D420 Discrete Math: Logic

0.0(0)
studied byStudied by 3 people
learnLearn
examPractice Test
spaced repetitionSpaced Repetition
heart puzzleMatch
flashcardsFlashcards
Card Sorting

1/99

encourage image

There's no tags or description

Looks like no tags are added yet.

Study Analytics
Name
Mastery
Learn
Test
Matching
Spaced

No study sessions yet.

100 Terms

1
New cards

proposition

a statement that is either true or false

2
New cards

^

and

<p>and</p>
3
New cards

v

or

<p>or</p>
4
New cards

¬

negation

5
New cards

conditional operation, "if p, then q"

<p>conditional operation, "if p, then q"</p>
6
New cards

Equivalent English expressions that mean "if p, then q"

If p, q

q, if p

p implies q

p only if q

p is sufficient for q

q is necessary for p

7
New cards

in a conditional proposition "→" p is the _______ and q is the __________

p is the hypothesis and q is the conclusion

8
New cards

The converse is the opposite of the conditional statement

For example, the converse of p → q (if p then q) is q → p (if q then p). If p → q is true, it does NOT guarantee that q → p is true

9
New cards

The inverse is the negation of the conditional statement

For example, the inverse of p → q (if p then q) is ¬p → ¬q (if not p then not q). If p → q is true, it does NOT guarantee that ¬p → ¬q is true

10
New cards

The contrapositive is the opposite and negative of the conditional statement

For example, the contrapositive of p → q (if p then q) is ¬q → ¬p (if not q then not p). If p → q is true, it DOES guarantee that ¬q → ¬p is true

11
New cards

biconditional operation

is read "p is necessary and sufficient for q" or "if p then q, and conversely" or "p if and only if q"

<p>is read "p is necessary and sufficient for q" or "if p then q, and conversely" or "p if and only if q"</p>
12
New cards

Logical equivalence p ≡ q

Two compound propositions are logically equivalent if they have the same truth value. That is, the truth value in the final column in a truth table is the same for both compound propositions

13
New cards

tautology

If the compound propositions is always true. For example, p∨¬p.

14
New cards

contradiction

if the compound proposition is always false. For example, p∧¬p.

15
New cards

De Morgan's Law

logical equivalences that show how to correctly distribute a negation operation inside a parenthesized expression containing the disjunction or conjunction operator.

¬(p ∨ q) = (¬p ∧ ¬q)

¬(p ∧ q) = (¬p ∨ ¬q)

16
New cards

Absorption laws

p ∨ (p ∧ q) ≡ p

p ∧ (p ∨ q) ≡ p

17
New cards

Associative laws

(p ∨ q) ∨ r ≡ p ∨ (q ∨ r)

(p ∧ q) ∧ r ≡ p ∧ (q ∧ r)

18
New cards

Commutative laws

p ∨ q ≡ q ∨ p

p ∧ q ≡ q ∧ p

19
New cards

Complement laws

p ∧ ¬p ≡ F

¬T ≡ F

p ∨ ¬p ≡ T

¬F ≡ T

20
New cards

Conditional identities

p → q ≡ ¬p ∨ q

p ↔ q ≡ ( p → q ) ∧ ( q → p )

21
New cards

Distributive laws

p ∨ (q ∧ r) ≡ (p ∨ q) ∧ (p ∨ r)

p ∧ (q ∨ r) ≡ (p ∧ q) ∨ (p ∧ r)

22
New cards

Domination laws

p ∨ T ≡ T

p ∧ F ≡ F

23
New cards

Double negation law

¬(¬p) ≡ p

24
New cards

idempotent laws

p ∨ p ≡ p

p ∧ p ≡ p

25
New cards

identity laws

p ∧ T ≡ p

p ∨ F ≡ p

26
New cards

predicate

a logical statement whose truth value is a function of one or more variables

27
New cards

domain of the predicate

the set of all possible x values for P(x) is called the domain of the predicate

28
New cards

universal quantifier

"for all x", is denoted ∀x, P(x). This means that for all values of x in the domain of P(x), the predicate is true.

29
New cards

existential quantifier

"there exists an x" such that P(x) is denoted ∃x, P(x). This means there is at least one x in the domain of the predicate that yields a truth value for P(x).

30
New cards

To show that ∀x, P(x) is not a true statement

we need only show for one x, P(x) is false.

31
New cards

To show that ∃x, P(x) is not a true statement

we need to show for all values of x, P(x) is false

32
New cards

free variable

A variable x in the predicate P(x) is called a free variable because it is not quantified. That is, the variable is free to take on any value in the domain.

33
New cards

bound variable

The variable x in the statement ∀xP(x) is a bound variable because it is quantified. That is, the variable is bound to a quantifier.

34
New cards

If statement has no free variables...

then the statement is a proposition because its truth value can be determined

35
New cards

DeMorgan's laws for quantified statements

¬∀xP(x) ≡ ∃x¬P(x)

¬∃xP(x) ≡ ∀x¬P(x)

DeMorgan's law for quantified statements are the same laws for propositions

36
New cards

nested quantifiers

A logical expression with more than one quantifier that binds different variables in the same predicate

37
New cards

∀x∀y M(x,y)

For every pair of x and y, M(x,y) is true

38
New cards

∃x∃y M(x,y)

There exists at least one pair of x and y such that M(x,y) is true

39
New cards

∃x∀y M(x,y)

There exists at least one x that pairs with ALL y, such that M(x,y) is true

40
New cards

∀x∃y M(x,y)

For each x, there is at least one y, such that M(x,y) is true

41
New cards

DeMorgan's law with nested quantifiers

¬∀x ∀y P(x, y) ≡ ∃x ∃y ¬P(x, y)

It is not true for all x and for all y, P(x, y).

There exists at least one pair (x, y) such that P(x, y) is false.

42
New cards

DeMorgan's law with nested quantifiers

¬∀x ∃y P(x, y) ≡ ∃x ∀y ¬P(x, y)

It is not true for all x there exists a y, such that P(x, y) is true

There exists at least one x and for all y, P(x, y) is false.

43
New cards

DeMorgan's law with nested quantifiers

¬∃x ∀y P(x, y) ≡ ∀x ∃y ¬P(x, y)

It is not true that there exists an x for all y, such P(x, y) is true

For all x, there is at least one y, such that P(x, y) is false.

44
New cards

DeMorgan's law with nested quantifiers

¬∃x ∃y P(x, y) ≡ ∀x ∀y ¬P(x, y)

It is not true that there exists a pair of x and y, such that P(x, y) is true.

For every pair of (x, y), P(x, y) is false.

45
New cards

argument

consists of a collection of propositions that include a set of premises called the hypotheses and a concluding one called the conclusion. Symbolically, we use p1, p2, ... pn to represent the hypotheses and c for the conclusion.

46
New cards

argument is expressed as

(p1 ∧ p2∧ ... ∧ pn) → c

47
New cards

A proposition can be true or false whereas an argument is

valid or invalid

48
New cards

The argument is valid if...

all the premises are true AND the conclusion is true. It is invalid otherwise.

49
New cards

Modus ponens

Given p;

if p then q;

then q can be inferred

<p>Given p;</p><p>if p then q; </p><p>then q can be inferred</p>
50
New cards

Modus tollens

Given NOT q;

if p then q;

then NOT p can be inferred

<p>Given NOT q; </p><p>if p then q; </p><p>then NOT p can be inferred</p>
51
New cards

Addition

Given p;

p OR q can be inferred

<p>Given p; </p><p>p OR q can be inferred</p>
52
New cards

Simplification

Given p AND q;

p can be inferred

<p>Given p AND q; </p><p>p can be inferred</p>
53
New cards

Conjunction

Given p;

Given q;

p AND q can be inferred

<p>Given p; </p><p>Given q; </p><p>p AND q can be inferred</p>
54
New cards

Hypothetical syllogism

If p implies q;

and q implies r;

Then p implies r can be inferred

<p>If p implies q; </p><p>and q implies r; </p><p>Then p implies r can be inferred</p>
55
New cards

Disjunctive syllogism

Given p OR q;

Given NOT p;

Then q can be inferred

<p>Given p OR q; </p><p>Given NOT p; </p><p>Then q can be inferred</p>
56
New cards

Resolution

Given p OR q ;

Given NOT p OR r;

Then q OR r can be inferred

<p>Given p OR q ; </p><p>Given NOT p OR r; </p><p>Then q OR r can be inferred</p>
57
New cards

elements

58
New cards

arbitrary element

An element that refers to any unspecified x in the domain.

For example, "Let x be any element in the domain of P(x)."

59
New cards

particular element

An element that refers to an x in the domain with certain properties

For example, "Let x be in the domain of P(x) such that x is also even."

60
New cards

Universal instantiation

Rule of Inference:

c is an element (arbitrary or particular)

∀x P(x)

∴ P(c)

Explanation:

c is an element

For all of x, P(x)

Therefore, P(c)

61
New cards

Universal generalization

Rule of Inference:

c is an arbitrary element

P(c) ______

∴ ∀x P(x)

Explanation:

Let c be an arbitrary element.

P(c)

Therefore for every x, P(x).

62
New cards

Existential instantiation

Rule of Inference:

∃x P(x)

∴ (c is a particular element) ∧ P(c)

Explanation:

There exists an x, P(x).

Therefore, there is a particular c such that P(c).

63
New cards

Existential generalization

Rule of Inference:

c is an element (arbitrary or particular)

P(c)

∴ ∃x P(x)

Explanation:

There is an element c such that P(c).

Therefore, there exists an x such that P(x).

64
New cards

theorem

a claim that can be proved true using logical arguments

65
New cards

proof

process we use to show the theorem is true

66
New cards

axioms

Claims that we accept to be true without proof

67
New cards

For proofs of universal statements...

a proof by exhaustion is one technique that shows the claim is true for all x in the domain.

68
New cards

To prove a claim is true by exhaustion...

plug each element in the domain with a value and determine its truth value.

69
New cards

For infinite domains and large finite domains...

this process is not possible and one must show the statement is true for an arbitrary element in the domain.

70
New cards

To disprove a universal statement...

find one counterexample to the claim

For example, to disprove the statement, "All prime numbers are odd" find one example where this statement is false—the number 2—which is both even and prime.

71
New cards

Use a direct proof to..

prove a claim implies a conclusion for a conditional statement ().

72
New cards

In a direct proof

start with the hypothesis of a statement and make one deduction after another until you reach the conclusion.

73
New cards

Symbolically, to prove with a direct proof

start with the original claim p then justify a sequential order of steps. The following is the structure of a direct proof.

p and show

p → p1 then

p1 → p2 then

pn → c for a sequence of steps, p1, p2, ... ,pn.

74
New cards

To prove a statement by contraposition, start with the contrapositive of the statement

In this example ¬c→¬p is the contrapositive of p→c. Then prove the contrapositive by a direct proof and conclude that the original statement is true. (For a refresher on direct proofs, review the previous lesson.)

75
New cards

The proof by contrapositive is often used for number theory proofs

It is good to know that the definition of an even number can be expressed as 2n where n is an integer. An odd number can be expressed as 2n + 1 for some integer n.

76
New cards

The proof by contrapositive is often used with statements with rational numbers.

A rational number can be expressed as the quotient of integers. An irrational number is one that cannot.

77
New cards

proof by contradiction

An indirect way to prove a theorem is to assume it is false and then show how, under this assumption, a mathematical contradiction will arise.

78
New cards

To prove by contradiction

start with the conditional statement p→c and assume the premise (p) is true but that conclusion (c) is false. Then proceed to show there is a contradiction using the same steps as the direct proof.

79
New cards

Use proofs by contradiction when it is more difficult to prove the theorem directly

For example, to show that the sum of an irrational number and a rational number is irrational, it is easier to prove it indirectly by assuming the sum is rational and showing that a contradiction arises, than to prove it directly.

80
New cards

proof by cases

To prove a predicate P(x) is true on its domain, sometimes it is easier to show the predicate is true by breaking up the domain into different classes and offering proofs for each class separately.

81
New cards

Boolean algebra

an expansion of the logic chapter covered in a previous unit where true (T) is now represented by 1 and false (F) is now 0.

<p>an expansion of the logic chapter covered in a previous unit where true (T) is now represented by 1 and false (F) is now 0.</p>
82
New cards

Boolean addition (+)

Logical ∨ (OR)

83
New cards

Boolean multiplication (⋅)

Logical ∧ (AND)

84
New cards

Boolean complement (bar symbol xˉ)

Logical ¬ (NOT)

85
New cards

Boolean exclusive or (⊕)

Logical ⊕ (XOR)

86
New cards

Boolean order of operations

Parentheses can override any other precedence

Complements are calculated before addition or multiplication

Multiplication takes precedence over addition

87
New cards

Absorption laws (Boolean algebra)

Since x ⋅ x requires x, x+(x × y) is just x.

<p>Since x ⋅ x requires x, x+(x × y) is just x.</p>
88
New cards

Associative laws (Boolean algebra)

Only applies when the operators are all addition, or are all multiplication. Rearranging the parentheses in an expression will not change the expression's value.

<p>Only applies when the operators are all addition, or are all multiplication. Rearranging the parentheses in an expression will not change the expression's value.</p>
89
New cards

Commutative laws (Boolean algebra)

Rearranging the values will not change the truth value.

<p>Rearranging the values will not change the truth value.</p>
90
New cards

Complement laws (Boolean algebra)

Addition or multiplication by the complement will equal either the multiplicative or additive identity value. Also, the complement of 1 is zero, and the complement of 0 is one.

<p>Addition or multiplication by the complement will equal either the multiplicative or additive identity value. Also, the complement of 1 is zero, and the complement of 0 is one.</p>
91
New cards

De Morgan's laws (Boolean algebra)

The complement of an OR expression is the same as an AND statement of their individual complements. The complement of an AND statement is the same as an OR statement of their individual complements.

<p>The complement of an OR expression is the same as an AND statement of their individual complements. The complement of an AND statement is the same as an OR statement of their individual complements.</p>
92
New cards

Distributive laws (Boolean algebra)

Addition can be distributed to each factor; multiplication can be distributed to each term.

<p>Addition can be distributed to each factor; multiplication can be distributed to each term.</p>
93
New cards

Domination laws (Boolean algebra)

Multiplication by the additive identity, 0, equals 0. Addition by the multiplicative identity, 1, equals 1.

<p>Multiplication by the additive identity, 0, equals 0. Addition by the multiplicative identity, 1, equals 1.</p>
94
New cards

Double complement law (Boolean algebra)

A double negative makes a positive.

<p>A double negative makes a positive.</p>
95
New cards

Idempotent laws (Boolean algebra)

To say x OR x—or to say x AND x—is redundant. In both cases, we just have x.

<p>To say x OR x—or to say x AND x—is redundant. In both cases, we just have x.</p>
96
New cards

Identity laws (Boolean algebra)

Addition or multiplication by the identity values of 0 and 1 respectively, does not change the original value

<p>Addition or multiplication by the identity values of 0 and 1 respectively, does not change the original value</p>
97
New cards

Literal

a single Boolean variable or its complement; for example, x¯ and x.

98
New cards

Minterm

the product of literals; for example, x¯yz

99
New cards

To find a Boolean expression that is equivalent to a Boolean function defined by an input/output table:

Each row of a table defining a Boolean function corresponds to a minterm.

Find each row where the value of f=1.

Write the expression for each row whose minterm equals 1.

Put an addition operator (+) between each expression.

100
New cards

The rules for disjunctive normal form DNF (the sum of products of literals):

Complements are applied to only single variables:

No addition within a term:

<p>Complements are applied to only single variables:</p><p>No addition within a term:</p>