PART B

1. Give the Truth table for ~ (p v (q Λ r) ↔ ((p v q) Λ (p → r)).

Solution:

p Q r qΛr p v( q Λ r) ~a pVq p→r (pVq) Λ ~a

≡a (p → r) ↔
≡b b
T T T T T F T T T F
T T F F T F T F F T
T F T F T F T T T F
T F F F T F T F F T
F T T T T F T T T F
F T F F F T T T T T
F F T F F T F T F F
F F F F F T F T F F
2. Show that ~ ((~p Λ q) v (~p Λ ~q)) v (p Λ q) ≡ p by proving the equivalences of the
results.
Solution:
L.H.S ≡ ~ ((~p Λ q) v (~p Λ ~q)) v (p Λ q)
≡ ~ ((~p Λ (q v ~q))) v (p Λ q)
≡ ~ ((~p ΛT)) v (p Λ q)
≡ ~ (~p) v (p Λ q)
≡ p v (p Λ q)
≡p by absorption law.
3. Without constructing the truth tables, find the principal disjunctive normal form for (~p
→ q) Λ (q ↔ p)
Solution:
(~p → q) Λ (q ↔ p) ≡ (p v q) Λ ((q Λ p) v (~q Λ ~p))
≡ (p v q) Λ ((p Λ q) v ~ (p V q))
≡ (p v q) Λ (p Λ q) v ((p v q) Λ ~ (p v q))
≡ ((p v q) Λ (p Λ q)) v F
≡ ((p Λ (p Λ q)) V ((q Λ (p Λ q))
≡ (p Λ q) V (p Λ q)
≡ (p Λ q)
4. Without constructing the truth tables, find the principal conjunctive normal form for
(p Λ q) V (~p Λ q Λ r).
Solution:
(p Λ q) V (~p Λ q Λ r)
 ≡ ((p Λ q) V ~p) Λ ((p Λ q) V q) Λ ((p Λ q) V r)
≡ (p V ~p) Λ (q V ~p) Λ (p V q) Λ (q V q) Λ (p V r) Λ (q V r)
≡ T Λ (~p V q) Λ (p V q) Λ q Λ (p V r) Λ (q V r)
≡ ((~p V q) V (r Λ ~r)) Λ ((p V q) V (r Λ ~r)) Λ q V (p Λ ~p) Λ (p V r) V
(q Λ ~q) Λ (q V r) V (p Λ ~p)
≡ (~p V q V r) Λ (~p V q V ~r) Λ (p V q V r) Λ (p V q V ~r) Λ (q V p) Λ
(q V ~p) Λ (p V r V q) Λ (p V r V ~q) Λ (q V r V p) Λ (q V r V ~p)
≡ (~p V q V r) Λ (~p V q V ~r) Λ (p V q V r) Λ (p V q V ~r) Λ ((q V p) V
(r Λ ~r)) Λ ((q V ~p) V (r Λ ~r) (Omitting repetitions)
≡ (~p V q V r) Λ (~p V q V ~r) Λ (p V q V r) Λ (p V q V ~r) Λ
(p V ~q V r) (Deleting repetitions)
5. State the rules of Inference theory in predicate calculus.
Rule US:

P(a) is true, if ∀x P(x) is true, where a is an arbitrary member of the universe of

Universal specification is the rule of inference which states that one can conclude that

discourse.
Rule ES:

∃x P(x) is true, where a is an arbitrary member of the universe, but one for which P(a) is
Existential Specification is the rule which allows us to conclude that P(a) is true, if

true. Usually we will not know what a is, but know that it exists. Since it exists, we may
call it a.
Rule UG:
Universal Generalization is the rule which stated that ∀x P(x) is true, if P(a) is true,
where a is an arbitrary member of the universe of discourse.
Rule EG:
Existential Generalization is the rule that is used to conclude that ∃ x P(x) is true when
P(a) is true, where a is a particular member of the universe of discourse.
6. Prove the following famous Socrates argument using inference theory.
All men are mortal.
Socrates is a man.
Therefore Socrates is a mortal.
Solution:
Let us use the notations
H(x): x is a man
 M(x): x is a mortal.
s: Socrates.
With these symbolic notations the problem becomes
∀x (H(x) → M(x)) Λ H(s) => M(s)
The derivation of the proof is as follows

Step No. Statement Reason

1. ∀x (H(x) → M(x)) P
2. H(s) → M(s) US, 2
3. H(s) P
4. M(s) T, 2, 3

7. Show that b can be derived from the premises a → b, c → b, d → (a V c), d, by the

indirect method.
Solution: Let us include ~b as an additional premise and prove a contradiction.
Step No. Statement Reason
1. a→b P
2. c→b P
3. (a V c) → b T, 1, 2
4. d → (a V c) P
5. d→b T, 3, 4
6. d P
7. b T, 5, 6
8. ~b P
9. b Λ ~b T, 7, 8
10. F T, 9
8. Prove the implication
∀x ( P(x) → Q(x)), ∀x (R(x) → ~ Q(x)) => ∀x( R(x) → ~P(x))
Solution:
Step No. Statement Reason
1. ∀x (P(x) → Q(x)) P
2. P(a) → Q(a) US, 1
3. ∀x (R(x) → ~ Q(x)) P
4. R(a) → ~Q(a) US, 2
5. Q(a) → ~R(a) T, 4
6. P(a) → ~R(a) T, 2, 5
 7. R(a) → ~P(a) T, 6
8. ∀x (R(x) → ~P(x)) UG and 7
9. Show that the following set of premises is inconsistent.
If Rama gets his degree, he will go for a job.
If he goes for a job, he will get married soon.
If he goes for higher study, he will not get married.
Rama gets his degree and goes for higher study.
Solution:
Let the statements be symbolized as follows
p: Rama gets his degree.
q: He will go for a job.
r: He will get married soon.
s: He goes for higher study.
Then we have to prove that
p → q, q → r, s → ~r, p Λ s are inconsistent.
Step No. Statement Reason
1. p→q P
2. q→r P
3. p→r T, 1, 2
4. pΛs P
5. p T, 4
6. s T, 4
7. s → ~r P
8. ~r T, 6, 7
9. r T 3, 5
10. r Λ ~r T, 8 , 9
11. F T, 10
Hence the set of given premises is inconsistent.
10. Show that ¬¿ ¿ P( a , b) follows logically from ( x )( y ) ( P( x , y )→W ( x , y ) ) and
¬¿ ¿ W(a , b)

Solution:
Step No. Statement Reason
1. ( x )( y ) ( P( x , y )→W ( x , y ) ) Rule P
2. ( y ) ( P(a , y )→W (a , y ) ) Rule US, 1
3. P(a , b )→W (a , b ) Rule US, 2
4. ¬W (a , b ) Rule P
5. ¬¿ ¿ P(a,b) Rule T, 3 and 4
 11 Show that
(p → q) Λ (r → s), (q → t) Λ (s → u), ~(t Λ u) and (p → r) => ~p.
Step No. Statement Reason
1. (p → q) Λ (r → s) P
2. p→q T, 1
3. r→s T, 1
4. (q → t) Λ (s → u) P
5. q→t T, 4
6. s→u T, 4
7. p→t T, 2, 5
8. r→u T, 3, 6
9. p→r P
10. p→u T, 8, 9
11. ~t → ~p T, 7
12. ~u → ~p T, 10
13. (~t V ~u) → ~p T, 11, 12
14. ~( t Λ u) → ~p T, 13
15. ~(t Λ u) P
16. ~p T, 14, 15
12Show that (a → b) Λ (a → c), ~(b Λ c), (d V a) => d.
Step No. Statement Reason
1. (a → b) Λ (a → c) P
2. a→b T, 1
3. a→c T, 1
4. ~b → ~a T, 2
5. ~c → ~a T, 3
6. ( ~b V ~c ) → ~a T, 4, 5
7. ~( b Λ c) → ~a T
8. ~ (b Λ c) P
9. ~a T, 7, 8
10. dVa P
11. (d V a) Λ ~a T, 9, 10
12. (d Λ ~a) V (a Λ ~a) T, 11
13. (d Λ ~a) V F T, 12
14. d Λ ~a T, 13
15. d T, 14
12. Prove that the premises a → (b → c), d → (b Λ ~c) and (a Λ d) are inconsistent.
Step No. Statement Reason
1. aΛd P
2. a T, 1
3. d T, 1
4. a → ( b → c) P
5. ( b → c) T, 2, 4
6. ~b v c T, 5
7. d → (b Λ ~c) P
8. ~(b Λ ~c) → ~d T, 7
9. ~b V c → ~d T, 8
10. ~d T, 6, 9
11. d Λ ~d T, 3, 10
12. F T, 11
13. Show that the premises “one student in this class knows how to write
programs in JAVA” and “Everyone who knows how to write programs in
JAVA can get a high paying job” imply the conclusion “Someone in this
class can get a high-paying job”.
Let C(x) represent “x is in this class”
J(x) represent “x knows JAVA programming” and
H(x) represent “x can get a high paying job”.
Then the given premises are ∃x (C(x) Λ J(x)) and ∀x (J(x) → H(x)). The conclusion
is ∃x (C(x) Λ H(x)).
Step No Statement Reason
1. ∃x (C(x) Λ J(x)) P
2. C(a) Λ J(a) ES, 1
3. C(a) T, 2
4. J(a) T, 2
5. ∀x (J(x) → H(x)) P
6. J(a) → H(a) US, 5
7. H(a) T, 4, 6
8. C(a) Λ H(a) T, 3 , 7
9. ∃x (C(x) Λ H(x)) EG, 8
14. Show that the conclusion ∀x (P(x) → ~Q(x)) follows from the premises.
∃x (P(x) Λ Q(X)) → ∀y (R(y) → S(y)) and ∃y (R(y) Λ ~S(y))
Step No Statement Reason
1. ∃y (R(y) Λ ~S(y)) P
2.
3.
R(a) Λ ~S(a) ES , 1

4.
~(R(a) → S(a)) T, 2

5.
∃y (~(R(y) → S(y)) EG, 3

6.
~∀y(R(y) → S(y)) T, 4

7.
∃x (P(x) Λ Q(x)) → ∀y (R(y) → S(y)) P

8.
~∃x(P(x) Λ Q(x)) T, 5, 6

9.
∀x ~(P(x) Λ Q(x)) T, 7

10.
~ (P(b) Λ Q(b)) US, 8

11.
~P(b) V ~Q(b) T, 9

12.
P(b) → ~Q(b) T, 10
∀x (P(x) → ~Q(x)) UG, 11
15. Prove that
x P(x) → x ((P(x) V Q(x)) → R(x)), x P(x), x Q(x) =>
x y (R(x) Λ R(y))
Step No. Statement Reason
1. x P(x) P
2. P(a) ES, 1
3. x Q(x) P
4. Q(b) ES, 3
5. x P(x) → x ((P(x) V Q(x)) → R(x)) P
6. P(a) → ((P(b) V Q(b))R(b)) ES, US, 5
7. (P(b) V Q(b)) → R(b) T, 2, 6
8. P(b) V Q(b) T, 4
9. R(b) T, 7, 8
10. x R(x) EG, 9
11. R(a) ES, 10
12. R(a) Λ R(b) T, 9, 11
13. y (R(a) Λ R(y)) EG, 12
14. x y (R(x) Λ R(y)) EG, 13
16. Use the indirect method to prove that the conclusion z Q(z) follows from
the premises x (P(x) → Q(x)) and y P(y).
Let us assume the additional premise ~(z Q(z)) and prove a contradiction.
Step No. Statement Reason
1. y P(y) P
2. P(a) ES, 1
3. ~(z Q(z)) P
4. z (~Q(z)) T, 3
5. ~ Q(a) US, 4
6. P(a) Λ ~Q(a) T, 2, 5
7. ~(~P(a) V Q(a)) T, 6
8. ~(P(a) → Q(a)) T, 7
9. x (P(x) → Q(x)) P
10. P(a) → Q(a) US, 9
11. (P(a) → Q(a)) Λ ~(P(a) → Q(a)) T, 8, 10
12. F T, 11