, 2020 14 / 19
Indirect method
4. Prove the following using indirect method:
p → q, q → r , ¬(p ∧ r ), p ∨ r ⇒ r
Solution
For indirect method, we consider the negation of the conclusion as an
additional premise and arrive at a contradiction.
¬r is included as a premise.
Module - I July 18, 2020 14 / 19
Indirect method
4. Prove the following using indirect method:
p → q, q → r , ¬(p ∧ r ), p ∨ r ⇒ r
Solution
For indirect method, we consider the negation of the conclusion as an
additional premise and arrive at a contradiction.
¬r is included as a premise.
Steps Logical Statement Reason
1 ¬r Rule P (additional), Premise
2 p→q Rule P
3 q→r Rule P
4 p→r Rule T, Hypothetical Syllogism of (2) and (3)
5 ¬p Rule T, Modus Tollens of (1) and (4)
6 p∨r Rule P
7 r Rule T, Disjunctive Syllogism of (1) and (6)
8 r ∧ ¬r Rule T, Conjunction of (1) and (7)
9 F RuleModule
T, Inverse
-I
law (8) July 18, 2020 14 / 19
CP rule
5. Derive p → s using the CP-rule from the premises ¬p ∨ q, ¬q ∨ r , r → s.
Module - I July 18, 2020 15 / 19
CP rule
5. Derive p → s using the CP-rule from the premises ¬p ∨ q, ¬q ∨ r , r → s.
Solution
By CP-rule, we assume an additional premise p along with the given
premises and prove s.
Module - I July 18, 2020 15 / 19
CP rule
5. Derive p → s using the CP-rule from the premises ¬p ∨ q, ¬q ∨ r , r → s.
Solution
By CP-rule, we assume an additional premise p along with the given
premises and prove s.
Steps Logical Statement Reason
1 p Rule P (additional)
2 ¬p ∨ q Rule P
3 q Rule T, Disjunctive Syllogism of (1) and (2)
4 ¬q ∨ r Rule P
5 r Rule T, Disjunctive Syllogism of (3) and (4)
6 r →s Rule P
7 s Rule T, Modus Ponens of (5) and (6)
Module - I July 18, 2020 15 / 19
Problems
1. Show that the following argument is valid. If today is Tuesday, I have a
test in Mathematics or Economics. If my Economics professor is sick, I will
not have a test in Economics. Today is Tuesday, and my Economics
professor is sick. Therefore, I will have a test in Mathematics
2. Show that p → q, r → s, q → t, s → u, ¬(t ∧ u), p → r =⇒ ¬p
3. Check the validity of the argument.
If John gets the office position and works hard, then he will get bonus. If
he gets bonus, then he will go on a trip . He didnot go on a trip.
Therefore, either he did not get the office position or he didnot work hard.
4. Show that the following set of premises is inconsistent.
If Rama gets her degree, she will go for a job. If she goes for a job, she
will get married soon. If she goes for higher studies, she will not get
married. Rama gets her degree and goes for higher studies.
Module - I July 18, 2020 16 / 19
Problems
5. Check whether the following set of premises is consistent.
If the contract is valid then John is liable for penalty. If John is liable for
penalty he will go bankrupt. If the bank will loan him money, he will not
go bankrupt. As a matter of fact,the contract is valid and the bank will
loan him money
6. Determine the validity of the following argument.
If my father praises me, then I can be proud of myself. Either I do well in
sports or I can’t be proud of myself. If I study hard, then I cannot do well
in sports. Therefore, If my father praises me then I donot study well.
7. Show that [¬p ∧ (¬q ∧ r )] ∨ (q ∧ r ) ∨ (p ∧ r ) =⇒ r [Hint: use logical
laws]
8. Show that (p → (q → r )) ∧ (q → (r → s)) =⇒ p → (q → s)
Module - I July 18, 2020 17 / 19
Problems
9. Prove the following: (a) p → q, q → r , ¬(p ∧ q), p ∨ r =⇒ r , (b)
c ∨ d, (c ∨ d) → ¬h, ¬h → (a ∧ ¬b), (a ∧ ¬b) → (r ∨ s) =⇒ r ∨ s, (c)
p → (q → s), ¬r ∨ p, q =⇒ r → s
10. Use indirect method of proof to verify the following: (i) ¬(p ∧ q)
follows from ¬p ∨ ¬q, (ii) ¬q follows from p → q, ¬p
11. Write the inverse, converse, and contrapositive of “Unless you report
to the exam cell before 9 am, you will not be permitted to write the exam”
Module - I July 18, 2020 18 / 19
Logical Puzzle
12. Consider a situation where 3 men (A,C,E) and 2 women (B,D) are
travelling in a train. The train passes through a tunnel and when it
emerges, it is found that E is murdered. An inquiry is held where A, B,C,D
made the following statements. Each person makes two statements.
A says : I am innocent. B was talking to E when the train was passing
through the tunnel.
B says: I am innocent. I was not talking to E when the train was passing
through the tunnel.
C says: I am innocent. D committed the murder.
D says: I am innocent. One of the men committed the murder.
Out of the 8 statements given above, 4 are true and 4 are false. Who is
the murderer. Support your answer with a precise and concise justification.
Module - I July 18, 2020 19 / 19
