Discrete Mathematics Unit-1
Uploaded by
revanthsrinu6Discrete Mathematics Unit-1
Uploaded by
revanthsrinu6WELCOME TO ALL B.
Tech 2nd YEAR I SEM STUDENTS
DISCRETE
MATHEMATICAL
STRUCTURES
NOTES ON UNIT-1
Syllabus
UNIT – I: Mathematical Logic
Propositional logic and Predicate Calculus:
Statements and Notations, Connectives, Truth Tables,
Tautologies, Well-formed formulas, Equivalence of Formulas,
Tautological Implications, Normal Forms, Theory of Inference
for Statement Calculus, Consistency of Premises, Indirect
Method of Proof, Predicative Logic, Statement Functions,
Variables and Quantifiers, free and bound variables, inference
theory for predicate calculus.
UNIT – II: Sets, Relations & Functions
UNIT – III: Graph Theory I & II
UNIT – IV: Algebraic Structures & Combinatorics
UNIT – V: Recurrence Relation
TEXT BOOKS
Text Book:
1. Tremblay, Manohar, Discrete Mathematical Structures with Applications
to Computer Science, TMH Publications[1,2,3,4,5]
Reference Text Books:
1. Chandrasekaran,Umaparvathi,Discrete Mathematics,PHI,
2010[1,2,3,4,5]
2. Ralph. P.Grimaldi, Ramana, Discrete and Combinational
Mathematics,Pearson,5th edition. [1,2,3,4,5]
3. https://nptel.ac.in/courses/106/106/106106183/[1,2,3,4,5]
4. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Awoo5kE-
kQ&list=PL8xmnXn7pVtzAxYSeAXSVxrzoYbETf1NA [1,2,3,4,5]
Text book front page
Pre-requisites and Course Outcomes
Pre-requisites : Basic mathematical knowledge
Course Outcomes: At the end of the course, the student will be able to:
CO1:Construct mathematical arguments using logical connectives and
quantifiers and verify them.
CO2:Demonstrate the basic terminology of functions, relations, lattices and
their operations through examples
CO3:Apply the properties of graphs to solve the graph theory problems.
CO4:Apply basic principles/techniques to solve different algebraic structures
& combinatorial problems.
CO5:Solve linear recurrence relations by recognizing homogeneity using
constant coefficients and characteristic roots and Generating functions
APPLICATIONS OF DISCRETE
MATHEMATICS
• Data Structures
• Relational database theory
• Automata Theory
• Algorithm design
• Compiler design
• Permutation and Combinations
What is Discrete Mathematics?
• Discrete Mathematics
Discrete Mathematics is the study of
mathematical structures that are fundamentally
discrete rather than continuous.
Discrete Mathematics focus on
problems that are not over a continuous domain.
Statement (or) Proposition
• A Statement is a declarative sentence that is either true or
false but not both.
• A Statement is also referred to as Proposition.
• Statements or Propositions are usually represented by small
or lowercase letters such as p,q,r,s..........
• Example:
p: 2+2=4 ..... (True)
q: It is Sunday today.....(False)
• The truth or falsity of a proposition or Statement is called it
is “truth value”.
• If the proposition is true, we say that it has a truth value of
“True” denoted by ‘T’.
• If the proposition is false, we say that it has a truth value of
“False” denoted by ‘F’.
Exercise on Statement or Proposition
• Grass is Green
• 4+2=7
• 3+5=8
• There are 4 fingers in a hand
• X+2=5
• Give me some water.
• How are you?
• Today is awesome!
• X+Y=9
• Close the door
• X is greater than 5
• He is very rich.
Answers for Exercise
Statement Truth Value Statement/Proposition
Grass is Green T Statement/Proposition
4+2=7 F Statement/Proposition
3+5=8 T Statement/Proposition
There are 4 fingers in a hand F Statement/Proposition
X+2=5 Not T or F Not a Statement/Proposition
Give me some water. Not T or F Not a Statement/Proposition
How are you? Not T or F Not a Statement/Proposition
Close the Door Not T or F Not a Statement/Proposition
X is greater than 5 Not T or F Not a Statement/Proposition
He is very rich Not T or F Not a Statement/Proposition
Today is awesome! Not T or F Not a Statement/Proposition
X+Y=9 Not T or F Not a Statement/Proposition
Compound Statement or Proposition
• A Compound Statement or Proposition is obtained
by combining the given propositions by inserting
words like “not”, “and”, “or”, “if...then”, “if and
only if” . Such words are called as “Logical
Connectives”.
• Propositions which do not contain any logical
connectives are called “primary or atomic
statement”
• The truth value of a compound proposition
depends on those of sub propositions and the way
in which they are combined using connectives.
LOGICAL CONNECTIVES
• The following are logical connectives
1. Negation (not, )
2. Conjunction (and, )
3. Disjunction (or, )
4. Exclusive-or (either-or, )
5. Implication or Conditional (if – then, )
6. Biconditional (if and only if, )
LOGICAL CONNECTIVES: NEGATION
• A proposition obtained by inserting the word
“not” at an appropriate place in a given
proposition is called the negation of the given
proposition.
• The symbol used for negation is ‘ ’
• The negation of a proposition p is denoted by
p(read it as ‘not p’).
Truth table of a Negation
• Truth table:
p p
T F
F T
1.The first column in the above truth table indicates the possible
truth values of p
2.The second column gives the corresponding truth vale of p
EXAMPLE FOR NEGATION
• Let the proposition
p: 3 is a prime number
p: 3 is not a prime number
• Let the proposition
p: New Delhi is in India
p: New Delhi is not in India
or
it is not the case that New Delhi is in India
or
it is false that New Delhi is in India
LOGICAL CONNECTIVES:
CONJUNCTION
• A Compound proposition obtained by
combining two given propositions by inserting
the word ‘and’ in between them is called the
conjunction of the given propositions.
• The symbol used for Conjunction is “”
• The conjunction of two propositions p and q is
denoted by pq( read “p and q”)
• The conjunction of pq is true only when p is
true and q is true; in all other cases it is false.
Truth table of Conjunction
• Truth table:
in the below truth table, the last column
indicates the truth value of p q for all
possible combinations of the truth values of p
and q given in the first 2 columns.
p q pq
T T T
T F F
F T F
F F F
Examples on Conjunction
Example-1:
p: It is raining
q: it is warm
pq : It is raining and it is warm
Now what is the truth value of pq is ______
Example-2:
p: 2+3=5
q: 1<2
pq : 2+3=5 and 1<2
Now what is the truth value of pq is ______
LOGICAL CONNECTIVES: DISJUNCTION
• A Compound proposition obtained by
combining two given propositions by inserting
the word ‘or’ in between them is called the
disjunction of the given propositions.
• The symbol used for Disjunction is “”
• The disjunction of two propositions p and q is
denoted by p q( read “p or q”)
• The Disjunction of p q is false only when p is
false and q is false; in all other cases it is true.
Truth table of Disjunction
• Truth table:
in the below truth table, the last column
indicates the truth value of p q for all
possible combinations of the truth values of p
and q given in the first 2 columns.
p q pq
T T T
T F T
F T T
F F F
Examples on Disjunction
Example-1:
p: Today is Sunday
q: 2+3=5
p q : Today is Sunday or 2+3=5
Now what is the truth value of p q is ______
Example-2:
p: 5-3=2
q: 1<2
p q : 5-3=2 or 1<2
Now what is the truth value of p q is ______
LOGICAL CONNECTIVES: EXCUSIVE- OR (XOR)
(or) EXCUSIVE DISJUNCTION
• A Compound proposition p q (read as either
p or q is true,but not both) is called the
exclusive disjunction of the propositions p and
q.
• The symbol used for Exclusive-or is “”
• The compound proposition of p q is true
only when either p is true or q is true but not
both; in all other cases it is false.
Truth table of Exclusive Disjunction
p q pq
T T F
T F T
F T T
F F F
Examples on Exclusive Disjunction
Example-1:
p: Today is Sunday
q: 2+3=5
p q : Either Today is Sunday or 2+3=5 is true, but not
both
Now what is the truth value of p q is ______
Example-2:
p: 5-3=2
q: 1<2
p q : Either 5-3=2 or 1<2 is true ,but not both
Now what is the truth value of p q is ______
LOGICAL CONNECTIVES:
CONDITIONAL (or) IMPLICATION
• A Compound proposition obtained by combining two given
propositions by using the words ‘if’ and ‘then’ at
appropriate place is called the conditional or implication of
the given propositions.
• The symbol used for Conditional or implication is “”
• The implication of two propositions p and q is denoted by
p q( read “if p, then q”)
• The implication of two propositions q and p is denoted by
q p ( read “if q, then p”) .
• The implication of p and q: p q is false only when p is
true and q is false; in all other cases it is true.
• The implication of q and p : q p is false only when q is
true and p is false; in all other cases it is true.
• It is important to note that p q is not equal to q p
Truth table of Conditional or
Implication
• Truth table:
in the below truth table, the last two
columns indicates the truth value of p q
and q p for all possible combinations of the
truth values of p and q given in the first 2
columns.
p q pq qp
T T T T
T F F T
F T T F
F F T T
Examples on Conditional or
Implication
Example-1:
p: 2 is a prime number
q: 6 is a perfect square
p q : if 2 is a prime number, then 6 is a perfect square
q p : if 6 is a perfect square, then 2 is a prime number
Now what is the truth value of p q is ______ and q p is _____
Example-2:
p: 3 is a prime number
q: 9 is multiple of 6
p q : if 3 is a prime number, then 9 is multiple of 6
q p : if 9 is multiple of 6, then 3 is a prime number
Now what is the truth value of p q is ______ and q p is _____
NOTE-1: in p q, p is called the hypothesis, antecedent,
premise
NOTE-2: in p q, q is called the conclusion, consequence
NOTE-3: p q ≠ q q
LOGICAL CONNECTIVES:
BICONDITIONAL
• If p and q are two propositions, the compound
proposition p q is called as p Biconditional
proposition q.
• The symbol used for Biconditional proposition is “”
• p q read it as “p if and only if q” or “ p iff q”
• q p read it as “q if and only if p” or “q iff p”
• p q can also be written as (p q) (q p) it can
be read it as “if p then q and if q then p”
• The compound proposition p q is true only when
both p and q have the same truth values; in all other
cases it false.
• It is important to note that p q is equal to q p
Truth table of Biconditional
• Truth table:
in the below truth table, the last column
indicates the truth value of p q for all possible
combinations of the truth values of p and q given
in the first 2 columns.
p q pq qp p q or
(p q ) (q p)
T T T T T
T F F T F
F T T F F
F F T T T
Examples on Biconditional
Example-1:
p: 2 is a prime number
q: 6 is a perfect square
p q : if 2 is a prime number, then 6 is a perfect square
q p : if 6 is a perfect square, then 2 is a prime number
p q: if 2 is a prime number, then 6 is a perfect square and if 6 is
a perfect square, then 2 is a prime number
Now what is the truth value of p q is _____
Example-2:
p: 3 is a prime number
q: 9 is multiple of 6
p q : if 3 is a prime number, then 9 is multiple of 6
q p : if 9 is multiple of 6, then 3 is a prime number
p q: if 3 is a prime number, then 9 is multiple of 6 and if 9 is
multiple of 6, then 3 is a prime number
Now what is the truth value of p q is _____
Converse, Inverse, Contrapositive
• Consider the proposition p q
i. p q converse is q p
ii. p q inverse is p q
iii. p q contrapositive is q p
Statement Formulas
• Statements which do not contain any connectives(and, or, if..then,
if and only if, either..or) are called “atomic” or “primary” or
“simple statements”.
• Example: i. Delhi is the capital of India.
ii. 2+5=7
• Statements which contain one or more primary statements and
some connectives are called “molecular” or “composite” or
“compound statements”.
• Example: i. Rama is a good boy and Seetha is a intelligent girl.
ii. 5*3=15 or 5-2=3
iii. If you work hard, then you will pass the exam
• Let p and q be any two statements. Some of the
compound statements or Statement formulas formed by
using p and q are
i. p NOTE-1:-.The compound statements
given beside mentioned are called as
ii. p q “Statement Formulas” derived from
the statement variables p and q , hence
iii. p q p and q are called the “Components of
iv. p q the statement Formulas”
v. p q NOTE-2:- Our objective is to
determine the truth value of a
vi. p q statement formula for each possible
combination of the truth values of
vii. p q the components.
viii. p q q
Truth Table:- A Table showing all the truth values of a statement formula
is called the “Truth Table of the statement formula”
Examples on Truth Tables
• Example-1: Construct the truth table for
(p q) (p q)
p q pq pq (p q) (p q)
T T T T T
T F T F F
F T T F F
F F F F T
Components : p ,q
Statement Formulas: (p q),(p q), (p q) (p q)
Examples on Truth Tables
• Example-2: Construct the truth table for
( p q) (p q)
p q p q ( p q) (p q) ( p q)
(p q)
T T F F F T F
T F F T T F F
F T T F T F F
F F T T T T T
Components : p ,q
Statement Formulas: p, q, ( p q), (p q), ( p q) (p q)
Examples on Truth Tables
• Example-3: Construct the truth table for
(p q) ( (p q) (q p) )
p q pq pq qp (p q) (q p) (p q) ( (p q)
(q p) )
T T T T T T T
T F F F T F T
F T F T F F T
F F T T T T T
Components : p ,q
Statement Formulas: p q, p q, q p, (p q) (q p),
(p q) ( (p q) (q p) )
Order of Precedence for Logical Connectives
• We will use the parentheses to specify the order in which
logical connectives in a compound proposition are to be
applied.
• The negation connective has precedence over all other
connectives.
• Ex:- p q means ( p) q
• The conjunction connective has precedence over the
disjunction connective.
• Ex:- p q r means (p q) r but not p (q r)
• Conditional() and Biconditional() operators have lower
precedence than other operators. Among them ,
Conditional() has precedence over Biconditional()
Exercise-1
Ex-1:- Write the following statement in Symbolic form
“ the crop will be destroyed if there is a flood”
Sol: The above statement can be divided into some simple
statements.
p: There is a flood
q: The crop will be destroyed
Symbolic form: p q
Exercise-2
Ex-2:- Write the following statement in Symbolic form
“ if Ramu takes B.Tech course or Seetha take
B.Arch course, then Lakshman takes B.Pharmacy
course”
Sol: The above statement can be divided into some simple
statements.
p: Ramu takes B.Tech course
q: Seetha take B.Arch course
r: Lakshman takes B.Pharmacy course
Symbolic form: (p q) r
Exercise-3
• Consider the following propositions concerned with a
triangle ABC.
p: ABC is isosceles
q: ABC is equilateral
r: ABC is equiangular
Write down the following compound propositions in
words
i. p ( q) ii. ( p) q iii. p q iv. q p
v. ( r) (q) vi. p ( q)
i. p ( q) : ABC is isosceles and ABC is not
equilateral
ii. ( p) q : ABC is not isosceles or ABC is
equilateral
iii. p q : if ABC is isosceles, then ABC is
equilateral
iv. q p: if ABC is equilateral, then ABC is isosceles
v. ( r) (q): if ABC is not equiangular , then ABC
is not equilateral
vi. p ( q): if ABC is isosceles, then ABC is not
equilateral and if ABC is not equilateral, then ABC is
isosceles
FUCTIONALLY COMPLETE SET
OF CONNECTIVES
(DISCRETE MATHEMATICS)
www.youtube.com/c/DIVVELASRINIVASARAO
91-9492704500
( Whats’up Number)
Functionally Complete Set of Connectives
• A set of connectives is said to be functionally complete set of
connectives if every compound statement or statement formula can
be expressed interms of an equivalent formula containing the
connectives only from this set.
• The sets of connectives {, } and {, } are functionally
complete sets.
• Example:
( i). p q ( p q)
p q can be expressed in {, }
( ii). p q ( p q)
p q can be expressed in {, }
( iii). p q p q
p q can be expressed in {, }
( iv) p q ( p q) ( q p)
p q can be expressed in {, }
• The sets of connectives {, } is not functionally complete
sets, because it is not possible to find an equivalent formula
containing connectives only from the set {, }
• {↑} and {↓} are functionally complete sets.
p p p (p p ) p ↓ p
p q ( p q) p ↓ q (p ↓ p) ↓ (q ↓ q)
{↓} is a functionally complete set because ↓ can be
expressed in {, }
p p p (p p ) p ↑ p
p q ( p q) (p ↑ q) (p ↑ p) ↑ (q ↑ q)
{↑} is a functionally complete set because ↓ can be
expressed in {, }
Note-1: , } and {, } are functionally complete sets.
Note-2:{, } is not a functionally complete set
Note-3: {↑} and {↓} are functionally complete sets
Tautology
• A Compound proposition or Statement formula
which is true for all possible truth values of its
components is called a “Tautology”
(or)
• A Compound proposition ‘P’ which contains
some components such as p1,p2,p3,……,pn is
called a Tautology, if it is true for every truth
value assignments for p1,p2,p3,……,pn.
• Tautology can also be called as “Universally
valid formula” or “logical truth”
Example on Tautology
• Example-1: Construct the truth table for
(p q) ( p q) and check whether it is a
Tautology or not?
p q p p q p q (p q) ( p q)
T T F T T T
T F F F F T
F T T T T T
F F T T T T
The given compound proposition (p q) ( p q) is true for all
possible truth values of its components, Hence the given compound
proposition is a Tautology (or) The final column of the above Truth table
contains only true values for all possible truth values of its components,
hence the given compound proposition is a Tautology.
Example on Tautology
• Example-2: Prove that, for any propositions p,q,r, the compound
proposition [p (q r)] [((p q) (p r)] is a
Tautology
p q r p q q r p p (q r) (p q) [p (q r)]
r (p r) [((p q)
(p r)]
T T T T T T T T T
T T F T F F F F T
T F T F T T T T T
T F F F T F T T T
F T T T T T T T T
F F T T T T T T
F F T T T T T T T
F F F T T T T T T
• Hence The given compound proposition
[p (q r)] [((p q) (p r) is true for
all possible truth values of its components,
Hence the given compound proposition is a
Tautology
(or)
The final column of the above Truth table
contains only true values for all possible truth
values of its components, hence the given
compound proposition is a Tautology.
Contradiction
• A Compound proposition or Statement formula
which is false for all possible truth values of its
components is called a “Contradiction”
(or)
• A Compound proposition ‘P’ which contains
some components such as p1,p2,p3,……,pn is
called a Contradiction, if it is false for every
truth value assignments for p1,p2,p3,……,pn.
• Contradiction can also be called as
“Universally invalid formula” or “logical
false”
Example on Contradiction
• Example-1: Construct the truth table for
(p q) (p q) and check whether it is a
Tautology or Contradiction?
p q pq pq (p q) (p q)
T T F T F
T F T F F
F T T F F
F F F T F
The given compound proposition (p q) (p q) is false for all
possible truth values of its components, Hence the given compound
proposition is a Contradiction (or) The final column of the above Truth
table contains only false values for all possible truth values of its
components, hence the given compound proposition is a Contradiction.
Example on Tautology & Contradiction
• Example-2: For any two propositions p and q, Show that, the
compound proposition p ( p q) is a Tautology and the
Compound Proposition p ( p q) is a Contradiction
p q pq p( p q) p pq p ( p q)
T T T T F F F
T F T T F F F
F T T T T T F
F F F T T F F
The given compound proposition p ( p q) is true for all possible
truth values of its components, Hence the given compound proposition is a
Tautology.
The given compound proposition p ( p q) ) is false for all possible
truth values of its components, Hence the given compound proposition is a
Contradiction
Example on Tautology & Contradiction
• Example-3: For any two propositions p and q, Show that, the
compound propositions p p and q q are Tautologies and
the compound Proposition p p and q q are
Contradictions
p q p q pp p p qq q q
T T F F T F T F
T F F T T F T F
F T T F T F T F
F F T T T F T F
The given compound propositions p p and q q are true for all
possible truth values of its components, Hence the given compound
propositions are Tautologies.
The given compound propositions p p and q q are false for all
possible truth values of its components, Hence the given compound
propositions are Contradictions
Contingency
• A Compound proposition or Statement formula
which is true or false for all possible truth
values of its components is called a
“Contingency”
(or)
• A Contingency is a compound proposition
which is neither a Tautology nor a
Contradiction
Example on Contingency
• Example-1: Construct the truth table for
(p q) (p q) and check whether it is a
Contingency or not?
p q pq pq (p q) (p q)
T T F T F
T F T F F
F T T T T
F F F T F
The given compound proposition (p q) (p q) is true or false
for all possible truth values of its components, Hence the given compound
proposition is a Contingency (or) The final column of the above Truth table
contains both true or false values for all possible truth values of its
components, hence the given compound proposition is a Contingency.
Examples on Tautology,
Contradiction, Contingency
• Tautology(always True):
p p and q q
• Contradiction(always False)
p p and q q
• Contingency(either True of False)
(p q) (p q)
EXAMPLE PROBLEMS
ON
LOGICAL EQUIVALENCE
WITH OR WITH OUT
USING
TRUTH TABLES
(DISCRETE
MATHEMATICS)
Logical Equivalence or Equivalence of Statement
Formulas or Compound Propositions
• Definition: Let A and B be two Compound Propositions
and p1, p2, p3,…., pn denotes the statements in both A and
B. Two compound propositions A and B are said to be
logically equivalent if the truth value of A is equal to the
truth value of B for every one of the 2n possible set of
truth values assigned to p1, p2, p3,…., pn.
• The equivalence of two compound propositions A and B
is denoted by AB or A ≡ B which is read as A is
equivalent to B.
• A B means A is not equivalent to B.
• Logical Equivalence is denoted by the symbol (or) ≡
• or ≡ is not a logical connective.
• To find out the Logical Equivalence of two compound
propositions, we have to use two methods.
1. Truth Table method
2. Using logical Equivalence formulas(without using
Truth table)
• In the Truth table method, first construct the truth table for the
given compound propositions, if the compound propositions
contains the same truth values for all possible truth values of
its components, hence we can say that, the two compound
propositions are logically Equivalent.
• In second method, we are using some logical equivalence
formulas, by using equivalence formulas we can say that , the
given compound propositions are logically Equivalent or not.
• First we have to concentrate on Truth table method, later we
go for second method.
Example on Logical Equivalence
• Example-1: for any two propositions p, q. Show that
(p q) ( p q)
Let us first construct the truth table for (p q) and ( p q)
p q pq p pq
T T T F T
T F F F F
F T T T T
F F T T T
We observe that the given compound proposition (p q) and( p
q) have identical truth values for all possible truth values of its components:
p and q, Hence we can say that (p q) ( p q)
• AB means A is logical equivalent to B whenever A and B
contains the same truth values for all possible truth values of
statements in A and B.
• If AB, then A B is a Tautology, Where A = p q and
B=pq
p q pq p pq (p q) ( p q)
T T T F T T
T F F F F T
F T T T T T
F F T T T T
Example on Logical Equivalence
• Example-2: for any three propositions p, q, r. Show that
p (q r) (p q) r
Let us first construct the truth table for p (q r) and (p q)
r
p q r qr p (q r) pq (p q)
r
T T T T T T T
T T F F F T F
T F T T T F T
T F F T T F T
F T T T T F T
F T F F T F T
F F T T T F T
F F F T T F T
• We observe that from the above truth table,
these two columns p (q r) and (p q)
r, have identical truth values for all possible
truth values of its components: p, q and r.
Hence we can say that
p (q r) (p q) r
• If p (q r) (p q) r, then p (q
r) (p q) r is a Tautology shown in
below table
Show that p (q r) (p q) r is a tautology.
p q r q r p (q r) p q (p q) p (q r) (p
r q) r
T T T T T T T T
T T F F F T F T
T F T T T F T T
T F F T T F T T
F T T T T F T T
F T F F T F T T
F F T T T F T T
F F F T T F T T
By observing the above truth table, the final column
Contains only True values, hence we can say that
The given compound proposition p (q r) (p q) r is a tautology
Example on Logical Equivalence
• Example-3: for any three propositions p, q, r. Show that
p (q r) (p q) (p r)
Let us first construct the truth table for p (q r) and (p q) (p
r)
p q r qr p (q r) pq pr (p q) (p r)
T T T T T T T T
T T F F F T F F
T F T F F F T F
T F F F F F F F
F T T T T T T T
F T F F T T T T
F F T F T T T T
F F F F T T T T
• We observe that from the above truth table,
these two columns p (q r) and (p q)
(p r) , have identical truth values for all
possible truth values of its components: p, q
and r. Hence we can say that
p (q r) (p q) (p r)
• If p (q r) (p q) r, then p (q
r) (p q) r is a Tautology
Example on Logical Equivalence
Example-4: for any three propositions p, q, r. Show that
p ( q r) and p ( q r) are not logically Equivalent.
Let us first construct the truth table for
p ( q r) and p ( q r)
p q r q qr p ( q r) r qr p ( q r)
T T T F T T F F T
T T F F F F T T T
T F T T T T F F T
T F F T T T T F T
F T T F T F F F F
F T F F F F T T T
F F T T T F F F F
F F F T T F T F F
• We observe that from the above truth table,
these two columns p ( q r) and p ( q
r) , have not identical truth values for all
possible truth values of its components: p, q
and r. Hence we can say that
p (q r) (p q) (p r)
• If p (q r) (p q) r, then p (q
r) (p q) r is not a Tautology
EQUIVALENCE FORMULAS
PPP P PP Idempotent laws
(P Q) R P (Q R) (P Q) R P (Q R) Association laws
PQQP P QQP Commutative laws
(P (Q R ) (P Q) (P R) (P (Q R ) (P Q) V(P R) Distributive laws
PFP PFF Identity laws
PTT PTP Dominant Laws
PPT PPF Complement laws
(P (P Q ) P (P (P Q ) P Absorption laws
(P Q) P Q (P Q) P Q De Morgan’s laws
EQUIVALENCE FORMULAS USING
CONDITIONALS
P Q P Q
P Q Q P
PQP Q
P Q (P Q )
(P Q ) P Q
( P Q ) ( P R ) P ( Q R)
( P R ) ( Q R ) (P Q ) R
( P Q ) ( P R ) P ( Q R)
( P R ) ( Q R ) (P Q ) R
EQUIVALENCE FORMULAS USING
BICONDITIONALS
P Q (P Q) ( Q P)
P Q P Q
P Q (P Q ) ( P Q )
(P Q ) (P Q )
Logical Equivalence with out using Truth tables
• Note: here we are using Equivalence formulas to check
whether the given compound statements are equal or not with
out using Truth table method.
• Example-1: With out using Truth table, prove the
following.
p (q r) (p q) r
• Sol: Take LHS : p (q r)
p ( q r ) [ by q r q r ]
p ( q r ) [ by p q p q ]
( p q) r [ by Associative law ]
( p q) r [ by De Morgan’s law ]
( p q) r [by p q p q ]
RHS
• Take RHS : ( p q) r
( p q) r [ by p r p r ]
( p q) r ) [ by De Morgan’s law ]
p ( q r ) [ by Associative law ]
p (q r) [ by q r q r ]
p (q r) [by p q p q ]
LHS
Therefore we can say that p (q r) (p q) r
• Example-2: With out using Truth table, prove the following.
(p r) (q r) (p q) r
Sol: Take LHS : (p r) (q r)
( p r ) ( q r ) [ by p r p r &
q r q r]
( p q ) r [ by taking negation common]
( p q) r [by p q p q ]
(p q) r
RHS
Take RHS : (p q) r
( p q) r [ by p r p r ]
( p q) r [ by applying negation ]
( p r ) ( q r ) [ by distributive law ]
(p r) (q r) [by p r p r & q r
qr]
LHS
hence we can say that (p r) (q r) (p q) r
• Example-3: With out using Truth table, prove the following.
[ p ( q r)] (q r ) (p r) r
• Sol: Take LHS : [ p ( q r)] (q r ) (p r)
[ by Associative Law & Commutative Law]
[( p q) r)] ( r q ) (r p)
[by Distributive Law & De Morgan’s Law]
[ (p q) r)] r (q p )
[ r (p q)] r (p q )
[ by Commutative Law]
r [ (p q) (p q ) ] [ by Commutative Law]
r [(p q ) (p q) ] [ by Complement Law]
r T [by Identity Law]
r
RHS
Therefore [ p ( q r)] (q r ) (p r) r
• Example-4: With out using Truth table, prove the following.
[(p q ) (p q ) ] q p q
• Sol: Take LHS : [(p q ) (p q ) ] q
[ by Distributive Law ]
[ p ( q q) ] q [by Complement Law]
[p F ] q [by Identity Law]
p q
RHS
Therefore [(p q ) (p q ) ] q p q
Example-5: with out using Truth table, prove the following.
p [ p (p q ) ] p
Sol: Take LHS : p [ p (p q ) ] [ by Absorption Law]
p p [by Idempotent law ]
p
RHS
Therefore p [ p (p q ) ] p
• Example-6: With out using Truth table, prove the following.
(p q ) [ q ( r q)] (q p)
• Sol: Take LHS : (p q ) [ q ( r q)]
[ by Commutative Law ]
(p q ) [ q ( q r)] [by Absorption
Law]
(p q ) q [by p q p q ]
( p q) q [ by Distributive Law]
( p q) (q q ) [ by Complement Law]
( p q) F [ by Identity Law]
( p q) [by Commutative Law ]
( q p) [by De Morgan’s Law ]
(q p)
RHS
Therefore (p q ) [ q ( r q)] (q p)
• Example-7: With out using Truth table, prove the following is a
Tautology.
[(p q) { p ( q r)}] ( p q) ( p r)
• Sol: Take A= [(p q) { p ( q r)}] ( p q)
( p r )
Take B= [(p q) { p ( q r)}]
Take C= ( p q) ( p r )
A= B C
Let us take B= (p q) { p ( q r)}
[Apply negation ]
(p q) {p ( q r)}
(p {q ( q r)}
(p {q q r}[ by Idempotent Law]
p (q r)
Now B= p (q r)
Let us take C= ( p q) ( p r )
(p q) (p r )
((p q) ( p r))
(p (q r))
B
B= (p (q r))
Therefore A= B C B B
( (p (q r)) (p (q r))
T [ by B B T]
Therefore, the given compound proposition [(p q) { p
( q r)}] ( p q) ( p r) is a Tautology.
DUALITY LAW
• Two formulas A and A* or Ad are said to be duals of
each other if either one can be obtained from the
other by replacing by and by . If the formula
A contains the special variables T or F, then A* or Ad
is obtained by replacing T by F and F by T.
• The connectives are also called duals of each
other.
• Example: Write down the duals of i. p (q r)
ii. ( p q) T
iii. (p q) (p (q s)
• The dual of p (q r) is p (q r)
• The dual of ( p q) T is ( p q) F
• The dual of (p q) (p (q s) is
(p q) (p (q s)
• Note-1: if any two compound statements are equivalent ,then
their duals are also equivalent to each other. This is known as
“Principle of Duality”
If A B, then A* B*
(or)
If A B, then Ad Bd
• Note-2: (Ad)d A (or) (A* ) * A (The dual of the dual of
A is logically equivalent to A
EXAMPLES ON DUALITY LAW
• Example-1: Write down the duals of the
following propositions.
i. p q dual is
(p q)* ( p q)* p q
ii. (p q) r dual is
[(p q) r]* [( p q) r]*
[( p q)) r]*
[(p q) r]*
(p q) r
iii. p (q r) dual is
[p (q r)]* [p (q r)]*
[ p (q r)]*
[ p (q r)]
p (q r)
iv. p (q r) dual is
[p (q r)]* [ p (q r)] *
[ p (q r)]
p (q r)
v. (p q) T dual is
[ (p q) T]* (p q) F
• Example-2: Verify the principle of duality for the
following logical equivalence
[ (p q) p ( p q)] p q
Sol: Let us take A= [ (p q) p ( p q)]
Let us take B = p q
A*= [ (p q) p ( p q)]*
[( (p q)) p ( p q)]*
[ (p q) p ( p q)]*
[ (p q) p p q]*
[ (p q) ( p q)]
[ (p p q)(q p q)]
[ (F q) (q q p)]
[ F ( p q)]
pq
B*= ( p q)*
pq
Therefore A* B* is proved
according to principle of Duality
If A B, then A* B*
Well-formed Formulas
• A Statement formula is an expression which is
a string consisting of statements, parentheses
and connective symbols.
• Not every string of these symbols is a formula.
• A recursive definition of a statement formula
often called a well-formed formula, it can be
generated by the following rules.
1. A statement variable standing alone is a
well-formed formula.
2. if A is a well-formed formula, then A is
a well-formed formula
3. if A and B are well-formed formulas, then (A
B),(A B),(A B) and (A B) are well-formed
formulas.
4. A string of symbols containing the statement
variables, connectives and parentheses is a well-
formed formula, iff it can be obtained by finitely
many applications of the rules 1,2 and 3.
Examples of Well-formed
Formulas
• (p q), (p q), ( p (p q)), ( p (q
r)), and ( (p q) (q r)) are well-formed
formulas.
• p q is not a well-formed formula, here p and
q are well-formed formula. A well-formed
formula would be either (p q) or (p q).
• (p q is not a well-formed formula. A well-
formed formula would be (p q).
• (p q) q) is not a well-formed formula, A
well-formed formula would be ((p q) q)
Tautological Implication
• A compound proposition A(p1,p2,...., pn) is said
to tautologically imply a another compound
proposition B(p1,p2,...., pn) if and only if A B
is a Tautology, where p1,p2,...., pn are
Statements or Components.
• A ⇒ B is true if and only if A B is a
Tautology.
• Tautological implication is denoted by the
symbol ⇒
• A ⇒ B can be read it as “ A implies B”
• ⇒ is not a logical connective.
Examples on Tautological
Implication using Truth Tables
• Example-1: Show that p (p q) ⇒ q
We know that A ⇒ B is true if A B is a Tautology.
p q pq p (p q) p (p q) q
T T T T T
T F F F T
F T T F T
F F T F T
Therefore A B is a Tautology hence we can say that A ⇒ B that is
p (p q) q is a Tautology hence we can say that p (p q) ⇒ q
• Example-2: Show that (p q) (q r) ⇒ (p r)
We know that A ⇒ B is true if A B is a Tautology.
p q r pq qr pr (p q) (q r) (p q) (q r)
(p r)
T T T T T T T T
T T F T F F F T
T F T F T T F T
T F F F T F F T
F T T T T T T T
F T F T F T F T
F F T T T T T T
F F F T T T T T
Therefore (p q) (q r) (p r) is a Tautology, Hence we can
that (p q) (q r) ⇒ (p r)
• Example-3: Show that (p q) (p r) (q r) ⇒ r
We know that A ⇒ B is true if A B is a Tautology.
p q r p q pr qr (p r) (q (p q) (p q)
r) (p q) (q r) (p q) (q
r) r
T T T T T T T T T
T T F T F F F F T
T F T T T T T T T
T F F T F T F F T
F T T T T T T T T
F T F T T F F F T
F F T F T T T T T
F F F F T T T T T
Therefore (p q) (p r) (q r) r is a Tautology, Hence we can
that (p q) (p r) (q r) ⇒ r
NAND and NOR Connectives
• NAND is a combination of “not” and “and” connectives
• For any two propositions p and q, The DeMorgan’s laws state
that
i. (p q) p q
ii. (p q) p q
• The compound proposition (p q) is read as “ not ‘p and q’ ”
is also denoted by p ↑ q. The symbol ↑ is called the NAND
connective.
(p ↑ q) (p q) p q
• The compound proposition (p q) is read as “ not ‘p or q’ ”
is also denoted by p ↓ q. The symbol ↓ is called the NOR
connective.
(p ↓ q) (p q) p q
• (p ↑ q) and (p ↓ q) are also duals of each other
i. (p q) p q
ii. (p q) p q
Truth Table of (p ↑ q) and (p ↓ q) is shown
below.
p q (p q) (p q) p↑q p q (p q) p↓q
T T T F F T F F
T F F T T T F F
F T F T T T F F
F F F T T F T T
Examples on NAND and NOR Connectives
• Example-1: For any propositions p, q , prove the following.
i. (p ↑ q) ( p ↓ q)
Let us take LHS : (p ↑ q)
( (p q) )
( p q) )
p ↓ q
RHS
Therefore (p ↑ q) ( p ↓ q)
ii. (p ↓ q) ( p ↑ q)
Let us take LHS : (p ↓ q)
( (p q) )
( p q) )
p ↑ q
RHS
Therefore (p ↓ q) ( p ↑ q)
• Example-2: For any propositions p, q ,r prove the following.
i. p ↑ (q ↑ r) p (q r)
Let us take LHS : p ↑ (q ↑ r) [ by (q ↑r) (q r) ]
p ↑ (q r) ) [ by (p ↑q) (p q) ]
(p (q r) )
p ( (q r) )
p (q r) )
RHS
Therefore p ↑ (q ↑ r) p (q r)
ii. p ↓ (q ↓ r) p (q r)
Let us take LHS : p ↓ (q ↓ r) [ by (q ↓ r) (q r) ]
p ↓ (q r) ) [ by (p ↓ q) (p q) ]
(p (q r) )
p ( (q r) )
p (q r) )
RHS
Therefore p ↓ (q ↓ r) p (q r)
Examples on Tautological Implication with
out using Truth Tables
• Example-1: (p q) ( (p r) (q r)) ⇒ r
Let us take and prove that (p q) (p r) (q r))
r is a Tautology
Now consider (p q) ( (p r) (q r)) r
[ by (p r) (q r) (p q) r]
⇒ (p q) ((p q) r) r
⇒ (p q) (( p q) r )) r
⇒ ((p q) ( p q)) ((p q) r ) r
[ by ((p q) ( p q)) F ]
⇒ (F ((p q) r)) r
⇒ ((p q) r)) r
⇒ ((p q) r)) r
⇒ ((p q) r)) r
[ by Distributive Law]
⇒ ((p r) (q r )) r
⇒ ( (p r) (q r )) r
⇒ (( p r) ( q r )) r
⇒ (( p r r) ( q r r ))
[ by r r T ]
⇒ (( p T) ( q T ))
⇒TT
⇒T
Therefore (p q) ( (p r) (q r)) ⇒ r
• Example-2: ((p p) q) ( ( p p) r) ⇒ (q r)
Let us take and prove that
((p p) q) ( ( p p) r) (q r)) is a Tautology
Now consider ((p p) q) ( ( p p) r) (q r)
[ by (p p) T ]
⇒ ((T q) (T r)) (q r)
⇒ (( T q) ( T r)) (q r)
⇒ ((F q) (F r)) (q r)
[ by identity Law]
⇒ ( q r) (q r)
⇒ ( q r) ( q r)
⇒ ( q r) ( q r)
⇒ (q r) ( q r)
⇒ (q q r) ( r q r)
⇒ (q q r) ( r q r)
⇒ (q q r) ( r r q)
⇒ (q q r) ( r r q)
[ by q q T and r r T ]
⇒ (T r) (T q) [ by dominance Law]
⇒ T T
⇒ T
Therefore : ((p p) q) ( ( p p) r) ⇒ (q r)
I. NORMAL FORMS & ITS TYPES
(a) DISJUNCTIVE NORMAL FORM(DNF) WITH
EXAMPLE PROBLEMS
(b) CONJUNCTIVE NORMAL FORM(CNF) WITH
EXAMPLE PROBLEMS
(c) PRINCIPAL DISJUNCTIVE NORMAL FORM
(PDNF) WITH EXAMPLE PROBLEMS
(d)PRINCIPAL CONJUNCTIVE NORMALFORM
(PCNF) WITH EXAMPLE PROBLEMS
(DISCRETE MATHEMATICS)
www.youtube.com/c/DIVVELASRINIVASARAO
91-9492704500( Whats’up Number)
Why Normal Forms required
• We have to construct the Truth table to determine
whether the given compound proposition A(p1,p2,....,
pn) is a Tautology or Contradiction or atleast
satisfiable in a finite number of steps is called as
“Decision Problem”
• We have to construct the Truth table to determine
whether the given compound propositions
A(p1,p2,...., pn) and B(p1,p2,...., pn) are logically
equivalent by comparing the truth values.
• But the construction of truth tables may not be
practical, when the number of primary propositions
p1,p2,...., pn increases.
• We therefore consider alternate procedure known as
reduction to Normal Forms.
• There are four types of Normal Forms.
1. Disjunctive Normal Form(DNF)
2. Conjunctive Normal Form(CNF)
3. Principal Disjunctive Normal Form(PDNF)
4. Principal Conjunctive Normal Form(PCNF)
• A Product of the atomic variables(statements) and their
negations in a statement formula or compound statement(a
conjunction of primary statements and their negations) is
called an “Elementary Product”.
• Example: p p, p p, p p, p p, p q, p
q, p q are Elementary products in 2 variables.
• A Sum of the atomic variables(statements) and
their negations(a Disjunction of primary
statements and their negations) is called an
“Elementary Sum”.
• Example: p p, p p, p p, p q, p
q, p q are Elementary sums with 2
variables.
Disjunctive Normal Form(DNF)
• Disjunctive Normal Form:
A formula Compound proposition) which is equivalent to a given
formula and which consists of a sum of elementary products is
called a “Disjunctive Normal Form” of the given formula.
Example: (p q) (p q) ( p q) ( p q)
• Example-1: Obtain the Disjunctive Normal Form of p (p q)
Let us consider p (p q) [ by p q p q ]
p ( p q) [ by Distributive Law ]
(p p) (p q) [ by p p F ]
F (p q) [ by identity Law]
pq
it is the required DNF
• Disjunctive Normal Form using Truth table :(alternate method)
construct the truth table first ,from the last column of the truth
table, we are considering only True values, take the conjunction of
truth values of primary statements, after that we are getting
elementary products, these elementary products are summed using
‘or’ connective.
p q pq p (p q)
T T T T
T F F F
F T T F
F F T F
From the last column of the above Truth Table,
considering only T values, the corresponding truth values of primary
statements are T and T, then the corresponding statements are
connected by using ‘and’ connective.
pq
Now it is the required DNF
Example-2: Obtain the Disjunctive Normal Form of p (q r)
Let us consider p (q r) [by (q r) q r]
p ( q r) [ by Distributive Law]
(p q) (p r)
Now it is the required DNF
Example-3: Obtain the Disjunctive Normal Form of (p q) (q r)
Let us consider (p q) (q r) [ by p q p q]
( p q) ( q r)
( p q) ( q r)
( p ( q r)) (q ( q r))
[ by Distributive Law]
( p q )( p r) ((q q) (q r))
[ by q q F]
( p q )( p r) (F (q r))
[ by identity Law]
( p q )( p r) (q r)
Now it is the required DNF
Example-4: Obtain the Disjunctive Normal Form of p q) ( q )
Let us consider (p q) ( q )
( p q) ( q ) [ by p q p q]]
( q ) ( p q) [ by Commutative Law ]
( q p) ( q q) [ by ( q q) F]
( q p) F [ by identity Law ]
( q p)
Now it is the required DNF
Example-5: Obtain the Disjunctive Normal Form of
(p q) ( q p)
Let us consider (p q) (q p)
( p q) ( q p) [ by p q p q ]
(( p q) ( q )) (( p q) p ))
[ by Distributive Law]
[
(( p q) (q q)) (( p p ) (q p))
[ by ( q q) F & ( p p) F ]
(( p q) F) ( F (q p)) [ by identity Law]
( p q) ( q p) [ by Commutative Law]
( p q) ( p q)
Now it is the required DNF
Example-6: Obtain the Disjunctive Normal Form of
(p q) ( p q )
Let us consider
[ by R S ( R S ) ( R S) ]
( (p q) ( p q )) (( (p q) ( p q ))
[ by DeMorgan’s Law]
(( p q) ( p q )) ( (p q) ( p q ))
(( p q p) ( p q q )) ( (p q) ( p q))
(( p p q) ( p q q )) ( (p q) ( p q))
[ by p p F & q q F ]
((F q) ( p F )) ( (p q) p) (p q) q) )
[ by Domination Laws]
((F F )) ( (p p) (q p)) ((p q) (q q))
[ by Complementation Laws]
((F ) ( (p p) (q p)) ((p q) (q q))
[ by identity Laws]
( (p p) (q p)) ( (p q) (q q) )
(F (q p) ( p q ) F) [ by Identity Law]
(q p) ( p q ) [ by Commutative Law]
( p q) ( p q )
Now it is the required DNF
Example-7: Obtain the Disjunctive Normal Form of
(p q) ( r q )
Let us consider (p q) ( r q ) [ by p q p q]
( p q) ( r q ) [ by p q p q]
( p q) ( r q )
(p q) ( r q)
Now it is the required DNF
Conjunctive Normal Form(CNF)
• Conjunctive Normal Form: A formula(Compound proposition) which is
equivalent to a given formula and which consists of a product of
elementary sums is called a Conjunctive Normal Form of the given
formula.
• Example: (p q) (p q) ( p q) ( p q)
• Example-1: Obtain the Conjunctive Normal Form of p (p q)
Let us consider p (p q) [ by p q p q ]
p ( p q) [ by p p p ]
(p p) ( p q)
the above compound statement is in CNF
• Conjunctive Normal Form using Truth table :
construct the truth table first ,from the last column of the truth table,
we are considering only False values, take the disjunction of
corresponding truth values, we are getting elementary sums, then we take
the product of elementary sums.
p q pq p (p q)
T T T T
T F F F
F T T F
F F T F
From the last column of the above Truth Table, considering
only F values, then the corresponding truth values are taken, the
corresponding statements disjunctions are connected by using
Conjunction.
from the 3rd row, truth values of p and q are T F (p q )
p q)
from the 4th row, truth values of p and q are F T ( p q )
( p q)
from the 5th row, truth values of p and q are F F ( p q)
p q
( p q) ( p q) (p q)
( p q) ( p (q q)) [ by (q q) F ]
( p q) ( p F) [ by p F p]
( p q) p [ by Commutative Law]
p ( p q) [ by idempotent Law]
(p p) ( p q)
This is the required CNF
Example-2: Obtain the Conjunctive Normal Form of
p (q r)
Let us consider p (q r) [ by DeMorgan’s Law]
p ( q r) [ by Idempotent Law]
(p p) ( q r)
This is the required CNF
Example-3: Obtain the Conjunctive Normal Form of
(p q) ( q )
Let us consider (p q) ( q ) [ by p q p q]
( p q) ( q ) ) [ by identity Law]
( p q) ( q q)
This is the required CNF
Example-4: Obtain the Conjunctive Normal Form of
(p (q r ))
Let us consider (p (q r ))
( p (q r ) ) [by p q p q]
(p (q r ) ) [ by DeMorgan’s Law]
p ( q r ) [ by Distributive Law]
(p p ) ( q r ) [ by Idempotent Law]
This is the required CNF
Example-5: Obtain the Conjunctive Normal Form of
((p q ) r )
Let us consider ((p q ) r )
(( p q ) r )
( p q ) r [ by Distributive Law]
( p r ) (q r )
This is the required CNF
Example-6: Obtain the Conjunctive Normal Form of
(p q) (q p)
Let us consider (p q) (q p)
[ by p q p q & q p q p]
( p q) ( q p )
This is the required CNF
Example-7: Obtain the Conjunctive Normal Form of
(p q) ( p q )
Let us consider (p q) ( p q )
[ by R S ( R S ) (S R ) ]
( (p q) ( p q )) (( p q ) ( p q ))
[ by p q p q ]
(((p q)) ( p q )) ( (p q) ( p q ))
((p q) ( p q )) (( p q) ( p q ))
((p q p ) (p q q )) (( p q p ) ( p
q q ))
((p p q ) (p q q )) (( p p q ) ( p
q q ))
[ by idempotent Law]
((p q ) (p q )) (( p q ) ( p q ))
[ by idempotent Law]
(p q ) ( p q )
This is the required CNF
Example-8: Obtain the Conjunctive Normal Form of
(( p q ) r )
Let us consider (( p q ) r )
( ( ( p) q) r ) [by p q p q]
(p q) r) [ by DeMorgan’s Law]
( p q) r [ by Distributive Law]
( p r) ) (q r )
This is the required CNF
Minterms
• The conjunctions in which each statement variable or
its negation, but not both, appears only once are called
“Minterms”.
• Let p and q be two statement variables, the possible
number of Minterms= 2n = 22 =4 Minterms, that are
shown in final column of the below table.
p q Minterms
T T pq
T F p q
F T pq
F F p q
Minterms
• The conjunctions in which each statement variable or its
negation, but not both, appears only once are called
“Minterms”.
• Let p, q and r be three statement variables, The possible
number of Minterms= 2n = 23 =8 Minterms are shown in final
column of the below table.
p q r Minterms
T T T pqr
T T F pqr
T F T pqr
T F F p q r
F T T pqr
F T F p q r
F F T p q r
F F F p q r
Maxterms
• The disjunctions in which each statement variable or
its negation, but not both, appears only once are
called “Maxterms”.
• Let p and q be two statement variables, the possible
number of Maxterms = 2n = 22 =4 Maxterms, that are
shown in final column of the below table.
p q Maxterms
T T p q
T F p q
F T pq
F F p q
Maxterms
• The disjunctions in which each statement variable or its
negation, but
not both, appears only once are called “Maxterms”.
• Let p, q and r be three statement variables, The possible
number of Maxterms = 2n = 23 = 8 Maxterms, that are shown
in final column of the below table.
p q r Maxterms
T T T pqr
T T F pqr
T F T pqr
T F F p q r
F T T pqr
F T F p q r
F F T pqr
F F F p q r
PRINCIPAL DISJUNCTIVE NORMAL
FORM(PDNF)
• A formula(Compound proposition) which is equivalent to a
given formula and which consisting of disjunctions of
Minterms is called a “Principal Disjunctive Normal
Form(PDNF)” of the given formula.
• Principal Disjunctive Normal Form(PDNF) is also called as
“Sum of Products Canonical Form”
• Example-1 : Obtain the PDNF of ( p q )
Let us consider ( p q )
(p T ) (T q)
[ by p T T & T q q ]
[ by Complementation Law]
(p (q q )) ((p p ) q)
[ by Distributive Law]
((p q ) (p q )) ((p q ) ( p q))
(p q) (p q) (p q ) ( p q)
[ by idempotent Law]
(p q) (p q) ( p q)
This is the required PDNF.
Truth Table Method:
p q q (pq)
T T F T
T F T T
F T F F
F F T T
Considering only True vales in the final column of the above
Truth table , Take the disjunctions of conjunctions of the truth values of
the corresponding statements: p and q. Then the corresponding PDNF is
(p q) (p q) ( p q)
Example-2 : Obtain the PDNF of (p q) ( p r) (q r)
Let us consider (p q) ( p r) (q r)
[ by p T T & T q q ]
(p q T) ( p r T) (q r T)
(p q ( r r )) ( p r ( q q)) (q r)
( p p)) [ by Distributive Law]
((p q r) (p q r )) ( p q r) ( p
q r)) ( (p q r) ( p q r))
((p q r) (p q r )) ( p q r) ( p
q r))
(p q r) (p q r ) ( p q r) ( p
q r))
This is the required PDNF
Truth Table Method: (p q) ( p r) (q r)
p q r p pq p r (p q) (q r) (p q) (
( p r) p r) (q
r)
T T T F T F T T T
T T F F T F T F T
T F T F F F F F F
T F F F F F F F F
F T T T F T T T T
F T F T F F F F F
F F T T F T T F T
F F F T F F F F F
Considering only True vales in the final column of the above Truth table , Take the
disjunctions of conjunctions of the truth values of the corresponding statements: p,q and r.
Then the corresponding PDNF is
(p q r) (p q r ) ( p q r) ( p q r))
Example-3 : Obtain the PDNF of p ((p q ) ( q p))
Let us consider p ((p q ) ( q p))
[ by p q p q ]
p (( p q ) (q p ))
p ( p (q p)) (q (q p))
[ by Distributive Law]
p (( p q p) (q q p))
[ by Commutative Law & idempotent Law ]
p (( p p q) (q p))
p ((F (q p)) [ by Identity Law]
p (q p)
( p T) (q p) [ by p T p & (q q) T]
( p (q q)) (q p)
[ by Distributive Law & Commutative Law]
(( p q ) ( p q)) (p q)
( p q ) ( p q) (p q)
This is the required PDNF
Truth Table Method: p ((p q ) ( q p))
p q p q (p q ) q p ( q p) ((p q ) p ((p
( q q ) (
p)) q p))
T T F F T F T T T
T F F T F T F F F
F T T F T T F F T
F F T T T T F F T
Considering only True vales in the final column of the above
Truth table , Take the disjunctions of conjunctions of the truth values of
the corresponding statements: p and q. Then the corresponding PDNF is
(p q) ( p q ) ( p q)
PRINCIPAL CONJUNCTIVE NORMAL
FORM(PCNF)
• A formula(Compound proposition) which is equivalent to a
given formula and which consisting of conjunctions of
Maxterms is called a “Principal Conjunctive Normal
Form(PCNF)” of the given formula.
• Principal Conjunctive Normal Form(PCNF) is also called as
“Product of Sums Canonical Form”
• Example-1 : Obtain the PCNF of p q
Let us consider p q
[ by p q (p q) (q p)]
(p q) (q p)
[ by p q p q ]
( p q ) ( q p)
( p q ) ( q p)
[ by Commutative Law]
( p q ) (p q )
This is the required PCNF
Truth Table Method:
p q (p q) (q p) (p q) (q p) p q(p q)
(q p)
T T T T T T
T F F T F F
F T T F F F
F F T T T T
Considering only False values in the final column of the above Truth table ,
Take the negation of conjunctions of truth values of the corresponding
statements: p and q. Then the corresponding PCNF is
((p q) ( p q)) (p q) ( p q) ( p q ) (p q )
Example-2 : Obtain the PCNF of ( p q) (q p)
Let us consider ( p q) (q p)
[ by p q (p q) (q p) &
by p q p q ]
( ( p ) q ) ((p q) (q p))
[ by ( p ) p & by p q p q ]
( p q ) (( p q ) ( q p ))
[ by Commutative Law]
( p q ) ( p q ) (p q )
This is the required PCNF
Truth Table Method: ( p q) (q p)
p q p ( p q) (q p) ( p q) (q p)
T T F T T T
T F F T F F
F T T T F F
F F T F T F
Considering only False values in the final column of the above Truth table ,
Take the negation of conjunctions of truth values of the corresponding
statements: p and q. Then the corresponding PCNF is
((p q) ( p q) ( p q))
(p q) ( p q) ( p q)
( p q ) ( p q ) (p q )
Example-3 : Obtain the PCNF of ( p q ) ( p q)
By observing the above compound statement (p q )
( p q), it is in the form of PDNF, Now from PDNF, we have
to find out the PCNF in the following way.
Let us take S= ( p q ) ( p q)
By considering S, there are two statements p and q in S,
with two statement variables ,we generate 4 Minterms such as
(p q), ( p q), (p q), ( p q). Among 4 Minterms,
existing Minterms are ignored, missing Minterms are written in
S.
S= ( p q) ( p q)
( S)= (( p q) ( p q))
= ( p q) ( p q)
= (p q) ( p q)
This is the required PCNF
Truth Table Method: ( p q ) ( p q)
p q pq p pq ( p q ) ( p q)
T T T F F T
T F F F F F
F T F T T T
F F F T F F
Considering only False values in the final column of the above Truth table ,
Take the negation of conjunctions of truth values of the corresponding
statements: p and q. Then the corresponding PCNF is
((p q) ( p q))
(p q) ( p q)
( p q ) (p q )
Example-4 : Obtain the PDNF of (p q) ( p r) (q r), then find
PCNF from PDNF.
Let us consider (p q) ( p r) (q r)
[ by p T T & T q q ]
(p q T) ( p r T) (q r T)
(p q ( r r )) ( p r ( q q)) (q r)
( p p)) [ by Distributive Law]
((p q r) (p q r )) ( p q r) ( p
q r)) ( (p q r) ( p q r))
((p q r) (p q r )) ( p q r) ( p
q r))
(p q r) (p q r ) ( p q r) ( p q r))
This is the required PDNF
PDNF of (p q) ( p r) (q r) is
(p q r) (p q r ) ( p q r) ( p q r))
Let us take S= (p q r) (p q r ) ( p q r) ( p q r))
with 3 statements p,q and r, we are getting 8 Minterms, among 8 Minterms,
the Minterms with in S are ignored, the remaining Minterms among 8
Minterms can be write in S
S= (p q r ) (p q r ) ( p q r )
( p q r )
( S)= ((p q r ) (p q r ) ( p q r )
( p q r ))
( S)= (p q r ) (p q r ) ( p q r )
( p q r )
( S)= (p q r ) (p q r ) ( p q r )
(pq r)
This is the required PCNF
Functionally Complete Set of Connectives
• A set of connectives is said to be functionally complete set of
connectives if every compound statement or statement formula
can be expressed interms of an equivalent formula containing
the connectives only from this set.
• The sets of connectives {, } and {, } are functionally
complete sets.
• Example: p q ( p q)
p q ( p q)
p q p q
p q ( p q) ( q p)
• The sets of connectives {, } is not functionally complete
sets, because it is not possible to find an equivalent formula
containing connectives only from the set {, }
• {↑} and {↓} are functionally complete sets.
p p p (p p ) p ↓ p
p q ( p q) p ↓ q (p ↓ p) ↓ (q ↓ q)
{↓} is a functionally complete set because ↓ can be
expressed in {, }
p p p (p p ) p ↑ p
p q ( p q) (p ↑ q) (p ↑ p) ↑ (q ↑ q)
{↑} is a functionally complete set because ↓ can be
expressed in {, }
Note-1: , } and {, } are functionally complete sets.
Note-2:{, } is not a functionally complete set
Note-3: {↑} and {↓} are functionally complete sets
Theory of Inference for Statement Calculus
• Inference Theory:
The main aim of logic is to provide rules of inference
to infer a conclusion from certain premises. The theory
associated with rules of inference is known as “Inference
Theory”
• Rules of Inference:
Inference theory is concerned with the inferring of a
conclusion from certain hypotheses or basic assumptions,
called “premises”, by applying certain principles of reasoning
called “Rules of inference”
• Deduction or Formal proof:
When a conclusion is derived from a set of premises by
using rules of inference, then the process of such derivation is
called a “deduction” or “a formal proof”.
• Argument: The rules of inference is used to draw a
conclusion from a set of premises in a finite sequence of steps
called “argument”
• Valid Conclusion: Any conclusion which is arrived at by
following these rules is called “Valid conclusion” and the
argument is called a “Valid argument”
• Consider a set of propositions p1 ,p2 , ........, pm and a
proposition q. Then a compound proposition of the form
p1 p2 ........ pm ⇒ q
is called an argument.
Where p1 ,p2 , ........, pm are called the premises of the
argument
q is called a conclusion of the argument
• Let A and B be two statement formulas , we say that “ B
logically follows from A” or “B is a valid
conclusion(consequence) of the premise A” iff A B is a
Tautology i.e., A ⇒ B.
By extending the above definition , we say that from a set
of premises {H1,H2,........,Hm} a conclusion C follows logically
iff
H1 H2 ........ Hm ⇒ C
Example-1: Determine whether the conclusion C follows
logically from the hypotheses H1 and H2.
i) H1: p q H2: p C: q
ii) H1: p q H2: p C: q
iii) H1: p q H2: (p q) C: p
iv) H1: p q H2: q C: q
Truth Table Method:
Example-1: H1: p q H2: p C: q
p q p q
T T T First Row
T F F
F T T
F F T
i. First, we have to construct the appropriate truth table , as
shown in the above table,
ii. We observe that the first row is the only row in which both
the Premises have the value T.
iii. The conclusion also have the value T in that row.
Hence it is a valid conclusion
Truth Table Method:
Example-2: H1: p q H2: p C: q
p q p p q
T T F T
T F F F
F T T T Third row
F F T T Fourth row
i. First, we have to construct the appropriate truth table , as
shown in the above table,
ii. We observe that the third and fourth rows in which both the
Premises have the value T.
iii. The conclusion q is true only in the third row, but not in
the fourth row
iv. Hence it is a not a valid conclusion because for the same
Premises, the conclusion is one time it is true(third row) and another
Time it is false(fourth row), it is not possible
Truth Table Method:
Example-3: H1: p q H2: (p q) C: p
p q p q p p q (p q)
T T T F T F
T F F F F T Third row
F T T T F T
Fourth row
F F T T F T
i. First, we have to construct the appropriate truth table , as
shown in the above table,
ii. We observe that the third and fourth rows in which both the
Premises have the value T.
iii. The conclusion p is true in the third row and fourth row
iv. Hence it is a valid conclusion
Truth Table Method:
Example-4: H1: p q H2: q C: p
p q p q
T T T First Row
T F F
F T T Third Row
F F T
i. First, we have to construct the appropriate truth table , as shown in
the above table,
ii. We observe that the first row and Third row , in which both the
Premises have the value T.
iii. The conclusion q is true only in the third row, but not in the
fourth row
iv. Hence it is a not a valid conclusion because for the same
Premises, the conclusion is one time it is true(First row) and another Time it
is false(Third row), it is not possible, hence it is not a valid Conclusion.
Disadvantage
• Disadvantages of Theory of Inference using Truth Table:
The truth table technique becomes tedious, if the
premises contain a large number of statement variables..
Rules of Inference with out using
Truth table
• The truth table technique becomes tedious, if the
premises contain a large number of statement
variables, to overcome this limitation, we follow
other possible methods with out using Truth table.
• There are 3 rules of inference
i. Rule P
ii. Rule T
iii. Rule CP(Rule of Conditional Proof)
• Rule P and Rule T are called the two basic rules
of inference
• Rule-P:
We may introduce a premise 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 of the preceding formulas
in the derivation
• Rule-CP (Rule of Conditional Proof)
If we can derive S from R and a set of premises then we can
derive R S from the set of premises alone
(OR)
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.
IMPLICATIONS
I1: p q ⇒ p Simplification
I2: p q ⇒ q Simplification
I3: p ⇒ p q Addition
I4: q ⇒ p q Addition
I5: p ⇒ p q
I6: q ⇒ p q
I7: (p q )⇒ p
I8: (p q )⇒ q
I9: p, q ⇒ p q
I10: p , p q ⇒ q Disjunctive Syllogism
I11: p, p q ⇒ q Modus ponens
I12: q, p q ⇒ p Modus Tollens
I13: p q , q r ⇒ p r Hypothetical Syllogism
I14: p q , p r , qr ⇒r Dilemma
Equivalences
E1: ( p ) p Double Negation
E2: p q q p Commutative Law
E3: p q q p Commutative Law
E4: (p q) r p (q r) Associative Law
E5: (p q) r p (q r) Associative Law
E6: p (q r) (p q) (p r) Distributive Law
E7: p (q r) (p q) (p r) Distributive Law
E8: (p q ) p q DeMorgan’s Law
E9: (p q ) p q DeMorgan’s Law
E10: p p p
E11: p q p
E12: R (p p ) R
E13: R (p p ) R
Equivalences
E14: R (p p ) T
E15: R (p p ) F
E16: p q p q
E17: (p q) p q
E18: p q q p
E19: p (q r) (p q ) r
E20: (p q) p q
E21: p q (p q) (q p)
E22: p q (p q) ( p q )
• Example-1: Show that s is a valid inference or
conclusion from the premises
p q , r q, s p and r
Sol: [1] (1) rq Rule P
[2] (2) r Rule P
[1,2] (3) q Rule T,(1),(2) and I10
[4] (4) p q Rule P
[4] (5) q p Rule T,(4) and E18
[1,2,4] (6) p Rule T,(3),(5) and I11
[ 7] (7) s p Rule P
[7] (8) p s Rule T,(6) and E18
[1,2,4,7] (9) s Rule T,(6),(8) and I11
hence S is a valid inference or valid conclusion
• Example-2: Show that R S follows logically from
the premises
C D, (C D) H , H (A B), (A B) (R S)
Sol: [1] (1) (C D) H Rule P
[2] (2) H (A B) Rule P
[1,2] (3) (C D) (A B) Rule T,(1),(2) and I13
[4] (4) (A B) (R S) Rule P
[1,2,4] (5) (C D) (R S) Rule T,(3),(4) and I13
[ 6] (6) C D Rule P
[1,2,4,6] (7) R S Rule T,(5),(6) and I11
hence R S is a valid inference or valid conclusion
• Example-3: Show that R (P Q) is a valid inference or
conclusion from the premises
(P Q), Q R , P M and M
Sol: [1] (1) P M Rule P
[1] (2) M P Rule T,(1) and E18
[3] (3) M Rule P
[2,3] (4) P Rule T,(2),(3) and I11
[5] (5) PQ Rule P
[2,3,5] (6) Q Rule T,(4),(5) and I10
[ 7] (7) Q R Rule P
[2,3,5,7] (8) R Rule T,(6),(7) and I11
[ 2,3,5,7] (8) R (P Q) Rule T,(5),(8) and I9
hence R (P Q) is a valid inference or valid conclusion
Example problem-1 on Rule CP:
Show that R S can be derived from the premises
P (Q S), R P and Q
Sol: Take R as an Additional Premise
[1] (1) R P Rule P
[1] (2) R P Rule T,(1),E16
[3] (3) R Rule P(Additional Premise)
[1,3] (4) P Rule T,(2),(3) and I11
[5] (5) P (Q S) Rule P
[1,3,5] (6) Q S Rule T,(4),(5) and I11
[ 7] (7) Q Rule P
[1,3,5,7] (8) S Rule T,(6),(7) and I11
[1,3,5,7] (9) R S Rule CP
hence R S is a valid inference or valid conclusion
Example problem-2 on Rule CP:
Show that P S can be derived from the premises
R S, P Q and Q R
Sol: [1] (1) P Q Rule P
[1] (2) P Q Rule T,(1),E16
[3] (3) P Rule P(Additional Premise)
[1,3] (4) Q Rule T,(2),(3) and I11
[5] (5) Q R Rule P
[ 5] (6) Q R Rule T,(5) and E16
[1,3,5] (7) R Rule T,(4),(6) and I11
[6] (8) R S Rule P
[1,3,5,6] (9) S Rule T,(8),(9),and I11
[1,3,5,6] (10) P S Rule CP
hence R (P Q) is a valid inference or valid conclusion
Example Problem-3 on Rule CP
Derive P ( Q S) using the Rule CP if necessary from
P ( Q R), Q ( R S)
Sol: [1] (1) P ( Q R) Rule P
[2] (2) P Rule P(Additional Premise)
[1,2] (3) QR Rule T,(1),(2) and I11
[1,2] (4) Q R Rule T,(3) and E16
[5] (5) Q ( R S) Rule P
[5] (6) Q (R S) Rule T,(5) and E16
[1,2,5] (7) Q (R (R S)) Rule T,(4),(6) and E16
Q (R ( R S)) Q ((R R) S)
Q (F S) Q S
[1,2,5] (8) Q S Rule T,(7) and E16
[1,2,5] (9) P ( Q S) Rule CP
Consistent and Inconsistent
Premises
• A Set of premises(Statement formulas) H1, H2,.....,Hn is
said to be inconsistent, if their conjunction implies a
contradiction i.e.,
H1 H2 ..... Hn ⇒ R R, for some formula R
• A Set of premises(Statement formulas) H1, H2,.....,Hn is
said to be consistent, if their conjunction does not
implies a contradiction
H1 H2 ..... Hn ⇒ R R, for some formula R
Indirect Method of Proof
• The notion of inconsistency is used in a procedure
called “Proof by contradiction” or “Indirect
Method of Proof ”.
• The procedure to be followed for indirect method of
proof is as follows:
1. Introduce the negation of the desired
conclusion as a new premise. Suppose, conclusion is
C, then C is taken as additional premise(new
premise)
2. The additional premise together with the
given premises derive a contradiction
Example on Indirect Method of Proof
• Example-1: By indirect method of proof, show that
( Q), P Q , P R ⇒ R
Sol: The desired conclusion is R. Hence, include its negation R as
an additional premise.
[1] (1) PQ Rule P
[2] (2) Q Rule P
[1,2] (3) P Rule T,(1),(2) and I12
[4] (4) PR Rule P
[1,2,4] (5) R Rule T,(3),(4) and I10
[6] (6) R Rule P(additional premise)
[1,2,4,6] (7) R R Rule T,(5),(6) and I9
The new premise R , together with the given premises, leads
to a Contradiction. Thus
( Q), P Q , P R ⇒ R
• Example-2: By indirect method of proof, show that
P Q , Q R, P R ⇒R
Sol: The desired conclusion is R. Hence, include its negation
R as an additional premise.
[1] (1) QR Rule P
[2] (2) R Rule P(additional Premise)
[1,2] (3) Q Rule T,(1),(2) and I12
[4] (4) PQ Rule P
[1,2,4] (5) P Rule T,(3),(4) and I12
[6] (6) PR Rule P
[1,2,4,6] (7) R Rule T,(5),(6) and I10
[1,2,4,6] (8) R R Rule T,(2),(7) and I9
The new premise R , together with the given
premises, leads to a Contradiction. Thus
PQ,QR,PR ⇒R
• Example-3: Using indirect method of proof, derive
P S from P Q R, Q P, S R , P
Sol: The desired conclusion is P S . Hence, include its
negation (P S) as an additional premise.
The additional premise is (P S)
(P S)
((P S)
(P S)
[1] (1) P (Q R) Rule P
[2] (2) P Rule P
[1,2] (3) QR Rule T,(1),(2) and I11
[4] (4) SR Rule P
[5] (5) PS Rule P(additional Premise)
[5] (6) S Rule T,(5) and I2
[4,5] (7) R Rule T,(5),(6) and I10
[1,2,4,5] (8) Q Rule T,(3),(7) and I10
[9] (9) Q P Rule P
[1,2,4,5,9] (10) P Rule T,(8),(9) and I11
[1,2,4,5,9] (11) P P Rule T,(2),(10) and I9
The new premise P Q , together with the given
premises, leads to a Contradiction. Thus
P S derivable from P Q R, Q P, S R , P
INTRODUCTION
TO
I. PREDICATE CALCULUS
II.QUANTIFIERS
(a) UNIVERSAL QUANTIFIER
(b) EXISTENTIAL QUANTIFIER
DISCRETE MATHEMATICS
www.youtube.com/c/DIVVELASRINIVASARAO
What’s up Number 9492704500
Predicate Calculus
• The logic based upon the analysis of predicates in any statement is
called “Predicate Calculus”.
• Let us consider the statement : “ x is a student”
This statement has two parts.
i. First part : “x” is called the subject/object/variable of
the statement.
ii. Second part : “ is a student” is called the predicate.
• Predicate refers to a property that the subject of the statement can
have.
• We can denote the statement “ x is a student” by S(x), where S
denotes the predicate “is a student” and x is the variable. S(x) is
called the propositional function at x.
• Once a value has been assigned to the variable x ,the statement
S(x) has the truth value, then it becomes the Statement Function.
• Suppose we can take the statement “p is Q” where
“is Q” is a predicate
p is the subject/object
The above statement can be denoted by Q(p).
• A simple statement function of one variable is defined to be an
expression consisting of a predicate symbol and an individual
variable.
• Example: H(x): x is a man
M(y): y is mortal
• A compound statement function is obtained by combining one or
more simple statement functions and logical connectives.
• Example: H(x) M(y), H(x) M(y), H(x) M(y),
• Let us consider the compound statement :
“ Amulya is a student and this painting is blue” where
“ is a student” is the predicate.
“Amulya” is the subject/object
“is blue” is the predicate”
“this painting” is the subject/object.
The above compound statement can be denoted by
S(a) B(p)
• The other connectives can also be used to form the compound
statements such as
S(a) B(p),
B(p),
S(a) B(p) etc…
• Let us consider the compound statement :
“ Naveen is taller than Amul” where
“ is taller than” is the predicate.
“Naveen” is the subject/object
“Amul” is the subject/object
The above compound statement can be denoted by
T( n, a)
• 1-place predicate means the predicate belongs to one object.
Example: Amulya is a student
where the predicate “is a student” belongs to one object
called Amulya
• 2-place predicate means the predicate belongs to two objects.
Example: Naveen is taller than Amul
where the predicate “is taller than” belongs to two objects
called Naveen and Amul.
• m-place predicate means the predicate belongs to m objects
Quantifiers:
Certain statements containing the words such as “all”,
“every”, “some” , “there exists”, “none” , “there is at least”
are associated with the idea of quantity. Such word are called
Quantifiers.
Consider the following examples:
1. some men are tall.
2. All birds have wings
3. No air balloon is perfectly round
4. There is a real number less than 11.
Universal Quantifier:
i. The quantifier “all”, “every”, “each” and “every thing”
is called the Universal Quantifier.
ii. we denote it by the symbol ∀
iii. Universal quantifier(∀) represents each of the following
phrases, all phrases have the same meaning.
for all x
for every x
for each x
every thing x is such that
each thing x is such that
Existential Quantifier:
i. The quantifier “some”, “there exist” and “there is atleast” is
called the Existential Quantifier.
ii. we denote it by the symbol ∃
iii. Existential quantifier(∃) represents each of the following
phrases, all phrases have the same meaning.
for some x
some x such that
There exists an x such that
There is atleast one x such that
PREDICATE FORMULA
• Suppose we are taking n-place predicate, n-place predicate
symbol must me followed by n object variables. Such
variables are called objects or individual variables and are
denoted by lowercase letters.
• Example: P(x1,x2,x3,.......,xn) denotes an n-place predicate
formula in which the letter P is an n-place predicate and
x1,x2,x3,.......,xn are individual variables.
• P(x1,x2,x3,......., xn) will be called atomic formula of predicate
calculus.
• Examples of atomic formula of predicate calculus are
Q(x), P(x, y), A(x,y,z), P(a,y) and A(x,a,z)
• A well-formed formula of predicate calculus is obtained by
using the following rules.
1. An atomic formula is a well-formed formula.
2. if A is a well-formed formula, then A is a well-formed
formula
3. if A and B are well-formed formulas, then (A B),(A
B),(A B) and (A B) are also well-formed formulas.
4. if A is a well-formed formula and x is any variable, then
(∀x)A and (∃x)A are well-formed formulas.
5. Only those formulas obtained by using rules 1 to 4 are
well-formed formulas.
FREE AND BOUND VARIABLES
• Given a formula containing a part of the form (∀x)P (x) or
(∃x) P(x), such a part is called an x-bound part of the formula.
• Any occurrence of x in an x-bound part of a formula is called a
bound occurrence of x.
• Free Variable:
An occurrence of a variable x that is not bounded by any
quantifier such as (∀x)P(x) or (∃x) P(x) is called a “Free
variable”.
• Bounded Variable:
An occurrence of a variable x that is bounded by a
quantifier such as (∀x)P (x) or (∃x) P(x) is called a “Bounded
variable”
• Scope of the quantifier:
The scope of a quantifier is the predicate formula immediately
following the quantifier.
(OR)
The part of the logical expression or predicate formula to
which a quantifier is applied is called the “scope of the quantifier”.
S.NO PREDICATE BOUND FREE SCOPE OF THE
FORMULA VARIABLE VARIABLE QUANTIFIER
1 (∀x)P(x ,y ) x y P(x,y)
2 (∀x)(I(x) R(x)) x __ I(x) R(x)
3 (∀x)((P(x) ∃ (y)Q (x , y)) x __ P(x) E(y)Q (x , y)
4 (∀x)(P(x) Q(x)) (∀y)R(y) x __ P(x) Q(x)
y __ R(y)
5 ∃x R(x) P(x) First x Second x R(x)
• Let us consider the compound statement :
“ Amulya is a student and this painting is blue” where
“ is a student” is the predicate.
“Amulya” is the subject/object
“is blue” is the predicate”
“this painting” is the subject/object.
The above compound statement can be denoted by
S(a) B(p)
• The other connectives can also be used to form the compound
statements such as
S(a) B(p),
B(p),
S(a) B(p) etc…
• Let us consider the compound statement :
“ Naveen is taller than Amul” where
“ is taller than” is the predicate.
“Naveen” is the subject/object
“Amul” is the subject/object
The above compound statement can be denoted by
T( n, a)
• 1-place predicate means the predicate belongs to one object.
Example: Amulya is a student
where the predicate “is a student” belongs to one object
called Amulya
• 2-place predicate means the predicate belongs to two objects.
Example: Naveen is taller than Amul
where the predicate “is taller than” belongs to two objects
called Naveen and Amul.
• m-place predicate means the predicate belongs to m objects
Quantifiers:
Certain statements containing the words such as “all”,
“every”, “some” , “there exists”, “none” , “there is at least”
are associated with the idea of quantity. Such word are called
Quantifiers.
Consider the following examples:
1. some men are tall.
2. All birds have wings
3. No air balloon is perfectly round
4. There is a real number less than 11.
Universal Quantifier:
i. The quantifier “all”, “every”, “each” and “every thing”
is called the Universal Quantifier.
ii. we denote it by the symbol ∀
iii. Universal quantifier(∀) represents each of the following
phrases, all phrases have the same meaning.
for all x
for every x
for each x
every thing x is such that
each thing x is such that
Existential Quantifier:
i. The quantifier “some”, “there exist” and “there is atleast” is
called the Existential Quantifier.
ii. we denote it by the symbol ∃
iii. Existential quantifier(∃) represents each of the following
phrases, all phrases have the same meaning.
for some x
some x such that
There exists an x such that
There is atleast one x such that
Example: For the universe of all integers, let
p(x): x>0,
q(x): x is even
r(x): x is a perfect square
s(x): x is divisible by 3
t(x): x is divisible by 7
Write down the following quantified statements in symbolic form:
i). At least one integer is even: (∃x) q(x)
ii). There exist a positive integer that is even: (∃x) (p(x) q(x))
iii). Some even integers are divisible by 3: (∃x) (q(x) s(x))
iv). Every integer is either even or odd: (∀x)(q(x) q(x))
v). If x is even and a perfect square, then x is not divisible by 3:
(∀x)[(q(x) r(x)) s(x)]
vi). If x is odd or is not divisible by 7, then x is divisible by 3.
(∀x)[( q(x) t(x)) s(x)]
• Example-2: Now consider the following Statements. Represent
them in symbolic form.
i. All monkeys have tails
ii. No monkey has a tail.
iii. Some monkeys have tails
iv. Some monkeys have no tails.
Sol: let us consider M(x): x is a monkey
T(x): x has a tail
i. All monkeys have tails: (∀x)[M(x) T(x)]
ii. No monkey has a tail: (∀x)[M(x) T(x)]
iii. Some monkeys have tails: (∃x) [M(x) T(x))
iv. Some monkeys have no tails: (∃x) [M(x) T(x))
• Example-3: Write the following sentences in symbolic form.
i. Some people who trust others one rewarded.
ii. If any one is good then john is good.
iii. Some one is teasing
iv. It is not true that all roads lead to Rome.
Sol: Let us consider
P(x): x is a person
T(x): x trusts others
R(x): x is rewarded.
G(x): x is good
Q(x): x is teasing
S(x): x is a road
L(x): x lead to Roam
i. Some people who trust others one rewarded:
(∃x) [P(x) T(x) R(x)]
ii. If any one is good then john is good.
(∃x) [ P(x) G(x)] G(john)
iii. Some one is teasing
(∃x) [ P(x) Q(x)]
iv. It is not true that all roads lead to Rome.
(∃x) [ S(x) L(x)] or (∀x)[S(x) L(x)]
• Example-4: Write the following sentences in symbolic form.
i. Every living thing is a plant or Animal
ii. John’s gold fish is alive and it is not a plant
iii. All animals have hearts
iv. John’s gold fish has a heart
Sol: Let us consider
x is a living thing
H(x): x has heart
P(x): x is a plant
A(x): x is a animal
g : john’s gold fish.
i. Every living thing is a plant or Animal
(∀x)[(P(x) A(x)]
ii. John’s gold fish is alive and it is not a plant
P(g)
iii. All animals have hearts
(∀x)[A(x) H(x)]
iv. John’s gold fish has a heart
H(g)
• Example-5: Write the following sentences in symbolic form.
i. All integers are rational numbers
ii. Some integers are powers of 3
iii. Some rational numbers are powers of 3
Sol: Let us consider
I(x): x is an integer
R(x): x is rational number
P(x): x is power of 3
i. All integers are rational numbers.
(∀x)[I(x) R(x)]
ii. Some integers are powers of 3.
(∃x) [ I(x) P(x)]
iii. Some rational numbers are powers of 3
(∃x) [ R(x) P(x)]
• Example-6: Write the following sentences in symbolic form.
i. All men are mortal
ii. Socrates is a man
iii. Socrates is a mortal
Sol: Let us consider
H(x): x is a man
M(x): x is mortal
S: Socrates
i. All men are mortal
(∀x)[H(x) M(x)]
ii. Socrates is a man
H(s)
iii. Socrates is a mortal
M(s)
Negation of a Quantified Statement
• To construct the negation of a quantified statement, change
the quantifier from Universal to Existential and Existential to
Universal, and replace the predicate statement by its negation.
• Example:
1. (∃ x)(P(x) (∀x) (P(x)
2. (∀x)(P(x) (∃x) (P(x)
3. (∃ x)[(P(x) Q(x)] ⇒ (∀ x)[( P(x) Q(x)]
4. (∀x) (A(x) B(x)) (∃ x) (A(x) B(x))
Logical Equivalence in Predicate Calculus
• Two quantified predicates are said to be logically equivalent,
whenever they have the same truth values in all possible
situations.
• Example: E23. (∃x) [(P(x) Q(x)] (∃x)(P(x)) (∃x)(Q(x))
E24. (∀x)[(P(x) Q(x)] (∀x)(P(x)) (∀x)(Q(x))
E25. (∃ x)(P(x) (∀x) (P(x)
E26. (∀x)(P(x) (∃x) (P(x)
I15. (∀x)(P(x)) (∀x)(Q(x)) ⇒ ∀x(P(x) Q(x))
I16. (∃ x)[(P(x) Q(x)] ⇒ (∃ x)(P(x)) (∃ x)(Q(x))
. E27.(∀x)[A Q(x)] A (∀x)(Q(x))
E28. (∃ x)[A Q(x)] A (∃ x)(Q(x))
E29. (∀x) A(x) B (∃ x) (A(x) B)
E30. (∃ x) A(x) B (∀x)(A(x) B)
E31: A (∀x)(P(x)) (∀x)(A P(x))
E32: A (∃ x)(P(x)) (∃ x)(A P(x))
Theory of inference for Predicate
Calculus
• Certain additional rules are required to deal with the formula
involving quantifiers.
• The elimination of quantifiers can be done by using the rules
of specification called US and ES.
• To prefix the correct quantifier, we need the rules of
generalization called UG and EG.
• Now the rules of generalization and specification are
1. Rule US(Universal Specification)
2. Rule UG(Universal Generalization)
3. Rule ES(Existential Specification)
4. Rule EG(Existential Generalization)
• Rule US:(Universal Specification)
If a statement of the form (∀x)(P(x)) is assumed to be true,
then the universal quantifier can be dropped to obtain P(t) is true
for an arbitrary object ‘t’ in the universe.
in symbols, this rule is : (∀x)(P(x))
Therefore P(t) for all t
• Rule UG:(Universal Generalization)
If a statement P(t) is true for each element t of the universe,
then the universal quantifier may be prefixed to obtain
(∀x)(P(x))
in symbols, this rule is : P(t) for all t
Therefore (∀x)(P(x))
• Rule ES:(Existential Specification)
If a statement of the form (∃x)(P(x)) is assumed to be true,
then there is an element t in the universe such that P(t) is true.
in symbols, this rule is : (∃ x)(P(x))
Therefore P(t) for some t
• Rule EG:(Existential Generalization)
If a statement P(t) is true for some element t in the universe,
then the Existential quantifier may be prefixed to obtain
(∃x)(P(x)) is true.
in symbols, this rule is : P(t) for some t
Therefore (∃ x)(P(x))
• Example-1: Verify the validity of the following argument..
Every living thing is a plant or Animal. John’s gold fish is
alive and it is not a plant. All animals have hearts. Therefore
John’s gold fish has a heart
Sol: Let us consider
x is a living thing
H(x): x has heart
P(x): x is a plant
A(x): x is a animal
g : john’s gold fish.
Then the inference pattern is : (∀x)[(P(x) A(x)]
P(g)
(∀x)[A(x) H(x)]
Therefore H(g)
[1] (1) (∀x)[(P(x) A(x)] Rule P
[2] (2) P(g) Rule P
[1] (3) P(g) A(g) Rule US,(1)
[1,2] (4) A(g) Rule T, (2),(3) and I10
[5] (5) (∀x)[A(x) H(x)] Rule P
[5] (6) A(g) H(g)] Rule US,(5)
[1,2,5] (7) H(g) Rule T, (4),(6) and I11
Hence the conclusion is valid
• Example-2: Verify the validity of the following argument.
All integers are rational numbers
Some integers are powers of 3
Therefore, Some rational numbers are powers of 3
Sol: Let us consider
I(x): x is an integer
R(x): x is rational number
P(x): x is power of 3
Then the given inference pattern is:
(∀x)[I(x) R(x)]
(∃x) [ I(x) P(x)]
Therefore (∃x) [ R(x) P(x)]
[1] (1) (∃x) [ I(x) P(x)] Rule P
[1] (2) I(g) P(g) Rule ES,(1)
[1] (3) I(g) Rule T,(2) and I1
[1] (4) P(g) Rule T, (2),I2
[5] (5) (∀x)[I(x) R(x)] Rule P
[5] (6) I(g) R(g) Rule US,(5)
[1,5] (7) R(g) Rule T, (3),(6) and I11
[8] (8) R(g) P(g) Rule T, (4),(7) and I9
[9] (9) (∃x) [ R(x) P(x)] Rule EG, (8)
Hence the conclusion is valid
Statements Involving more than
one Quantifier
• If a predicate formula involves more than one different
variable, then more than one quantifier is needed to
produce the symbolic sentence.
• Example: Consider the statement: P(x , y)
• There are 8 possible combinations of (∀x), (∀y),(∃x),
(∃y) for the statement P(x , y)
i. (∀x) (∀y) P(x , y) ii. (∃x) (∃y) P(x , y)
iii. (∀x) (∃y) P(x , y) iv. (∀y) (∃x) P(x , y)
v. (∀y) (∀x) P(x , y) vi. (∃y) (∀x) P(x , y)
vii. (∃x) (∀y) P(x ,y) viii. (∃y) (∃x) P(x , y)
You might also like
- Aristotle Plot Tragedy Concept With Theory of Immitation PDFNo ratings yetAristotle Plot Tragedy Concept With Theory of Immitation PDF8 pages
- 1 Intro To Propositional Logic For Students 3No ratings yet1 Intro To Propositional Logic For Students 366 pages
- DS Lecture # 1 (Overview of DS, Propositional Logic)No ratings yetDS Lecture # 1 (Overview of DS, Propositional Logic)36 pages
- 2 Cse Mfcs 2 Cse MFCS: Maths (Jain University) Maths (Jain University)No ratings yet2 Cse Mfcs 2 Cse MFCS: Maths (Jain University) Maths (Jain University)123 pages
- Storytelling For Public Speaking, Presentations and Training WorkbookNo ratings yetStorytelling For Public Speaking, Presentations and Training Workbook49 pages
- FALLSEM2024-25 BMAT205L TH VL2024250102549 2024-07-18 Reference-Material-INo ratings yetFALLSEM2024-25 BMAT205L TH VL2024250102549 2024-07-18 Reference-Material-I55 pages
- In Woods of God Realization SwamiRamaTirtha Volume4 Complete Works 1913 Edn100% (4)In Woods of God Realization SwamiRamaTirtha Volume4 Complete Works 1913 Edn696 pages
- DS Lecture # 1 (Overview of DS, Propositional Logic)No ratings yetDS Lecture # 1 (Overview of DS, Propositional Logic)42 pages
- The Relation of Logic To Ontology in Hegel: Paul Redding100% (1)The Relation of Logic To Ontology in Hegel: Paul Redding29 pages
- Discrete Structures or Mathemat Ics: Engr. Rajesh Kumar DharwaiNo ratings yetDiscrete Structures or Mathemat Ics: Engr. Rajesh Kumar Dharwai61 pages
- Discrete Mathematics - Lecture 1 - PropositionsNo ratings yetDiscrete Mathematics - Lecture 1 - Propositions3 pages
- Lesson 2: Distinction of Primary and Secondary Resources Historical ResourcesNo ratings yetLesson 2: Distinction of Primary and Secondary Resources Historical Resources3 pages
- 07 AMachereyand Balibar On Literatureasan Ideological FormNo ratings yet07 AMachereyand Balibar On Literatureasan Ideological Form7 pages
- Discrete Structures: Sheikh Kashif RaffatNo ratings yetDiscrete Structures: Sheikh Kashif Raffat39 pages
- Apologetics, Responding To Debating TechniquesNo ratings yetApologetics, Responding To Debating Techniques12 pages
- FALLSEM2019-20 MAT1014 TH VL2019201000547 Reference Material II 10-Jul-2019 Introduction To Propositional CalculusNo ratings yetFALLSEM2019-20 MAT1014 TH VL2019201000547 Reference Material II 10-Jul-2019 Introduction To Propositional Calculus10 pages
- Writing Biography in Greece and Rome Narrative Technique and Fictionalization Koen de Temmerman100% (1)Writing Biography in Greece and Rome Narrative Technique and Fictionalization Koen de Temmerman68 pages
- Harper - Meister Eckhart On Divine Knowledge by C. F. KelleyNo ratings yetHarper - Meister Eckhart On Divine Knowledge by C. F. Kelley5 pages
- Magic Lessons (Magick The Occult Imagination Will)No ratings yetMagic Lessons (Magick The Occult Imagination Will)41 pages
- Implication of Philosophy in Modern EducationNo ratings yetImplication of Philosophy in Modern Education13 pages
- PSYC1101-Cognition-2 - 2019 SLsky 4 Pre-Lecture PostingNo ratings yetPSYC1101-Cognition-2 - 2019 SLsky 4 Pre-Lecture Posting30 pages
- Study Questions For Philosophy 1000 - For Test 1 Fall 2009No ratings yetStudy Questions For Philosophy 1000 - For Test 1 Fall 20093 pages
- Teori Evolusi Darwin Dalam Perspektif IslamNo ratings yetTeori Evolusi Darwin Dalam Perspektif Islam11 pages
- Introduction To Society, Knowledge, Education and Human ExistenceNo ratings yetIntroduction To Society, Knowledge, Education and Human Existence24 pages