DOCSLIB.ORG

Discrete Mathematics1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Discrete Mathematics1 Discrete Mathematics1 http://lcs.ios.ac.cn/~znj/DM2017 Naijun Zhan April 5, 2017 1Special thanks to Profs Hanpin Wang (PKU) and Lijun Zhang (ISCAS) for their courtesy of the slides on this course. Contents 1. The Foundations: Logic and Proofs 2. Basic Structures: Sets, Functions, Sequences, Sum- s, and Matrices 3. Algorithms 4. Number Theory and Cryptography 5. Induction and Recursion 6. Counting 7. Discrete Probability 8. Advanced Counting Techniques 9. Relations 10. Graphs 11. Trees 12. Boolean Algebra 13. Modeling Computation 1 Chapter 1 The Foundations: Logic and Proofs Logic in Computer Science During the past fifty years there has been extensive, continuous, and growing interaction between logic and computer science. In many respects, logic provides computer science with both a u- nifying foundational framework and a tool for modeling compu- tational systems. In fact, logic has been called the calculus of computer science. The argument is that logic plays a fundamen- tal role in computer science, similar to that played by calculus in the physical sciences and traditional engineering disciplines. Indeed, logic plays an important role in areas of computer sci- ence as disparate as machine architecture, computer-aided de- sign, programming languages, databases, artificial intelligence, algorithms, and computability and complexity. Moshe Vardi 2 • The origins of logic can be dated back to Aristotle's time. • The birth of mathematical logic: { Leibnitz's idea { Russell paradox { Hilbert's plan { Three schools of modern logic: logicism (Frege, Russell, Whitehead) formalism (Hilbert) intuitionism (Brouwer) • One of the central problem for logicians is that: \why is this proof correct/incorrect?" • Boolean algebra owes to George Boole. • Now, we are interested in: \is the program correct?" 3 1.1 Propositional Logic { An Appetizer Definition 1.1.1 (Proposition). A proposition is a declarative sentence that is either true or false, but not both. Definition 1.1.2 (Propositional Logic). Fix a countable propo- sition set AP. Syntax of propositional formulas in BNF (Backus- Naur form) is given by: ' ::= p 2 AP j :' j ' ^ ' Accordingly, • Atomic proposition p 2 AP is a formula. • Compound formulas: :' (negation) and ' ^ (conjunc- tion), provided that ' and are formulas. 4 For p 2 AP , negation and conjunction, we can construct the truth tables. We define the following derived operators: • Disjunction: ' _ := :(:' ^ : ) • Implication: ' ! := :' _ • Bi-implication: ' $ := (' ! ) ^ ( ! ') • Exclusive Or: ' ⊕ := (' _ ) ^ (:(' ^ )) Definition 1.1.3 (Precedence of Logical Operators). Operators :; ^; _; !; $ have precedence 1; 2; 3; 4; 5, respectively. 5 Definition 1.1.4 (Logic and Bit Operators). • A bit is a symbol with possible values 0 and 1.A Boolean variable is a variable with value true or false. • Computer bit operations correspond to logic connectives: OR, AND, XOR in various programming languages corre- spond to _; ^; ⊕, respectively. • A bit string is a sequence of zero or more bits. The length of this string is the number of bits in the string. • Bitwise OR, bitwise AND and bitwise XOR of two strings of the same length are the strings that have as their bits the OR, AND and XOR of the corresponding bits in the two strings, respectively. 6 1.2 Applications of Propositional Logic Definition 1.2.1 (Applications). • System Specifications: The automated reply cannot be sent when the file system is full. • Boolean Searches: (one j two) - (three) • Logic Puzzles. Knights always tell the truth, and the op- posite knaves always lie. A says: "B is a knight". B says "The two of us are opposite types" Definition 1.2.2 (Logic Circuit). • Propositional logic can be applied to the design of computer hardware. Claude Shannon • A logic circuit receives input signals p1; p2; : : : ; pn and pro- duces an output s. Complicated digital circuits are con- structed from three basic circuits, called gates. • Build a digital circuit producing (p _:r) ^ (:p _ (q _:r)). 7 1.3 Propositional Equivalences A formula ' is called a • tautology if it is always true, no matter what the truth values of the propositional variables are; • contradiction if it is always false; • contingency if it is neither a tautology nor a contradiction. Moreover, ' is satisfiable if it is either a tautology or a contin- gency, unsatisfiable if it is a contradiction. Formulas ' and are called logically equivalent if ' $ is a tautology. This is denoted by ' ≡ . Definition 1.3.1 (Logical Equivalence). Show the following log- ical equivalences: 1. Identity laws: ' ^ T ≡ ', ' _ F ≡ ' 2. Dominations laws ' _ T ≡ T, ' ^ F ≡ F 8 3. Idempotent laws ' _ ' ≡ '; ' ^ ' ≡ ' 4. Double negation law :(:') ≡ ' 5. Commutative laws ' _ ≡ _ '; ' ^ ≡ ^ ' 6. Associative laws ('1 _'2)_'3 ≡ '1 _('2 _'3); ('1 ^'2)^'3 ≡ '1 ^('2 ^'3) 7. Distributive laws '1 _ ('2 ^ '3) ≡ ('1 _ '2) ^ ('1 _ '3), '1 ^ ('2 _ '3) ≡ ('1 ^ '2) _ ('1 ^ '3) 8. De Morgan's laws :(' ^ ) ≡ :' _: ; :(' _ ) ≡ :' ^ : 9. Absorption laws ' _ (' ^ ) ≡ '; ' ^ (' _ ) ≡ ' 10. Negation laws ' _:' ≡ T;' ^ :' ≡ F 9 Definition 1.3.2 (Logical Equivalence). Logical equivalences involving conditional statements: 1. ' ! ≡ :' _ 2. ' ! ≡ : !:' 3. ' _ ≡ :' ! 4. ' ^ ≡ :(' !: ) 5. ' ^ : ≡ :(' ! ) 6. ('1 ! '2) ^ ('1 ! '3) ≡ '1 ! ('2 ^ '3) 7. ('1 ! '3) ^ ('2 ! '3) ≡ ('1 _ '2) ! '3 8. ('1 ! '2) _ ('1 ! '3) ≡ '1 ! ('2 _ '3) 9. ('1 ! '3) _ ('2 ! '3) ≡ ('1 ^ '2) ! '3 10. ' $ ≡ :' $ : 11. ' $ ≡ (' ^ ) _ (:' ^ : ) 12. :(' $ ) ≡ ' $ : 10 1.4 Induction and Recursion PRINCIPLE OF MATHEMATICAL INDUCTION To prove that P (n) is true for all positive integers n, where P (n) is a proposi- tional function, we complete two steps: • BASIS STEP: We verify that P (1) is true. • INDUCTIVE STEP: We show that the conditional state- ment P (k) ! P (k + 1) is true for all positive integers k. Expressed as a rule of inference for first-order logic, this proof technique can be stated as: Φ := (P (1) ^ 8k:(P (k) ! P (k + 1))) ! 8n:P (n) Exercise 1.4.1. Prove 1 + 2 + 22 + ::: + 2n = 2n+1 − 1. 11 STRONG INDUCTION (Second principle of mathematical induc- tion) To prove that P (n) is true for all positive integers n, where P (n) is a propositional function, we complete two steps: • BASIS STEP: We verify that the proposition P (1) is true. • INDUCTIVE STEP: We show that the conditional state- ment (P (1) ^ P (2) ^ ::: ^ P (k)) ! P (k + 1) is true for all positive integers k. Expressed as a rule of inference for first-order logic, this proof technique can be stated as: k Ψ := (P (1) ^ 8k:(^i=1P (i) ! P (k + 1))) ! 8n:P (n) Exercise 1.4.2. Prove that if n is a natural number greater than 1, then n can be written as the product of primes. 12 Recursively Defined Sets and Structures and Structural Induction Definition 1.4.3 (Strings). The set Σ∗ of strings over the al- phabet Σ is defined recursively by • BASIS STEP: λ 2 Σ∗ (where λ is the empty string con- taining no symbols). • RECURSIVE STEP: If w 2 Σ∗ and x 2 Σ, then wx 2 Σ∗. Definition 1.4.4. We define the set of well-formed formulas in propositional logic, denoted by L, from alphabet Σ := AP [ f:; !; (; )g. • BASIS STEP: each p 2 AP is a well-formed formula. • RECURSIVE STEP: If ' and are well-formed formu- las, i.e., '; 2 L, then (:'), (' ! ) are well-formed formulas. Thus, the set of well-formed formulas is a subset of L ⊆ Σ∗. 13 STRUCTURAL INDUCTION A proof by structural in- duction consists of two parts. • BASIS STEP: Show that the result holds for all elements specified in the basis step. • RECURSIVE STEP: Show that if the statement is true for each of the elements used to construct new elements in the recursive step of the definition, the result holds for these new elements. Remark: The validity of structural induction follows from the principle of mathematical induction for the nonnegative integers. Exercise 1.4.5. Show that every well-formed formula for com- pound propositions contains an equal number of left and right parentheses. 14 1.5 Normal Forms Negation Normal Form • Literal: An atomic proposition p or its negation :p; • Negation Normal Form (NNF): A formula built up with \^", \_", and literals. • Using repeated DeMorgan and Double Negation, we can transform any formula into a formula with Negation Normal Form. • Example: :((A _ B) ^ :C) $ (DeMorgan) :(A _ B) _ ::C $ (Double Neg, DeMorgan) (:A ^ :B) _ C Disjunction Normal Form • Disjunction Normal Form (DNF): A generalized dis- junction of generalized conjunctions of literals. • Using repeated distribution of ^ over _, any NNF formula can be rewritten in DNF (exercise). • Example: (A _ B) ^ (C _ D) $ (Distribution) [(A _ B) ^ C] _ [(A _ B) ^ D] $ (Distribution) (A ^ C) _ (B ^ C) _ (A ^ D) _ (B ^ D) 15 Conjunction Normal Form • Conjunction Normal Form (CNF): A generalized con- junction of generalized disjunctions of literals. • Using repeated distribution of _ over ^, any NNF formula can be rewritten in CNF (exercise). • Example: (A ^ B) _ (C ^ D) $ (Distribution) [(A ^ B) _ C] ^ [(A ^ B) _ D] $ (Distribution) (A _ C) ^ (B _ C) ^ (A _ D) ^ (B _ D) Truth table 16 Expressive completeness • What are the truth tables for (p ^ q) _ r and p ^ (q _ r)? • Truth table for n-ary Boolean function. • A set of logical connectives is called functionally com- plete if any n-ary Boolean function is definable with it, e.g. f:; ^g, f:; _g. • How about f:; !g? Exercise. Exercise 49 of page 16, Exercise 15 of page 23, Exercise 39 of page 35, Exercise 45 of page 36. 17 1.6 Propositional Logic and Deduction Sys- tems: a Sound and Complete Axiomati- zation This section considers a complete axiomatization system such that, a formula is a tautology if and only if it can be derived by means of the axioms and the deduction rules of the system.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Propositional Logic, Modal Logic, Propo- Sitional Dynamic Logic and first-Order Logic
    A I L Madhavan Mukund Chennai Mathematical Institute E-mail: [email protected] Abstract ese are lecture notes for an introductory course on logic aimed at graduate students in Com- puter Science. e notes cover techniques and results from propositional logic, modal logic, propo- sitional dynamic logic and first-order logic. e notes are based on a course taught to first year PhD students at SPIC Mathematical Institute, Madras, during August–December, . Contents Propositional Logic . Syntax . . Semantics . . Axiomatisations . . Maximal Consistent Sets and Completeness . . Compactness and Strong Completeness . Modal Logic . Syntax . . Semantics . . Correspondence eory . . Axiomatising valid formulas . . Bisimulations and expressiveness . . Decidability: Filtrations and the finite model property . . Labelled transition systems and multi-modal logic . Dynamic Logic . Syntax . . Semantics . . Axiomatising valid formulas . First-Order Logic . Syntax . . Semantics . . Formalisations in first-order logic . . Satisfiability: Henkin’s reduction to propositional logic . . Compactness and the L¨owenheim-Skolem eorem . . A Complete Axiomatisation . . Variants of the L¨owenheim-Skolem eorem . . Elementary Classes . . Elementarily Equivalent Structures . . An Algebraic Characterisation of Elementary Equivalence . . Decidability . Propositional Logic . Syntax P = f g We begin with a countably infinite set of atomic propositions p0, p1,... and two logical con- nectives : (read as not) and _ (read as or). e set Φ of formulas of propositional logic is the smallest set satisfying the following conditions: • Every atomic proposition p is a member of Φ. • If α is a member of Φ, so is (:α). • If α and β are members of Φ, so is (α _ β). We shall normally omit parentheses unless we need to explicitly clarify the structure of a formula.
    [Show full text]
  • Discrete Mathematics
    Discrete Mathematics1 http://lcs.ios.ac.cn/~znj/DM2017 Naijun Zhan March 19, 2017 1Special thanks to Profs Hanpin Wang (PKU) and Lijun Zhang (ISCAS) for their courtesy of the slides on this course. Contents 1. The Foundations: Logic and Proofs 2. Basic Structures: Sets, Functions, Sequences, Sum- s, and Matrices 3. Algorithms 4. Number Theory and Cryptography 5. Induction and Recursion 6. Counting 7. Discrete Probability 8. Advanced Counting Techniques 9. Relations 10. Graphs 11. Trees 12. Boolean Algebra 13. Modeling Computation 1 Chapter 1 The Foundations: Logic and Proofs Logic in Computer Science During the past fifty years there has been extensive, continuous, and growing interaction between logic and computer science. In many respects, logic provides computer science with both a u- nifying foundational framework and a tool for modeling compu- tational systems. In fact, logic has been called the calculus of computer science. The argument is that logic plays a fundamen- tal role in computer science, similar to that played by calculus in the physical sciences and traditional engineering disciplines. Indeed, logic plays an important role in areas of computer sci- ence as disparate as machine architecture, computer-aided de- sign, programming languages, databases, artificial intelligence, algorithms, and computability and complexity. Moshe Vardi 2 • The origins of logic can be dated back to Aristotle's time. • The birth of mathematical logic: { Leibnitz's idea { Russell paradox { Hilbert's plan { Three schools of modern logic: logicism (Frege, Russell, Whitehead) formalism (Hilbert) intuitionism (Brouwer) • One of the central problem for logicians is that: \why is this proof correct/incorrect?" • Boolean algebra owes to George Boole.
    [Show full text]
  • On Basic Probability Logic Inequalities †
    mathematics Article On Basic Probability Logic Inequalities † Marija Boriˇci´cJoksimovi´c Faculty of Organizational Sciences, University of Belgrade, Jove Ili´ca154, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia; [email protected] † The conclusions given in this paper were partially presented at the European Summer Meetings of the Association for Symbolic Logic, Logic Colloquium 2012, held in Manchester on 12–18 July 2012. Abstract: We give some simple examples of applying some of the well-known elementary probability theory inequalities and properties in the field of logical argumentation. A probabilistic version of the hypothetical syllogism inference rule is as follows: if propositions A, B, C, A ! B, and B ! C have probabilities a, b, c, r, and s, respectively, then for probability p of A ! C, we have f (a, b, c, r, s) ≤ p ≤ g(a, b, c, r, s), for some functions f and g of given parameters. In this paper, after a short overview of known rules related to conjunction and disjunction, we proposed some probabilized forms of the hypothetical syllogism inference rule, with the best possible bounds for the probability of conclusion, covering simultaneously the probabilistic versions of both modus ponens and modus tollens rules, as already considered by Suppes, Hailperin, and Wagner. Keywords: inequality; probability logic; inference rule MSC: 03B48; 03B05; 60E15; 26D20; 60A05 1. Introduction The main part of probabilization of logical inference rules is defining the correspond- Citation: Boriˇci´cJoksimovi´c,M. On ing best possible bounds for probabilities of propositions. Some of them, connected with Basic Probability Logic Inequalities. conjunction and disjunction, can be obtained immediately from the well-known Boole’s Mathematics 2021, 9, 1409.
    [Show full text]
  • Propositional Logic - Basics
    Outline Propositional Logic - Basics K. Subramani1 1Lane Department of Computer Science and Electrical Engineering West Virginia University 14 January and 16 January, 2013 Subramani Propositonal Logic Outline Outline 1 Statements, Symbolic Representations and Semantics Boolean Connectives and Semantics Subramani Propositonal Logic (i) The Law! (ii) Mathematics. (iii) Computer Science. Definition Statement (or Atomic Proposition) - A sentence that is either true or false. Example (i) The board is black. (ii) Are you John? (iii) The moon is made of green cheese. (iv) This statement is false. (Paradox). Statements, Symbolic Representations and Semantics Boolean Connectives and Semantics Motivation Why Logic? Subramani Propositonal Logic (ii) Mathematics. (iii) Computer Science. Definition Statement (or Atomic Proposition) - A sentence that is either true or false. Example (i) The board is black. (ii) Are you John? (iii) The moon is made of green cheese. (iv) This statement is false. (Paradox). Statements, Symbolic Representations and Semantics Boolean Connectives and Semantics Motivation Why Logic? (i) The Law! Subramani Propositonal Logic (iii) Computer Science. Definition Statement (or Atomic Proposition) - A sentence that is either true or false. Example (i) The board is black. (ii) Are you John? (iii) The moon is made of green cheese. (iv) This statement is false. (Paradox). Statements, Symbolic Representations and Semantics Boolean Connectives and Semantics Motivation Why Logic? (i) The Law! (ii) Mathematics. Subramani Propositonal Logic (iii) Computer Science. Definition Statement (or Atomic Proposition) - A sentence that is either true or false. Example (i) The board is black. (ii) Are you John? (iii) The moon is made of green cheese. (iv) This statement is false.
    [Show full text]
  • Logic in Computer Science
    P. Madhusudan Logic in Computer Science Rough course notes November 5, 2020 Draft. Copyright P. Madhusudan Contents 1 Logic over Structures: A Single Known Structure, Classes of Structures, and All Structures ................................... 1 1.1 Logic on a Fixed Known Structure . .1 1.2 Logic on a Fixed Class of Structures . .3 1.3 Logic on All Structures . .5 1.4 Logics over structures: Theories and Questions . .7 2 Propositional Logic ............................................. 11 2.1 Propositional Logic . 11 2.1.1 Syntax . 11 2.1.2 What does the above mean with ::=, etc? . 11 2.2 Some definitions and theorems . 14 2.3 Compactness Theorem . 15 2.4 Resolution . 18 3 Quantifier Elimination and Decidability .......................... 23 3.1 Quantifiier Elimination . 23 3.2 Dense Linear Orders without Endpoints . 24 3.3 Quantifier Elimination for rationals with addition: ¹Q, 0, 1, ¸, −, <, =º ......................................... 27 3.4 The Theory of Reals with Addition . 30 3.4.1 Aside: Axiomatizations . 30 3.4.2 Other theories that admit quantifier elimination . 31 4 Validity of FOL is undecidable and is r.e.-hard .................... 33 4.1 Validity of FOL is r.e.-hard . 34 4.2 Trakhtenbrot’s theorem: Validity of FOL over finite models is undecidable, and co-r.e. hard . 39 5 Quantifier-free theory of equality ................................ 43 5.1 Decidability using Bounded Models . 43 v vi Contents 5.2 An Algorithm for Conjunctive Formulas . 44 5.2.1 Computing ¹º ................................... 47 5.3 Axioms for The Theory of Equality . 49 6 Completeness Theorem: FO Validity is r.e. ........................ 53 6.1 Prenex Normal Form .
    [Show full text]
  • Sets, Propositional Logic, Predicates, and Quantifiers
    COMP 182 Algorithmic Thinking Sets, Propositional Logic, Luay Nakhleh Computer Science Predicates, and Quantifiers Rice University !1 Reading Material ❖ Chapter 1, Sections 1, 4, 5 ❖ Chapter 2, Sections 1, 2 !2 ❖ Mathematics is about statements that are either true or false. ❖ Such statements are called propositions. ❖ We use logic to describe them, and proof techniques to prove whether they are true or false. !3 Propositions ❖ 5>7 ❖ The square root of 2 is irrational. ❖ A graph is bipartite if and only if it doesn’t have a cycle of odd length. ❖ For n>1, the sum of the numbers 1,2,3,…,n is n2. !4 Propositions? ❖ E=mc2 ❖ The sun rises from the East every day. ❖ All species on Earth evolved from a common ancestor. ❖ God does not exist. ❖ Everyone eventually dies. !5 ❖ And some of you might already be wondering: “If I wanted to study mathematics, I would have majored in Math. I came here to study computer science.” !6 ❖ Computer Science is mathematics, but we almost exclusively focus on aspects of mathematics that relate to computation (that can be implemented in software and/or hardware). !7 ❖Logic is the language of computer science and, mathematics is the computer scientist’s most essential toolbox. !8 Examples of “CS-relevant” Math ❖ Algorithm A correctly solves problem P. ❖ Algorithm A has a worst-case running time of O(n3). ❖ Problem P has no solution. ❖ Using comparison between two elements as the basic operation, we cannot sort a list of n elements in less than O(n log n) time. ❖ Problem A is NP-Complete.
    [Show full text]
  • CS245 Logic and Computation
    CS245 Logic and Computation Alice Gao December 9, 2019 Contents 1 Propositional Logic 3 1.1 Translations .................................... 3 1.2 Structural Induction ............................... 8 1.2.1 A template for structural induction on well-formed propositional for- mulas ................................... 8 1.3 The Semantics of an Implication ........................ 12 1.4 Tautology, Contradiction, and Satisfiable but Not a Tautology ........ 13 1.5 Logical Equivalence ................................ 14 1.6 Analyzing Conditional Code ........................... 16 1.7 Circuit Design ................................... 17 1.8 Tautological Consequence ............................ 18 1.9 Formal Deduction ................................. 21 1.9.1 Rules of Formal Deduction ........................ 21 1.9.2 Format of a Formal Deduction Proof .................. 23 1.9.3 Strategies for writing a formal deduction proof ............ 23 1.9.4 And elimination and introduction .................... 25 1.9.5 Implication introduction and elimination ................ 26 1.9.6 Or introduction and elimination ..................... 28 1.9.7 Negation introduction and elimination ................. 30 1.9.8 Putting them together! .......................... 33 1.9.9 Putting them together: Additional exercises .............. 37 1.9.10 Other problems .............................. 38 1.10 Soundness and Completeness of Formal Deduction ............... 39 1.10.1 The soundness of inference rules ..................... 39 1.10.2 Soundness and Completeness
    [Show full text]
  • Principle of Acquaintance and Axiom of Reducibility
    Principle of acquaintance and axiom of reducibility Brice Halimi Université Paris Nanterre 15 mars 2018 Russell-the-epistemologist is the founding father of the concept of acquaintance. In this talk, I would like to show that Russell’s theory of knowledge is not simply the next step following his logic, but that his logic (especially the system of Principia Mathematica) can also be understood as the formal underpinning of a theory of knowledge. So there is a concept of acquaintance for Russell-the-logician as well. Principia Mathematica’s logical types In Principia, Russell gives the following examples of first-order propositional functions of individuals: φx; (x; y); (y) (x; y);::: Then, introducing φ!zb as a variable first-order propositional function of one individual, he gives examples of second-order propositional functions: f (φ!zb); g(φ!zb; !zb); F(φ!zb; x); (x) F(φ!zb; x); (φ) g(φ!zb; !zb); (φ) F(φ!zb; x);::: Then f !(φb!zb) is introduced as a variable second-order propositional function of one first-order propositional function. And so on. A possible value of f !(φb!zb) is . φ!a. (Example given by Russell.) This has to do with the fact that Principia’s schematic letters are variables: It will be seen that “φ!x” is itself a function of two variables, namely φ!zb and x. [. ] (Principia, p. 51) And variables are understood substitutionally (see Kevin Klement, “Russell on Ontological Fundamentality and Existence”, 2017). This explains that the language of Principia does not constitute an autonomous formal language.
    [Show full text]
  • Lecture 1: Propositional Logic
    Lecture 1: Propositional Logic Syntax Semantics Truth tables Implications and Equivalences Valid and Invalid arguments Normal forms Davis-Putnam Algorithm 1 Atomic propositions and logical connectives An atomic proposition is a statement or assertion that must be true or false. Examples of atomic propositions are: “5 is a prime” and “program terminates”. Propositional formulas are constructed from atomic propositions by using logical connectives. Connectives false true not and or conditional (implies) biconditional (equivalent) A typical propositional formula is The truth value of a propositional formula can be calculated from the truth values of the atomic propositions it contains. 2 Well-formed propositional formulas The well-formed formulas of propositional logic are obtained by using the construction rules below: An atomic proposition is a well-formed formula. If is a well-formed formula, then so is . If and are well-formed formulas, then so are , , , and . If is a well-formed formula, then so is . Alternatively, can use Backus-Naur Form (BNF) : formula ::= Atomic Proposition formula formula formula formula formula formula formula formula formula formula 3 Truth functions The truth of a propositional formula is a function of the truth values of the atomic propositions it contains. A truth assignment is a mapping that associates a truth value with each of the atomic propositions . Let be a truth assignment for . If we identify with false and with true, we can easily determine the truth value of under . The other logical connectives can be handled in a similar manner. Truth functions are sometimes called Boolean functions. 4 Truth tables for basic logical connectives A truth table shows whether a propositional formula is true or false for each possible truth assignment.
    [Show full text]
  • The Peripatetic Program in Categorical Logic: Leibniz on Propositional Terms
    THE REVIEW OF SYMBOLIC LOGIC, Page 1 of 65 THE PERIPATETIC PROGRAM IN CATEGORICAL LOGIC: LEIBNIZ ON PROPOSITIONAL TERMS MARKO MALINK Department of Philosophy, New York University and ANUBAV VASUDEVAN Department of Philosophy, University of Chicago Abstract. Greek antiquity saw the development of two distinct systems of logic: Aristotle’s theory of the categorical syllogism and the Stoic theory of the hypothetical syllogism. Some ancient logicians argued that hypothetical syllogistic is more fundamental than categorical syllogistic on the grounds that the latter relies on modes of propositional reasoning such as reductio ad absurdum. Peripatetic logicians, by contrast, sought to establish the priority of categorical over hypothetical syllogistic by reducing various modes of propositional reasoning to categorical form. In the 17th century, this Peripatetic program of reducing hypothetical to categorical logic was championed by Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz. In an essay titled Specimina calculi rationalis, Leibniz develops a theory of propositional terms that allows him to derive the rule of reductio ad absurdum in a purely categor- ical calculus in which every proposition is of the form AisB. We reconstruct Leibniz’s categorical calculus and show that it is strong enough to establish not only the rule of reductio ad absurdum,but all the laws of classical propositional logic. Moreover, we show that the propositional logic generated by the nonmonotonic variant of Leibniz’s categorical calculus is a natural system of relevance logic ¬ known as RMI→ . From its beginnings in antiquity up until the late 19th century, the study of formal logic was shaped by two distinct approaches to the subject. The first approach was primarily concerned with simple propositions expressing predicative relations between terms.
    [Show full text]
  • Propositional Calculus
    CSC 438F/2404F Notes Winter, 2014 S. Cook REFERENCES The first two references have especially influenced these notes and are cited from time to time: [Buss] Samuel Buss: Chapter I: An introduction to proof theory, in Handbook of Proof Theory, Samuel Buss Ed., Elsevier, 1998, pp1-78. [B&M] John Bell and Moshe Machover: A Course in Mathematical Logic. North- Holland, 1977. Other logic texts: The first is more elementary and readable. [Enderton] Herbert Enderton: A Mathematical Introduction to Logic. Academic Press, 1972. [Mendelson] E. Mendelson: Introduction to Mathematical Logic. Wadsworth & Brooks/Cole, 1987. Computability text: [Sipser] Michael Sipser: Introduction to the Theory of Computation. PWS, 1997. [DSW] M. Davis, R. Sigal, and E. Weyuker: Computability, Complexity and Lan- guages: Fundamentals of Theoretical Computer Science. Academic Press, 1994. Propositional Calculus Throughout our treatment of formal logic it is important to distinguish between syntax and semantics. Syntax is concerned with the structure of strings of symbols (e.g. formulas and formal proofs), and rules for manipulating them, without regard to their meaning. Semantics is concerned with their meaning. 1 Syntax Formulas are certain strings of symbols as specified below. In this chapter we use formula to mean propositional formula. Later the meaning of formula will be extended to first-order formula. (Propositional) formulas are built from atoms P1;P2;P3;:::, the unary connective :, the binary connectives ^; _; and parentheses (,). (The symbols :; ^ and _ are read \not", \and" and \or", respectively.) We use P; Q; R; ::: to stand for atoms. Formulas are defined recursively as follows: Definition of Propositional Formula 1) Any atom P is a formula.
    [Show full text]
  • Foundations of Mathematics
    Foundations of Mathematics November 27, 2017 ii Contents 1 Introduction 1 2 Foundations of Geometry 3 2.1 Introduction . .3 2.2 Axioms of plane geometry . .3 2.3 Non-Euclidean models . .4 2.4 Finite geometries . .5 2.5 Exercises . .6 3 Propositional Logic 9 3.1 The basic definitions . .9 3.2 Disjunctive Normal Form Theorem . 11 3.3 Proofs . 12 3.4 The Soundness Theorem . 19 3.5 The Completeness Theorem . 20 3.6 Completeness, Consistency and Independence . 22 4 Predicate Logic 25 4.1 The Language of Predicate Logic . 25 4.2 Models and Interpretations . 27 4.3 The Deductive Calculus . 29 4.4 Soundness Theorem for Predicate Logic . 33 5 Models for Predicate Logic 37 5.1 Models . 37 5.2 The Completeness Theorem for Predicate Logic . 37 5.3 Consequences of the completeness theorem . 41 5.4 Isomorphism and elementary equivalence . 43 5.5 Axioms and Theories . 47 5.6 Exercises . 48 6 Computability Theory 51 6.1 Introduction and Examples . 51 6.2 Finite State Automata . 52 6.3 Exercises . 55 6.4 Turing Machines . 56 6.5 Recursive Functions . 61 6.6 Exercises . 67 iii iv CONTENTS 7 Decidable and Undecidable Theories 69 7.1 Introduction . 69 7.1.1 Gödel numbering . 69 7.2 Decidable vs. Undecidable Logical Systems . 70 7.3 Decidable Theories . 71 7.4 Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorems . 74 7.5 Exercises . 81 8 Computable Mathematics 83 8.1 Computable Combinatorics . 83 8.2 Computable Analysis . 85 8.2.1 Computable Real Numbers . 85 8.2.2 Computable Real Functions .
    [Show full text]