University of Hawaii

ICS141:
Discrete Mathematics for
Computer Science I
Dept. Information & Computer Sci., University of Hawaii

Originals slides by Dr. Baek and Dr. Still, adapted by J. Stelovsky

Based on slides Dr. M. P. Frank and Dr. J.L. Gross
Provided by McGraw-Hill

ICS 141: Discrete Mathematics I – Fall 2011 5-1

 University of Hawaii

Lecture 5
Chapter 1. The Foundations
1.4 Nested Quantifiers
1.5 Rules of Inference

ICS 141: Discrete Mathematics I – Fall 2011 5-2

 Previously…
University of Hawaii

ICS 141: Discrete Mathematics I – Fall 2011 5-3

 Topic #3 – Predicate Logic

Nesting of Quantifiers
University of Hawaii

n  Example:
Let the domain of x and y be people.
Let L(x,y) = “x likes y” (A statement with 2 free
variables – not a proposition)
n  Then ∃y L(x,y) = “There is someone whom

x likes.” (A statement with 1 free variable x

– not a proposition)
n  Then ∀x (∃y L(x,y)) =
“Everyone has someone whom they like.”
(A __________ with ___ free variables.)
ICS 141: Discrete Mathematics I – Fall 2011 5-4
 Nested Quantifiers
University of Hawaii

n  Nested quantifiers are quantifiers that occur within the

scope of other quantifiers.
n  The order of the quantifiers is important, unless all the
quantifiers are universal quantifiers or all are existential
quantifiers.

ICS 141: Discrete Mathematics I – Fall 2011 5-5

 Nested Quantifiers
University of Hawaii

n  Let the domain of x and y is R, and P(x,y): xy = 0.

Find the truth value of the following propositions.
n  ∀x ∀y P(x, y) (F)
n  ∀x ∃y P(x, y) (T) R: set of real
n  ∃x ∀y P(x, y) (T) numbers

n  ∃x ∃y P(x, y) (T)

n  ∀x ∃y P(x,y) ≡ ∃y ∀x P(x,y)
n  For every x, there exists y such that x + y = 0. (T)
n  There exists y such that, for every x, x + y = 0. (F)

ICS 141: Discrete Mathematics I – Fall 2011 5-6

 Nested Quantifiers: Example
University of Hawaii

n  Let the domain = {1, 2, 3}. Find an expression

equivalent to ∀x ∃y P(x,y) where the variables
are bound by substitution instead:
n  Expand from inside out or outside in.

n  Outside in:

∀x ∃y P(x,y)
≡ ∃y P(1,y) ∧ ∃y P(2,y) ∧ ∃y P(3,y)
≡ [P(1,1) ∨ P(1,2) ∨ P(1,3)] ∧
[P(2,1) ∨ P(2,2) ∨ P(2,3)] ∧
[P(3,1) ∨ P(3,2) ∨ P(3,3)]
ICS 141: Discrete Mathematics I – Fall 2011 5-7
 Topic #3 – Predicate Logic

Quantifier Exercise
University of Hawaii

If R(x,y)=“x relies upon y,” express the following in

n 
unambiguous English when the domain is all people
∀x(∃y R(x,y)) = Everyone has someone to rely on.

There’s a poor overburdened soul whom

∃y(∀x R(x,y)) =
everyone relies upon (including himself)!

∃x(∀y R(x,y)) = There’s some needy person who relies

upon everybody (including himself).

∀y(∃x R(x,y)) = Everyone has someone who relies upon

them.

Everyone relies upon everybody,

∀x(∀y R(x,y)) =
(including themselves)!
ICS 141: Discrete Mathematics I – Fall 2011 5-8
 Negating Nested Quantifiers
University of Hawaii

n  Successively apply the rules for negating

statements involving a single quantifier
n  Example: Express the negation of the statement
∀x ∃y (P(x,y) ∧ ∃z R(x,y,z)) so that all negation
symbols immediately precede predicates.
n  ¬∀x ∃y (P(x,y) ∧ ∃z R(x,y,z))
≡ ∃x ¬∃y (P(x,y) ∧ ∃z R(x,y,z))
≡ ∃x ∀y ¬(P(x,y) ∧ ∃z R(x,y,z))
≡ ∃x ∀y (¬P(x,y) ∨ ¬∃z R(x,y,z))
≡ ∃x ∀y (¬P(x,y) ∨ ∀z ¬R(x,y,z))
ICS 141: Discrete Mathematics I – Fall 2011 5-9
 Topic #3 – Predicate Logic

Equivalence Laws
University of Hawaii

n  ∀x ∀y P(x,y) ≡ ∀y ∀x P(x,y)

∃x ∃y P(x,y) ≡ ∃y ∃x P(x,y)

n  ∀x (P(x) ∧ Q(x)) ≡ (∀x P(x)) ∧ (∀x Q(x))

∃x (P(x) ∨ Q(x)) ≡ (∃x P(x)) ∨ (∃x Q(x))

n  Exercise:
See if you can prove these yourself.

ICS 141: Discrete Mathematics I – Fall 2011 5-10

 Topic #3 – Predicate Logic

Notational Conventions
University of Hawaii

n  Quantifiers have higher precedence than all

logical operators from propositional logic:
(∀x P(x)) ∧ Q(x)
n  Consecutive quantifiers of the same type can
be combined:
∀x ∀y ∀z P(x,y,z) ≡ ∀x,y,z P(x,y,z)
or even ∀xyz P(x,y,z)

ICS 141: Discrete Mathematics I – Fall 2011 5-11

 1.5 Rules of Inference
University of Hawaii

n  An argument: a sequence of statements that end

with a conclusion
n  Some forms of argument (“valid”) never lead from
correct statements to an incorrect conclusion. Some
other forms of argument (“fallacies”) can lead from
true statements to an incorrect conclusion.
n  A logical argument consists of a list of (possibly
compound) propositions called premises/hypotheses
and a single proposition called the conclusion.
n  Logical rules of inference: methods that depend on
logic alone for deriving a new statement from a set of
other statements. (Templates for constructing valid
arguments.)
ICS 141: Discrete Mathematics I – Fall 2011 5-12
 Valid Arguments (I)
University of Hawaii

n  Example: A logical argument

If I dance all night, then I get tired.
I danced all night.
Therefore I got tired.
n  Logical representation of underlying variables:
p: I dance all night. q: I get tired.
n  Logical analysis of argument:
p→q premise 1
p premise 2
∴q conclusion

ICS 141: Discrete Mathematics I – Fall 2011 5-13

 Valid Arguments (II)
University of Hawaii

n  A form of logical argument is valid if

whenever every premise is true, the
conclusion is also true. A form of argument
that is not valid is called a fallacy.

ICS 141: Discrete Mathematics I – Fall 2011 5-14

 Inference Rules: General Form
University of Hawaii

n  An Inference Rule is

n  A pattern establishing that if we know that
a set of premise statements of certain
forms are all true, then we can validly
deduce that a certain related conclusion
statement is true.

premise 1
premise 2
··· .
∴ conclusion “∴” means “therefore”
ICS 141: Discrete Mathematics I – Fall 2011 5-15
 Inference Rules & Implications
University of Hawaii

n  Each valid logical inference rule corresponds to

an implication that is a tautology.
premise 1
premise 2 Inference rule
··· .
∴ conclusion

n  Corresponding tautology:

((premise 1) ∧ (premise 2) ∧ ) → conclusion

ICS 141: Discrete Mathematics I – Fall 2011 5-16

 Modus Ponens
University of Hawaii

n  p Rule of Modus ponens “the mode of

p→q (a.k.a. law of detachment) affirming”
∴q
n  (p ∧ (p →q)) → q is a tautology

p q p→q 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

n  Notice that the first row is the only one where
premises are all true
ICS 141: Discrete Mathematics I – Fall 2011 5-17
 Modus Ponens: Example
University of Hawaii

p → q : “If it snows today

If then we will go skiing” assumed TRUE
p .: “It is snowing today”
Then ∴q : “We will go skiing” is TRUE

p → q : “If n is divisible by 3
assumed
If then n is divisible by 3” TRUE
2

p . : “n is divisible by 3”
Then ∴q : “n2 is divisible by 3” is TRUE

ICS 141: Discrete Mathematics I – Fall 2011 5-18

 Modus Tollens
University of Hawaii

n  ¬q Rule of Modus tollens

p→q
“the mode of denying”
∴¬p
n  (¬q ∧ (p →q)) → ¬p is a tautology

n  Example
p → q : “If this jewel is really a diamond
then it will scratch glass” assumed
If
TRUE
¬q . : “The jewel doesn’t scratch glass”
Then ∴ ¬p : “The jewel is not a diamond” is TRUE

ICS 141: Discrete Mathematics I – Fall 2011 5-19

 More Inference Rules
University of Hawaii

n  p Rule of Addition

∴p∨q Tautology: p → (p ∨ q)

n  p∧q Rule of Simplification

∴p Tautology: (p ∧ q) → p

n  p
q Rule of Conjunction
∴p∧q Tautology: [(p) ∧ (q)] → p ∧ q

ICS 141: Discrete Mathematics I – Fall 2011 5-20

 Examples
University of Hawaii

n  State which rule of inference is the basis of

the following arguments:
n  It is below freezing now. Therefore, it is either
below freezing or raining now.
n  It is below freezing and raining now. Therefore, it
is below freezing now.
n  p: It is below freezing now.
q: It is raining now.
n  p → (p ∨ q) (rule of addition)
n  (p ∧ q) → p (rule of simplification)

ICS 141: Discrete Mathematics I – Fall 2011 5-21

 Hypothetical Syllogism
University of Hawaii

n  p→q Rule of Hypothetical syllogism

q→r Tautology:
∴p → r [(p → q) ∧ (q → r)] → (p → r)
n  Example: State the rule of inference used in
the argument:
p q
“If it rains today, then we will not have a q
barbecue today. If we do not have a barbecue
today, then we will have a barbecue tomorrow.r
Therefore, if it rains today, then we will have a
barbecue tomorrow.” p
r
ICS 141: Discrete Mathematics I – Fall 2011 5-22
 Disjunctive Syllogism
University of Hawaii

n  p∨q Rule of Disjunctive syllogism

¬p
∴q Tautology: [(p ∨ q) ∧ (¬p)] → q

n  Example
n  Ed’s wallet is in his back pocket or it is on

his desk. (p ∨ q) p q
n  Ed’s wallet is not in his back pocket. (¬p)

n  Therefore, Ed’s wallet is on his desk. (q)

ICS 141: Discrete Mathematics I – Fall 2011 5-23