Scribd
Upload
92 views

CSE 103: Discrete Mathematics: Predicate Rules of Inference

This document discusses predicates and proofs in discrete mathematics. It introduces predicates using examples like L(x) meaning "x is a lion". It covers quantifiers like "for all x" and "there exists x". It also discusses rules for combining quantifiers and the meaning of bound vs free variables. The document then discusses various proof rules like modus ponens, modus tollens, addition and disjunctive syllogism. It provides examples of using these rules to derive conclusions. Finally, it briefly discusses direct proofs vs indirect proofs and fallacies to avoid in logical arguments.

Uploaded by

Abu OUbaida
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
92 views

CSE 103: Discrete Mathematics: Predicate Rules of Inference

This document discusses predicates and proofs in discrete mathematics. It introduces predicates using examples like L(x) meaning "x is a lion". It covers quantifiers like "for all x" and "there exists x". It also discusses rules for combining quantifiers and the meaning of bound vs free variables. The document then discusses various proof rules like modus ponens, modus tollens, addition and disjunctive syllogism. It provides examples of using these rules to derive conclusions. Finally, it briefly discusses direct proofs vs indirect proofs and fallacies to avoid in logical arguments.

Uploaded by

Abu OUbaida
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 31

CSE 103: Discrete Mathematics

Predicate
Rules of Inference
Predicates - more examples
L(x) = “x is a lion.” Universe of discourse
is all creatures.
F(x) = “x is fierce.”
C(x) = “x drinks coffee.”

All lions are fierce.


x (L(x) 
Some lions don’t drink coffee.
F(x))
x (L(x) 
Some fierce creatures don’t drink coffee.
C(x))

x (F(x) 
C(x))
10/15/20
Predicates - quantifier negation

So, x P(x) is the same as x P(x).


So, x P(x) is the same as x P(x).

General rule: to negate a quantifier, move


negation to the right, changing quantifiers as you
go.

10/15/20
Predicates - quantifier negation
No large birds live on honey.

x (L(x)  H(x))  x (L(x)  H(x)) Negation


rule
 x (L(x)  H(x)) DeMorgan’s

 x (L(x)  H(x)) Subst for 

What’s wrong with


this proof?

10/15/20
Predicates - free and bound variables
A variable is bound if it is known or quantified.
Otherwise, it is free.

Examples:
P(x) x is free
P(5) x is bound to 5
x P(x) x is bound by quantifier

Reminder: in a
proposition, all
variables must be
bound.
10/15/20
Predicates - multiple quantifiers
To bind many variables, use many quantifiers!

Example: P(x,y) = “x > y”


x P(x,y) c)
xy P(x,y) b)
xy P(x,y) a) a) True proposition
x P(x,3) b)
b) False
proposition
c) Not a
proposition
10/15/20 d) No clue
Predicates - the meaning of multiple quantifiers

xy P(x,y) P(x,y) true for all x, y


pairs.
xy P(x,y) P(x,y) true for at least one x,
y pair.
xy P(x,y) For every value of x we can find a
(possibly different) y so that P(x,y)
is true.
xy P(x,y) There is at least one x for
which P(x,y) is always true.

Suppose P(x,y) = “x’s favorite


class is y.”

quantification order is not


commutative.
10/15/20
Predicates - the meaning of multiple quantifiers
N(x,y) = “x is sitting by y”
xy N(x,y) False

xy N(x,y) True

xy N(x,y) True


?
xy N(x,y) False

10/15/20
Proofs - how do you know?
The following statements are true:
If I am Mila, then I am a great swimmer.
I am Mila.

What do we know to be true?


I am a great swimmer!

How do we
know it?

10/15/20
Proofs - how do you know?
A theorem is a statement that can be shown
to be true.
A proof is the means of doing so.

Axiom, postulates,
hypotheses and
previously proven
theorems.
Rules of inference

Proof

10/15/20
Proofs - how do you know?
The following statements are true:
If I am Mila, then I am a great swimmer.
I am Mila.

What do we know to be true? What rule of


I am a great swimmer! inference
can we use
to justify
it?

10/15/20
Proofs - Modus Ponens

I am Mila.
If I am Mila, then I am a great swimmer.

 I am a great swimmer!

p Inference
Tautology: Rule:
pq
(p  (p  q))  q Modus
q Ponens

10/15/20
Proofs - Modus Tollens

I am not a great skater.


If I am Erik, then I am a great skater.

 I am not Erik!

q Inference
Tautology: Rule:
pq
(q  (p  q))  p Modus
 p Tollens

10/15/20
Proofs - Addition

I am not a great skater.

 I am not a great skater or I am tall.

Inference
Tautology: Rule:
p
p  (p  q) Addition
pq

10/15/20
Proofs - Simplification

I am not a great skater and you are sleepy.

 you are sleepy.

Inference
Tautology: Rule:
pq
(p  q)  p Simplification
p

10/15/20
Proofs - Disjunctive Syllogism

I am a great eater or I am a great skater.


I am not a great skater.

 I am a great eater!

pq Inference
Tautology: Rule:
q
((p  q)  q)  p Disjunctive
p Syllogism

10/15/20
Proofs - Hypothetical Syllogism

If you are an athlete, you are always hungry.


If you are always hungry, you have a snickers in
your backpack.
 If you are an athlete, you have a snickers in
your backpack.
Inference
pq Tautology: Rule:
qr ((p  q)  (q  r))  Hypothetical
Syllogism
(p  r)
pr
10/15/20
Proofs - A little quiz…

Amy is a computer science major. Addition


 Amy is a math major or a computer science major.

If Ernie is a math major then Ernie is geeky.


Ernie is not geeky!

 Ernie is not a math major. Modus Tollens

10/15/20
Proofs - A little proof…

Here’s what you know:


Ellen is a math major or a CS major.
If Ellen does not like discrete math, she is not a
CS major.
If Ellen likes discrete math, she is smart.
Ellen is not a math major.

Can you conclude Ellen is smart?


MC
D  C
DS
10/15/20
M
Proofs - A little proof…

1. M  C Given
2. D  C Given
3. D  S Given
4. M Given
5. C DS (1,4)
6. D MT (2,5)
7. S MP (3,6)

Ellen is smart!

10/15/20
Proofs - A little proof…

1. M  C Given
2. D  C Given
3. D  S Given
4. M Given

5. C Disjunctive Syllogism (1,4)


6. C  D Contrapositive of 2
7. C  S Hypothetical Syllogism (6,3)
8. S Modus Ponens (5,7)

Ellen is smart!

10/15/20
10/15/20
•

10/15/20
10/15/20
•

10/15/20
10/15/20
Proof Techniques - direct proofs

A totally different example:

Prove that if n = 3 mod 4, then n2 = 1 mod 4. HUH?

7 = 3 mod 4 7 = 111 mod 4

37 = 1 mod 4
37 = 61 mod 4 94 = 2 mod 4 94 = 6 mod 4
16 = 0 mod 4 16 = 1024 mod 4

10/15/20
Proof Techniques - direct proofs

A totally different example:


Prove that if n = 3 mod 4, then n2 = 1 mod 4.

If n = 3 mod 4, then n = 4k + 3 for some


int k.
n2 = (4k + 3)(4k + 3)
But then,
= 16k2 + 24k + 9
= 16k2 + 24k + 8 + 1
= 4(4k2 + 6k + 2) + 1
= 4j + 1 for some int j
= 1 mod 4.
10/15/20
Proofs - Fallacies

Rules of inference, appropriately applied give


valid arguments.

Mistakes in applying rules of inference are


called fallacies.

10/15/20
Proofs - valid arg or fallacy?
Affirming the
If I am Bonnie Blair, then I skate fast
conclusion.
I skate fast!

 I am Bonnie Blair I’m Eric Heiden


((p  q)  q)  p
Not a tautology.
If you don’t give me $10, I bite your ear.
I bite your ear!

 You didn’t give me $10. I’m just mean.

10/15/20
Proofs - valid arg or fallacy?

If it rains then it is cloudy. Denying the


It does not rain. hypothesis.

 It is not cloudy February!


((p  q)  p)  q
If it is a car, then it has 4 wheels. Not a tautology.
It is not a car.

 It doesn’t have 4 wheels. ATV

10/15/20

You might also like