Logic in Action

Chapter 9: Proofs

http://www.logicinaction.org/

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 1 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Systems revised so far

Issues with the tableau method.

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 2 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Systems revised so far

Issues with the tableau method.

It is a refutation method.

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 2 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Systems revised so far

Issues with the tableau method.

It is a refutation method.

It does not follow the way humans reason.

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 2 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Systems revised so far

Issues with the tableau method.

It is a refutation method.

It does not follow the way humans reason.

Issues with the presented derivation systems.

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 2 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Systems revised so far

Issues with the tableau method.

It is a refutation method.

It does not follow the way humans reason.

Issues with the presented derivation systems.

Proofs are not very natural (e.g., try to prove ϕ → ¬¬ϕ).

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 2 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Systems revised so far

Issues with the tableau method.

It is a refutation method.

It does not follow the way humans reason.

Issues with the presented derivation systems.

Proofs are not very natural (e.g., try to prove ϕ → ¬¬ϕ).

They do not facilitate conditional reasoning.

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 2 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

The deduction property

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 3 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

The deduction property

Σ, ϕ |= ψ if and only if Σ |= ϕ → ψ

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 3 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

What if we can make assumptions?

Consider a proof for ϕ → ϕ.

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 4 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

What if we can make assumptions?

Consider a proof for ϕ → ϕ.

Using the derivation system presented in Chapter 2, the proof

takes several steps.

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 4 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

What if we can make assumptions?

Consider a proof for ϕ → ϕ.

Using the derivation system presented in Chapter 2, the proof

takes several steps.

But if we can make assumptions . . .

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 4 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

What if we can make assumptions?

Consider a proof for ϕ → ϕ.

Using the derivation system presented in Chapter 2, the proof

takes several steps.

But if we can make assumptions . . .

1 ϕ

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 4 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

What if we can make assumptions?

Consider a proof for ϕ → ϕ.

Using the derivation system presented in Chapter 2, the proof

takes several steps.

But if we can make assumptions . . .

1 ϕ
2 ϕ repetition 1

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 4 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

What if we can make assumptions?

Consider a proof for ϕ → ϕ.

Using the derivation system presented in Chapter 2, the proof

takes several steps.

But if we can make assumptions . . .

1 ϕ
2 ϕ repetition 1

3 ϕ→ϕ deduction 1-2

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 4 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

What if we can make assumptions?

Consider a proof for ϕ → ϕ.

Using the derivation system presented in Chapter 2, the proof

takes several steps.

But if we can make assumptions . . .

1 ϕ
2 ϕ repetition 1

3 ϕ→ϕ deduction 1-2

This is the main idea for the deduction rule.

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 4 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

The deduction rule

Suppose you want to prove ϕ → ψ.

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 5 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

The deduction rule

Suppose you want to prove ϕ → ψ.

Assume ϕ.

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 5 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

The deduction rule

Suppose you want to prove ϕ → ψ.

Assume ϕ.
If after further steps

ϕ
..
.

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 5 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

The deduction rule

Suppose you want to prove ϕ → ψ.

Assume ϕ.
If after further steps
you can prove ψ,

ϕ
..
.
ψ

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 5 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

The deduction rule

Suppose you want to prove ϕ → ψ.

Assume ϕ.
If after further steps
you can prove ψ,
then you actually have ϕ → ψ.

ϕ
..
.
ψ
deduction

ϕ→ψ

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 5 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Recall

The three axioms for propositional logic

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 6 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Recall

The three axioms for propositional logic

1 ϕ → (ψ → ϕ)

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 6 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Recall

The three axioms for propositional logic

1 ϕ → (ψ → ϕ)
2 (ϕ → (ψ → χ)) → ((ϕ → ψ) → (ϕ → χ))

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 6 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Recall

The three axioms for propositional logic

1 ϕ → (ψ → ϕ)
2 (ϕ → (ψ → χ)) → ((ϕ → ψ) → (ϕ → χ))
3 (¬ϕ → ¬ψ) → (ψ → ϕ)

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 6 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Proving the axioms (1)

The axiom
ϕ → (ψ → ϕ)
can be proved from deduction:

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 7 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Proving the axioms (1)

The axiom
ϕ → (ψ → ϕ)
can be proved from deduction:

1 ϕ

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 7 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Proving the axioms (1)

The axiom
ϕ → (ψ → ϕ)
can be proved from deduction:

1 ϕ
2 ψ

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 7 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Proving the axioms (1)

The axiom
ϕ → (ψ → ϕ)
can be proved from deduction:

1 ϕ
2 ψ
3 ϕ repetition 1

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 7 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Proving the axioms (1)

The axiom
ϕ → (ψ → ϕ)
can be proved from deduction:

1 ϕ
2 ψ
3 ϕ repetition 1

4 ψ→ϕ deduction 2-3

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 7 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Proving the axioms (1)

The axiom
ϕ → (ψ → ϕ)
can be proved from deduction:

1 ϕ
2 ψ
3 ϕ repetition 1

4 ψ→ϕ deduction 2-3

5 ϕ → (ψ → ϕ) deduction 1-4

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 7 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Proving the axioms (2)

The axiom
(ϕ → (ψ → χ)) → ((ϕ → ψ) → (ϕ → χ))
can be proved from modus ponens and deduction:

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 8 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Proving the axioms (2)

The axiom
(ϕ → (ψ → χ)) → ((ϕ → ψ) → (ϕ → χ))
can be proved from modus ponens and deduction:

1 ϕ → (ψ → χ)

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 8 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Proving the axioms (2)

The axiom
(ϕ → (ψ → χ)) → ((ϕ → ψ) → (ϕ → χ))
can be proved from modus ponens and deduction:

1 ϕ → (ψ → χ)
2 ϕ→ψ

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 8 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Proving the axioms (2)

The axiom
(ϕ → (ψ → χ)) → ((ϕ → ψ) → (ϕ → χ))
can be proved from modus ponens and deduction:

1 ϕ → (ψ → χ)
2 ϕ→ψ
3 ϕ

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 8 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Proving the axioms (2)

The axiom
(ϕ → (ψ → χ)) → ((ϕ → ψ) → (ϕ → χ))
can be proved from modus ponens and deduction:

1 ϕ → (ψ → χ)
2 ϕ→ψ
3 ϕ
4 ψ modus ponens 3,2

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 8 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Proving the axioms (2)

The axiom
(ϕ → (ψ → χ)) → ((ϕ → ψ) → (ϕ → χ))
can be proved from modus ponens and deduction:

1 ϕ → (ψ → χ)
2 ϕ→ψ
3 ϕ
4 ψ modus ponens 3,2

5 ψ→χ modus ponens 3,1

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 8 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Proving the axioms (2)

The axiom
(ϕ → (ψ → χ)) → ((ϕ → ψ) → (ϕ → χ))
can be proved from modus ponens and deduction:

1 ϕ → (ψ → χ)
2 ϕ→ψ
3 ϕ
4 ψ modus ponens 3,2

5 ψ→χ modus ponens 3,1

6 χ modus ponens 4,5

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 8 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Proving the axioms (2)

The axiom
(ϕ → (ψ → χ)) → ((ϕ → ψ) → (ϕ → χ))
can be proved from modus ponens and deduction:

1 ϕ → (ψ → χ)
2 ϕ→ψ
3 ϕ
4 ψ modus ponens 3,2

5 ψ→χ modus ponens 3,1

6 χ modus ponens 4,5

7 ϕ→χ deduction 3-6

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 8 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Proving the axioms (2)

The axiom
(ϕ → (ψ → χ)) → ((ϕ → ψ) → (ϕ → χ))
can be proved from modus ponens and deduction:

1 ϕ → (ψ → χ)
2 ϕ→ψ
3 ϕ
4 ψ modus ponens 3,2

5 ψ→χ modus ponens 3,1

6 χ modus ponens 4,5

7 ϕ→χ deduction 3-6

8 (ϕ → ψ) → (ϕ → χ) deduction 2-7

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 8 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Proving the axioms (2)

The axiom
(ϕ → (ψ → χ)) → ((ϕ → ψ) → (ϕ → χ))
can be proved from modus ponens and deduction:

1 ϕ → (ψ → χ)
2 ϕ→ψ
3 ϕ
4 ψ modus ponens 3,2

5 ψ→χ modus ponens 3,1

6 χ modus ponens 4,5

7 ϕ→χ deduction 3-6

8 (ϕ → ψ) → (ϕ → χ) deduction 2-7

9 (ϕ → (ψ → χ)) → ((ϕ → ψ) → (ϕ → χ)) deduction 1-8

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 8 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

We need more

The axiom
(¬ϕ → ¬ψ) → (ψ → ϕ)
cannot be proved from modus ponens and deduction.

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 9 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

We need more

The axiom
(¬ϕ → ¬ψ) → (ψ → ϕ)
cannot be proved from modus ponens and deduction.

We need a way to deal with negations.

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 9 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

The refutation rule

Suppose you want to prove ϕ.

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 10 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

The refutation rule

Suppose you want to prove ϕ.

Assume ¬ϕ.

¬ϕ

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 10 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

The refutation rule

Suppose you want to prove ϕ.

Assume ¬ϕ.
If after further steps

¬ϕ
..
.

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 10 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

The refutation rule

Suppose you want to prove ϕ.

Assume ¬ϕ.
If after further steps
you can prove a contradiction ⊥,

¬ϕ
..
.
⊥

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 10 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

The refutation rule

Suppose you want to prove ϕ.

Assume ¬ϕ.
If after further steps
you can prove a contradiction ⊥,
then ¬ϕ cannot be true

¬ϕ
..
.
⊥

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 10 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

The refutation rule

Suppose you want to prove ϕ.

Assume ¬ϕ.
If after further steps
you can prove a contradiction ⊥,
then ¬ϕ cannot be true
so you actually have ϕ.

¬ϕ
..
.
⊥
refutation

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 10 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Proving the axioms (3)

The axiom
(¬ϕ → ¬ψ) → (ψ → ϕ)
can be proved from modus ponens, deduction and refutation:

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 11 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Proving the axioms (3)

The axiom
(¬ϕ → ¬ψ) → (ψ → ϕ)
can be proved from modus ponens, deduction and refutation:

1 ¬ϕ → ¬ψ

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 11 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Proving the axioms (3)

The axiom
(¬ϕ → ¬ψ) → (ψ → ϕ)
can be proved from modus ponens, deduction and refutation:

1 ¬ϕ → ¬ψ
2 ψ

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 11 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Proving the axioms (3)

The axiom
(¬ϕ → ¬ψ) → (ψ → ϕ)
can be proved from modus ponens, deduction and refutation:

1 ¬ϕ → ¬ψ
2 ψ
3 ¬ϕ

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 11 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Proving the axioms (3)

The axiom
(¬ϕ → ¬ψ) → (ψ → ϕ)
can be proved from modus ponens, deduction and refutation:

1 ¬ϕ → ¬ψ
2 ψ
3 ¬ϕ
4 ¬ψ modus ponens 3,1

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 11 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Proving the axioms (3)

The axiom
(¬ϕ → ¬ψ) → (ψ → ϕ)
can be proved from modus ponens, deduction and refutation:

1 ¬ϕ → ¬ψ
2 ψ
3 ¬ϕ
4 ¬ψ modus ponens 3,1

5 ⊥ modus ponens 2,4

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 11 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Proving the axioms (3)

The axiom
(¬ϕ → ¬ψ) → (ψ → ϕ)
can be proved from modus ponens, deduction and refutation:

1 ¬ϕ → ¬ψ
2 ψ
3 ¬ϕ
4 ¬ψ modus ponens 3,1

5 ⊥ modus ponens 2,4

6 ϕ refutation 3-5

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 11 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Proving the axioms (3)

The axiom
(¬ϕ → ¬ψ) → (ψ → ϕ)
can be proved from modus ponens, deduction and refutation:

1 ¬ϕ → ¬ψ
2 ψ
3 ¬ϕ
4 ¬ψ modus ponens 3,1

5 ⊥ modus ponens 2,4

6 ϕ refutation 3-5

7 ψ→ϕ deduction 2-6

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 11 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Proving the axioms (3)

The axiom
(¬ϕ → ¬ψ) → (ψ → ϕ)
can be proved from modus ponens, deduction and refutation:

1 ¬ϕ → ¬ψ
2 ψ
3 ¬ϕ
4 ¬ψ modus ponens 3,1

5 ⊥ modus ponens 2,4

6 ϕ refutation 3-5

7 ψ→ϕ deduction 2-6

8 (¬ϕ → ¬ψ) → (ψ → ϕ) deduction 1-7

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 11 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

Proving the axioms (3)

The axiom
(¬ϕ → ¬ψ) → (ψ → ϕ)
can be proved from modus ponens, deduction and refutation:

1 ¬ϕ → ¬ψ
2 ψ
3 ¬ϕ
4 ¬ψ modus ponens 3,1

5 ⊥ modus ponens 2,4

6 ϕ refutation 3-5

7 ψ→ϕ deduction 2-6

8 (¬ϕ → ¬ψ) → (ψ → ϕ) deduction 1-7

For step 5, note that ¬ψ can be seen as an abbreviation of ψ → ⊥.

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 11 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

So . . .

ϕ,ϕ→ψ
modus ponens
ψ
ϕ ¬ϕ
.. ..
. .
ψ ⊥
deduction refutation

ϕ→ψ ϕ

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 12 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

So . . .

ϕ,ϕ→ψ
modus ponens
ψ
ϕ ¬ϕ
.. ..
. .
ψ ⊥
deduction refutation

ϕ→ψ ϕ

The modus ponens, deduction and refutation rules are a complete system for
propositional logic.

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 12 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

To facilitate things . . .

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 13 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

To facilitate things . . .

Natural deduction introduces rules to manipulate all the

connectives in an easy way.

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 13 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

For implication →

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 14 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

For implication →

ϕ,ϕ→ψ
modus ponens

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 14 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

For implication →

ϕ,ϕ→ψ
modus ponens

E→

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 14 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

For implication →

ϕ
ϕ,ϕ→ψ ..
.
modus ponens

ψ ψ
deduction

ϕ→ψ

E→

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 14 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

For implication →

ϕ
ϕ,ϕ→ψ ..
.
modus ponens

ψ ψ
deduction

ϕ→ψ

E→ I→

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 14 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

For negation ¬

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 15 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

For negation ¬

¬ϕ , ϕ

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 15 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

For negation ¬

¬ϕ , ϕ

E¬

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 15 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

For negation ¬

¬ϕ
¬ϕ , ϕ ..
.
⊥ ⊥
refutation

E¬

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 15 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

For negation ¬

¬ϕ
¬ϕ , ϕ ..
.
⊥ ⊥
refutation

E¬ I¬

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 15 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

For conjunction ∧

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 16 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

For conjunction ∧

ϕ∧ψ

ϕ∧ψ

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 16 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

For conjunction ∧

ϕ∧ψ

ϕ∧ψ

E∧

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 16 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

For conjunction ∧

ϕ∧ψ

ϕ
ϕ,ψ

ϕ∧ψ
ϕ∧ψ

E∧

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 16 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

For conjunction ∧

ϕ∧ψ

ϕ
ϕ,ψ

ϕ∧ψ
ϕ∧ψ

E∧ I∧

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 16 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

For disjunction ∨

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 17 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

For disjunction ∨

ϕ ψ
ϕ∨ψ, .. , ..
. .
χ χ

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 17 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

For disjunction ∨

ϕ ψ
ϕ∨ψ, .. , ..
. .
χ χ

E∨

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 17 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

For disjunction ∨

ϕ
ϕ ψ
ϕ∨ψ, .. , .. ϕ∨ψ
. .
χ χ
ψ
χ
ϕ∨ψ

E∨

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 17 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Propositional Logic

For disjunction ∨

ϕ
ϕ ψ
ϕ∨ψ, .. , .. ϕ∨ψ
. .
χ χ
ψ
χ
ϕ∨ψ

E∨ I∨

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 17 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Predicate Logic

For predicate logic

In order to present introduction and elimination rules for both ∀ and ∃, we

need to recall two notions.

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 18 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Predicate Logic

For predicate logic

In order to present introduction and elimination rules for both ∀ and ∃, we

need to recall two notions.

Bounded variable.

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 18 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Predicate Logic

For predicate logic

In order to present introduction and elimination rules for both ∀ and ∃, we

need to recall two notions.

Bounded variable.

Substitution of a variable for a term in a formula.

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 18 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Predicate Logic

Bounded variable

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 19 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Predicate Logic

Bounded variable

Scope of a quantifier. In a formula of the form ∀xϕ (∃xϕ), the

subformula ϕ is said to be the scope of the quantifier ∀ (∃).

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 19 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Predicate Logic

Bounded variable

Scope of a quantifier. In a formula of the form ∀xϕ (∃xϕ), the

subformula ϕ is said to be the scope of the quantifier ∀ (∃).

Binding a variable. In a formula of the form ∀xϕ (∃xϕ), the

quantifier ∀ (∃) binds any occurrence of x in ϕ that is not bounded by
another quantifier inside ϕ.

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 19 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Predicate Logic

Bounded variable

Scope of a quantifier. In a formula of the form ∀xϕ (∃xϕ), the

subformula ϕ is said to be the scope of the quantifier ∀ (∃).

Binding a variable. In a formula of the form ∀xϕ (∃xϕ), the

quantifier ∀ (∃) binds any occurrence of x in ϕ that is not bounded by
another quantifier inside ϕ.

Bounded variable. An occurrence of a variable x is bounded in a

formula ϕ if there is a quantifier in ϕ that binds it.

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 19 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Predicate Logic

Substitution (1)

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 20 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Predicate Logic

Substitution (1)

Substitution inside a term. Replacing the occurrences of the variable y for

the term t inside the term s produces the term denoted by

(s)yt

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 20 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Predicate Logic

Substitution (1)

Substitution inside a term. Replacing the occurrences of the variable y for

the term t inside the term s produces the term denoted by

(s)yt

Formally,

For a constant: (c)yt := c

8
<(x)yt := x for x different from y
For a variable:
:(y)yt := t

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 20 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Predicate Logic

Substitution (1)

Substitution inside a term. Replacing the occurrences of the variable y for

the term t inside the term s produces the term denoted by

(s)yt

Formally,

For a constant: (c)yt := c

8
<(x)yt := x for x different from y
For a variable:
:(y)yt := t

Examples:

(a)x
c := a

(x)ya := x
(z)zy := y

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 20 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Predicate Logic

Substitution (2)

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 21 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Predicate Logic

Substitution (2)

Substitution inside a formula. Replacing the free occurrences of the

variable y for the term t inside the formula ϕ produces the formula denoted
by
(ϕ)yt

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 21 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Predicate Logic

Substitution (2)

Substitution inside a formula. Replacing the free occurrences of the

variable y for the term t inside the formula ϕ produces the formula denoted
by
(ϕ)yt
Formally,

(P t1 · · · tn )yt := P (t1 )yt · · · (tn )yt

8
< (∀xϕ)y := ∀x(ϕ)y
t t
(¬ϕ)yt := ¬(ϕ)yt : (∀yϕ)yt := ∀yϕ
(ϕ ∧ ψ)yt := (ϕ)yt ∧ (ψ)yt
(ϕ ∨ ψ)yt := (ϕ)yt ∨ (ψ)yt 8
< (∃xϕ)y := ∃x(ϕ)y
(ϕ → ψ)yt := (ϕ)yt → (ψ)yt t t
: (∃yϕ)yt := ∃yϕ
(ϕ ↔ ψ)yt := (ϕ)yt ↔ (ψ)yt

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 21 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Predicate Logic

For the universal quantifier ∀

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 22 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Predicate Logic

For the universal quantifier ∀

∀x ϕ

(ϕ)x
t

provided that no variable in t

occurs bounded in ϕ

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 22 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Predicate Logic

For the universal quantifier ∀

∀x ϕ

(ϕ)x
t

provided that no variable in t

occurs bounded in ϕ

E∀

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 22 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Predicate Logic

For the universal quantifier ∀

∀x ϕ ..
.
(ϕ)x (ϕ)x
u
t

∀x ϕ

provided that no variable in t for u a special symbol not used

occurs bounded in ϕ anywhere else in the proof

E∀

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 22 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Predicate Logic

For the universal quantifier ∀

∀x ϕ ..
.
(ϕ)x (ϕ)x
u
t

∀x ϕ

provided that no variable in t for u a special symbol not used

occurs bounded in ϕ anywhere else in the proof

E∀ I∀

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 22 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Predicate Logic

For the existential quantifier ∃

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 23 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Predicate Logic

For the existential quantifier ∃

u
(ϕ)x
u
∃x ϕ , ..
.
ψ

for u a special symbol not used

anywhere in the proof

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 23 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Predicate Logic

For the existential quantifier ∃

u
(ϕ)x
u
∃x ϕ , ..
.
ψ

for u a special symbol not used

anywhere in the proof

E∃

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 23 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Predicate Logic

For the existential quantifier ∃

u
(ϕ)x
u
∃x ϕ , .. (ϕ)x
. t

ψ ∃x ϕ
ψ

for u a special symbol not used provided that no variable in t

anywhere in the proof occurs bounded in ϕ

E∃

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 23 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Predicate Logic

For the existential quantifier ∃

u
(ϕ)x
u
∃x ϕ , .. (ϕ)x
. t

ψ ∃x ϕ
ψ

for u a special symbol not used provided that no variable in t

anywhere in the proof occurs bounded in ϕ

E∃ I∃

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 23 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Predicate Logic

For the identity symbol =

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 24 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Predicate Logic

For the identity symbol =

t1 = t2 , ϕ
ϕ[t1 /t2 ]

t1 = t2 , ϕ
ϕ[t2 /t1 ]
where ϕ[t1 /t2 ] is the result of replac-
ing, in ϕ, some ocurrences of t2 by
t1 , provided that

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 24 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Predicate Logic

For the identity symbol =

t1 = t2 , ϕ
ϕ[t1 /t2 ]

t1 = t2 , ϕ
ϕ[t2 /t1 ]
where ϕ[t1 /t2 ] is the result of replac-
ing, in ϕ, some ocurrences of t2 by
t1 , provided that
t2 contains only variables that
occurr freely in ϕ, and

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 24 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Predicate Logic

For the identity symbol =

t1 = t2 , ϕ
ϕ[t1 /t2 ]

t1 = t2 , ϕ
ϕ[t2 /t1 ]
where ϕ[t1 /t2 ] is the result of replac-
ing, in ϕ, some ocurrences of t2 by
t1 , provided that
t2 contains only variables that
occurr freely in ϕ, and
t1 contains only variables that
do not get bounded after
replacement.

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 24 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Predicate Logic

For the identity symbol =

t1 = t2 , ϕ
ϕ[t1 /t2 ]

t1 = t2 , ϕ
ϕ[t2 /t1 ]
where ϕ[t1 /t2 ] is the result of replac-
ing, in ϕ, some ocurrences of t2 by
t1 , provided that
t2 contains only variables that
occurr freely in ϕ, and
t1 contains only variables that
do not get bounded after
replacement.

E=

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 24 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Predicate Logic

For the identity symbol =

t1 = t2 , ϕ
ϕ[t1 /t2 ]

t1 = t2 , ϕ t=t

ϕ[t2 /t1 ]
where ϕ[t1 /t2 ] is the result of replac- for any term t.
ing, in ϕ, some ocurrences of t2 by
t1 , provided that
t2 contains only variables that
occurr freely in ϕ, and
t1 contains only variables that
do not get bounded after
replacement.

E=

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 24 / 24
 Natural Deduction for Predicate Logic

For the identity symbol =

t1 = t2 , ϕ
ϕ[t1 /t2 ]

t1 = t2 , ϕ t=t

ϕ[t2 /t1 ]
where ϕ[t1 /t2 ] is the result of replac- for any term t.
ing, in ϕ, some ocurrences of t2 by
t1 , provided that
t2 contains only variables that
occurr freely in ϕ, and
t1 contains only variables that
do not get bounded after
replacement.

E= I=

(http://www.logicinaction.org/) 24 / 24