Computing

Truth Values

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
Definition

An assertion is a statement. A proposition is a

statement which is either true or false. If a
proposition is true we assign the truth value
“TRUE” to it. If a proposition is false, we assign the
truth value “FALSE” to it. We will denote by “T” or
“1”, for the truth value TRUE and by “F" or “0” for
the truth value FALSE.

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
Examples

The following are examples of propositions:

1. 2 > 4
2. The billionth prime, when written in base 10,
ends in a 3.
3. All men are mortals.
4. 9 is a prime number.

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
Non-Examples

The following are non-examples of propositions:

1. x < y
2. Factor 𝑥 2 + 2𝑥 + 1.
3. 𝑥 = 10
4. How old are you?

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
*Decide whether the following are propositions or
not:

1. 23 = z
2. 10 – 7 = 3
3. 5 < 27
4. All women are mammals.
5. Where do you live?

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
Definition

A propositional variable, denoted by 𝑃, 𝑄, 𝑅 …

denotes an arbitrary proposition with an
unspecified truth value.

A propositional variable is a variable that

represents a proposition.

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
Do Worksheet 1

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
Definition

Given two propositional variables 𝑃 and 𝑄. These two

propositional variables maybe combined to form a
new one. These are combined using
the logical operators or logical connectives : “and”,
“or”or “not”.

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
These new proposition are:

1. (Conjunction of P and Q) P and Q, denoted by𝑃 ‫;𝑄 ٿ‬

2. (Disjunction of P and Q) P or Q, denoted by𝑃 ‫;𝑄 ڀ‬
3. (Negation of P) not P, denoted by ¬ 𝑃.

Truth Tables
𝑃 𝑄 𝑃‫𝑄ٿ‬ 𝑃‫𝑄ڀ‬
1 1 1 1
𝑃 ¬𝑃
1 0 0 1
1 0 0 1 0 1
0 1 0 0 0 0

Note: Other books represent the negation of P as ~P.

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
Inclusive and exclusive disjunction:

1. Inclusive disjunction denoted by 𝑃 ‫𝑄 ڀ‬is True when either

or both of the disjuncts are True.
2. Exclusive disjuction denoted byP⋁Q is True when only one
of the disjuncts is true and the other is false.

Truth Table:
𝑃 𝑄 𝑃‫ 𝑄ڀ‬P⋁Q
1 1 1 0
1 0 1 1
0 1 1 1
0 0 0 0

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
Do Worksheet 2 & 3

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
Definition

The proposition “P implies Q”, denoted by 𝑃⟹Q is called an

implication.

The operand P is called the hypothesis, premise or antecedent

while the operand Q is called the conclusion or the
consequence
When the if-then sentence is true,
we say that the hypothesis is a
sufficient condition for the
conclusion.

The conclusion is then called a

necessary condition of that
hypothesis.

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
Definition

Given the implication 𝑃⟹Q , its converse is 𝑄⟹P, its inverse

is¬𝑃⟹¬Q, and its contrapositive is ¬𝑄⟹¬P .

The operand P is called the hypothesis, premise or antecedent

and the operand Q is called the conclusion or the consequence

𝑃 𝑄 𝑃⟹Q ¬𝑃⟹¬Q 𝑄⟹P ¬𝑄⟹¬P

0 0 1 0 1 1
0 1 1 0 0 1
1 0 0 1 1 0
1 1 1 0 1 1

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
Definition

A biconditional proposition is expressed linguistically by

preceding either component by ‘if and only if’.

The truth table for a biconditional propositional form,

symbolised by P ⟷ Q is shown below.

𝑃 𝑄 P⟷Q
0 0 1
0 1 0
1 0 0
1 1 1

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
Do Worksheet 4

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
Definition

A propositional form is an assertion which contains at least

one propositional variable and maybe generated by the
following rules:
1. A propositional variable standing alone is a propositional
form;
2. If P is a propositional form, then Qis also a propositional
form;
3. If P and Q are propositional forms, then 𝑃 ‫𝑄 ڀ‬, 𝑃 ‫𝑄 ٿ‬, 𝑃 ⟺ 𝑄
are propositional forms;
4. A string of symbols containing propositional variables,
connectives and parentheses is a propositional form if and
only if it can be obtained by infinitely many applications of
rules (1.); (2.) or (3.) above.

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
Definition

Let X be a set of propositions.

A truth assignment (to X) is a function  : X → {true, false} that
assigns to each propositional variable a truth value. (A truth
assignment corresponds to one row of the truth table.
If a truth value of a compound proposition under truth
assignment  is true, we say that  satisfies P, otherwise we say
that  falsifies P.
A tautology is a propositional form where every truth assignment
satisfies P, i.e. All entries of its truth table are true.
A contradiction or absurdity is a propositional form where every
truth assignment is false;
A contingency is a propositional form that is neither tautology nor
contradiction.
Examples:
P V P is a tautology.
P  P is a contradiction.

For each of the following compound propositions determine if it is

a tautology, contradiction or contingency:
1. (p v q)  p  q
2. P v q v r v (p  q  r)
3. (p → q)  (p v q)
Do Worksheet 5

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
Definition

A logically equivalentpropositional form have identical values

for each assignment of the truth values to their component
propositional variables.

We can denote the logical equivalent variables P and Q as:

𝑃 ⟺𝑄
or
𝑃 ≡𝑄

(𝑥 + 2)2 and 𝑥 2 + 4𝑥 + 4 are regarded as equivalent algebraic

expressions.

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
Example

Show that P ⟹ Q and ¬P ⋁ Q are logically equivalent

propositional forms.

𝑃 𝑄 P⟹Q ¬P ¬P ⋁ Q
0 0 1 1 1
0 1 1 1 1
1 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 0 1

P ⟹ Q and ¬P ⋁ Q are logically equivalent propositional forms.

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
Example

Given the propositional forms Q ⋁ ¬P, ¬Q ⟹ ¬P and ¬P ⋀ ¬Q,

between which pairs of these forms does the relation logical
equivalence exist?

𝑃 𝑄 ¬P ¬Q Q ⋁ ¬P ¬Q ⟹ ¬P ¬P ⋀ ¬Q,
0 0 1 1 1 1 0
0 1 1 0 1 1 0
1 0 0 1 0 0 0
1 1 0 0 1 1 1

¬Q ⟹ ¬P and ¬P ⋀ ¬Q are logically equivalent

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
The following are logical identities or rules of replacement.

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
SYMBOLIC LOGIC
SYMBOLIC LOGIC
SYMBOLIC LOGIC
Example

Show that ¬(Q ⋀ P) ⟺ P ⟹¬Q.

Solution

¬(Q ⋀ P) ⟺ ¬Q ⋁¬P (De Morgan’s)

⟺ ¬P ⋁¬Q (Commutativity)
⟺ P ⟹¬Q (MI)

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
Example

Show that P ⋀ [(P ⋀ Q) ⋁ R] ⟺ P ⋀ (Q ⋁ R).

Solution

P ⋀ [(P ⋀ Q) ⋁ R] ⟺ [P ⋀ (P ⋀ Q)] ⋁ (P ⋀ R) (Dist)

⟺ [(P ⋀ P) ⋀ Q] ⋁ (P ⋀ R) (Assoc)
⟺ (P ⋀ Q) ⋁ (P ⋀ R) (Indempotence)
⟺ P ⋀ (Q ⋁ R) (Dist)

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
Do Worksheet 6

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
Definition

An argument is a collection of propositions wherein it is

claimed that one of the propositions, called the conclusion,
follows from the other propositions, called the premise of the
argument. the conclusion is usually preceded by such words as
therefore, hence, then, consequently.

Classification of Arguments:
1. Inductive argument is an argument where it is claimed
that within a certain probability of error, the conclusion
follows from a premise; and
2. Deductive argument is an argument where is it claimed
that the conclusion absolutely follows from the premise.

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
A deductive argument is said to be valid if whenever
the premises are all true, then the conclusion is also
true. In other words if 𝑃1 , 𝑃2 , … 𝑃𝑛 are premises and Q
is the conclusion of the argument
𝑃1 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑃2 , 𝑎𝑛𝑑 … 𝑃𝑛 therefore Q is valid if and only if
the corresponding prepositional form

(𝑃1 ‫𝑃 ٿ‬2 ‫𝑄 ⟹ ) 𝑛𝑃 ٿ … ٿ‬,

is a tautology. Otherwise, the argument is invalid.

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
To show that an argument is valid, we have to show an
instance where the conclusion is free and the premises
are all true.

Show that the following argument is invalid using

Truth Table.

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
To show the validity of arguments, we may use
the truth table. However, this method is
impractical specially if the argument contains
several propositional variables. A more
convenient method is by deducing the
conclusion from the premises by a sequence of
shorter, more elementary arguments known to
be valid.

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
Rules of Inference
These are known valid argument forms.

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
SYMBOLIC LOGIC
SYMBOLIC LOGIC
SYMBOLIC LOGIC
Construct a formal proof of the following rules of
inference:

1. Absorption
2. Modus Ponens
3. Modus Tollens
4. Disjunctive Syllogism
5. Constructive Dilemma
1. Absorption
p q
---------------
 p  (p  q)

Proof:
p q Given premise
p  q M.I.
1  (p  q) Identity
(p  p)  (p  q) Identity
p  (p  q) Dist.
p  (p  q) M.I.
2. Modus Ponens
p q
p
---------------
q
Proof:
1. p  q Given premise
2. p Given premise
3. p  q Addition
4. p  q M.I. (1)
5. (p  q)  (p  q) Conjunction (3,4)
6. (q  p)  (q  p) Comm.
7. q  (p  p) Dist.
8. q  0 Ident.
9. q Ident.
3. Modus Tollens
p q
q
---------------
 p
Proof:
1. p  q Given premise
2.  q Given premise
3.  q   p Addition
4. p  q M.I. (1)
5.  p   q Comm. (3)
6. ( p  q)  (p   q) Conjunction (4, 5)
7. p  (q  q) Dist.
8. p  0 Ident.
9. p Ident.
4. Disjunctive Syllogism
p q
p
---------------
q

Proof:
1. p  q Given premise
2. p Given premise
3. p  q M.I. (1)
4. q M.P. (3, 2)
5. Constructive Dilemma
(p  q)  (r  s)
pr
---------------
qs
Proof:
1. (p  q)  (r  s) Given premise
2. p  r Given premise
3. p  q Simplification (1)
4. r  s Comm. & Simplification (1)
5. p  r M.I. (2)
6. q  p Contra+ (3)
7. q  r H.S. (6, 5)
8. q  s H.S. (6, 4)
9. q  s M.I.
Construct a formal proof of validity of the following
arguments:

a) Jack is in Paris only if Mary is in New York. Jack is

in Paris and Fred is in Rome. Therefore, Mary is in
New York.

b) If Mark is correct then unemployment will rise

and if Ann is correct then there will be a hard
winter. Ann is correct. Therefore unemployment
will rise or there will be a hard winter or both.

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
Solution for (a):

J: Jack is in Paris.
M: Mary is in New York.
F: Fred Is in Rome.

The premises of the argument are J ⟹ M and J ⋀ F. The

conclusion is M.

1. J ⟹ M (premise)
2. J ⋀ F (premise)
3. J (2. Simp)
4. M (1, 3. MP)

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
Solution for (b):

M: Mark is correct.
U: Unemployment will rise.
A: Ann is correct.
H: There will be a hard winter.

The premises of the argument are: (M ⟹ U) ⋀ (A ⟹ H) and A. The

conclusion is: U ⋁ H.

1. (M ⟹ U) ⋀ (A ⟹ H) (premise)
2. A (premise)
3. (A ⟹ H) ⋀ (M ⟹ U) (1. Comm)
4. A ⟹ H (3. Simp)
5. H (4, 2. MP)
6. H ⋁ U (5. Add)
7. U ⋁ H (6. Comm)

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
Alternative Solution for (b):

M: Mark is correct.
U: Unemployment will rise.
A: Ann is correct.
H: There will be a hard winter.

The premises of the argument are: (M ⟹ U) ⋀ (A ⟹ H) and A. The

conclusion is: U ⋁ H.

1. (M ⟹ U) ⋀ (A ⟹ H) (premise)
2. A (premise)
3. A ⋁ M (2. Add)
4. M ⋁ A (3. Comm)
5. U ⋁ H (1, 4. CD)

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
Do Worksheet 7

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
Definition

A conditional proofis method of formal proof which is

particularly useful for establishing the validity of a valid
arguments which have a conclusion which can be expressed as
a conditional proposition.

Consider an argument form with premises 𝑝1 , 𝑝2 , … , 𝑝𝑛 and

conclusion q ⟹ r. Note that this argument form is valid if and
only if (𝑝1 ⋀ 𝑝2 ⋀ … ⋀ 𝑝𝑛 ) ⟹ (q ⟹ r). Now the exportation
replacement rule states that p ⟹ (q ⟹ r) ≡ (p ⋀ q) ⟹ rso that
the validity of the condition

(𝑝1 ⋀ 𝑝2 ⋀ … ⋀ 𝑝𝑛 ) ⟹ (q ⟹ r) is a tautology can be replaced by

(𝑝1 ⋀ 𝑝2 ⋀ …⋀ 𝑝𝑛 ⋀ 𝑞) ⟹ r is a tautology.

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
Example

Prove the validity of the following arguments using the method

of conditional proof.

1. If we have a party then we’ll invite Lana and Bob. If we invite

Lana or Bob then we must invite Jake. Therefore if we have a
party then we must invite Jake.

Solution

We symbolise the following simple propositions:

P: We have a party B: We’ll invite Bob.

L: We’ll invite Lana. J: We must invite Jake.

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
(Continued)

The premises of the argument are:

P ⟹ (L ⋀ B) and (L ⋁ B) ⟹ J

The conclusion is the conditional P ⟹ J.

Proof:
1. P ⟹ (L ⋀ B) (premise)
2. (L ⋁ B) ⟹ J (premise)
3. P (CP)
4. L ⋀ B (1, 3. MP)
5. L (4. Simp)
6. L ⋁ B (5. Add)
7. J (2, 6. MP)
8. P ⟹ J (3 – 7. CP)

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
Example

2. If we invite Lana then Jake will sulk, and if we invite Bob then
Alice will leave. So if we invite Lana and Bob then Jake will sulk
and Alice will leave.

Solution

We symbolize the following simple propositions:

L: We invite Lana. B: We invite Bob.

J: Jake will sulk. A: Alice will leave.

The premise of the argument is: (L ⟹ J) ⋀ (B ⟹ A)

and the conclusion is (L ⋀ B) ⟹ (J ⋀ A).

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
Solution

Proof:
1. (L ⟹ J) ⋀ (B ⟹ A) (premise)
2. L ⋀ B (CP)
3. L ⟹ J (1. Simp)
4. (B ⟹ A) ⋀ (L ⟹ J) (1. Com)
5. B ⟹ A (4. Simp)
6. L (2. Simp)
7. J (3, 6. MP)
8. B ⋀ L (2. Com)
9. B (8. Simp)
10. A (5, 9. MP)
11. J ⋀ A (7, 10. Conj)
12. (L ⋀ B) ⟹ (J ⋀ A) (2 – 11. CP)

SYMBOLIC LOGIC
Do Worksheet 8

SYMBOLIC LOGIC