Reasoning and Logic (CSE1300) page 1 of 11 16 September 2020

MC-test Reasoning and Logic (CSE1300)

Exam created by Stefan Hugtenburg & Neil Yorke-Smith

Please read the following information carefully!

• This exam consists of 20 multiple-choice questions. The questions are worth a total of 20 points: 1
point per question.
score − 0.25 ∗ 20
• The grade for this exam is computed as · 10. This accounts for a 25% guessing
0.75 ∗ 20
correction, corresponding to the four-choice questions used.
• This exam covers modules 1 and 2, which correspond to the first two weeks of lecture material of the
course. This includes chapters 1 and 2 of the book Delftse Foundations of Computation v1.2.

• You have 90 minutes to complete this exam.

• Before you hand in your answers, check that the sheet contains your name and student number, both
in the human and computer-readable formats.
• The use of the book, notes, calculators or other sources is strictly prohibited.

• Note that the order of the letters next to the boxes on your multiple-choice sheet may not always be
A-B-C-D!
• Please fill out the multiple-choice sheet using a pencil so that you can erase incorrect answers.
• Tip: mark your answers on this exam first, and only after you are certain of your answers, copy them
to the multiple-choice answer form.
• You may write on this exam paper and take it home.
• This exam is ©2020 TU Delft.

©2020 TU Delft
Reasoning and Logic (CSE1300) page 2 of 11 16 September 2020

Learning goals coverage, based on the objectives of all lectures (strongly paraphrased):
Goal et 17 mc 18 mt 18 et 18 ret 18 mc 19 mc 20
translate logic to and from natural language 1, 2 3,4 1 1 1,16-17 1-4
describe ∧,∨,¬,→, and ↔ operators 2
construct a truth table 3-5 1a,1b 31a 21a 3-4 5-7,10-1
determine prop. logic equivalence 6,7,1 9 2 5-7 8,20
rewrite logical connectives 8-1 0 31b 21c 8 9
describe contrapositives, converses, and inverses. 11,1 2 2 9 12
describe logic validity 13,1 4 3 10,11 13
describe sufficient and necessary conditions 15 4 12 16
prove validty of argument in prop. logic 16-17 1b 3, 21b 15
describe the principle of explosion 18 1c 13
explain why prop. logic is not suf. expressive 20
describe ∀ and ∃ quantifiers 21 2c 5
evaluate negation stmt. in pred. logic 22 4 14-15 3,14
construct a Tarski’s world 23-2 5 15,16
construct a formal structure in pred. logic 26-2 7 2b 32a 22a 18 17
evaluate claims about formal structures 28-29 2a 6,32b 22b 18,19 17,18-19
construct counterexamples for claims 30 2a,2b,5c 5 20 17
describe the number sets N, Z, Q, R, C 6
describe the form of a proof by div. into cases 5b 7
describe the form of a proof by contradiction 7
construct a proof by division into cases 7a
construct a proof by contradiction
explain what a theorem prover is 8
describe the form of a proof by contrapositive 5a
construct a proof by contrapositive 7b
describe the form of a proof by generalisation 5a,5b
construct a proof by generalisation
construct an existence proof 9
identify type of proof to use for a given claim 5b
compute a sequence given a recursive definition 6a 10 8
construct and interpret recursive definitions 3 6b,6c
explain the basic principle of an induction proof 2 11 9
construct an ind proof for numbers 33a 23a
construct an ind proof for algorithms 4 33b 10
construct recursive definitions on sets 12 a 12,13 23b, 24
construct a proof using structural induction 12 b 14,15 23c
explain and apply basic set operations. 1 16 11
construct Venn diagrams 5 17,18 12
construct counterexamples for claims on sets 1,1 3 19,34b 25
compute the powerset of a set 20,21 13
compute the cartesian product of two sets 22 14
construct proofs for claims on sets 34a 25
describe Cantor’s proofs about infinite sets 11 b 23 15
construct f or R from nat. language 24,25 26a
describe the diff. between f and R 35a 16
determine the inverse of R and f 8 35b 26b
determine if f is well-defined 6 26 17
determine if f is injective, surjective, or bijective 7,11a, c 27 18
determine if R is symmetric, transitive or reflexive 9 28,29 19
describe the properties of an equivalence relation 30 20, 26c

©2020 TU Delft
Reasoning and Logic (CSE1300) page 3 of 11 16 September 2020

1. How many ones are there in the column of the main connective of the following compound proposition?
p → ((a ∧ b) ∨ (c ↔ d) ∨ (e ∧ ¬e))
A. 32
B. 38
C. 52
D. 58

Answer: With 6 atoms, there are 64 rows all together. In all rows where p is false (32 of them), the
proposition will be true. Furthermore, when the consequent of the implication is true, the proposition
is also true. This is independent op p, but since p being false already means the compound is true,
let’s focus only on when p is false and let’s ignore e for now. In those cases, we have a = b = 1 with
4 options for c,d. Now for the other 3 combinations of a and b, we have 2 options each to make
c ↔ d true. Hence another 6 options from that for a total of 4+6 = 10 options altogether. Now
factor in that e can be either true or false, so 20 options when p is true and 32 for it being false,
gives us 52 options altogether.

2. Consider 4 compound propositions A, B, C, D such that (A ∨ B) → C. Which of the following is true?

A. (¬A → ¬D) → (D → C)
B. (¬D → ¬A) → (D → C)
C. (¬D → ¬(A ∨ B)) → (C ↔ D)
D. (¬(A ∨ B) → ¬D) → (C ↔ D)

Answer: First of all, realise that (A ∨ B) → C is equivalent to (A → C) ∧ (B → C). With that in

mind, we can see that the first answer allows us to conclude that D → A holds and combining this
with A → C we get that D → C holds as well (by transitivity).

3. Which of the following is equivalent to ((p ↔ r) ∧ ((q → z) ∨ ¬p)) → (a → (q ∨ ¬p))?

A. ¬a ∨ q ∨ ¬p ∨ ¬r
B. ¬a ∨ ¬q ∨ p ∨ ¬r
C. ¬a ∨ ¬q ∨ ¬p ∨ ¬r
D. ¬a ∨ q ∨ p ∨ r

Answer: A truth table/K-map to get to DNF (or using equivalences), will get you to answer A.

If Ivo is happy, then it is Tuesday or it is Thursday.

4. Consider the following argument: We have mentorate, if it is Tuesday or if it is Thursday. .
Therefore if we have mentorate, then Ivo is happy.
The propositions represent the following statements:
• p represents: “Ivo is happy.”
• q represents: “It is Tuesday.”
• r represents: “It is Thursday.”

©2020 TU Delft
Reasoning and Logic (CSE1300) page 4 of 11 16 September 2020

• s represents: “We have mentorate.”

Which of the following is an accurate equivalent translation of the the argument?
p → (q ∨ r)
A. (q ∨ r) → s
∴s→p
p → (r ∨ q)
B. s → (q ∨ r)
∴s→p
p → (q ∨ r)
C. s → (q ∨ r)
∴p→s
(q ∨ r) → p
D. (q ∨ r) → s
∴s→p

Answer: Notice the if being in the second part of the second premise! You then get to answer A.
Notice also that this argument is not valid!

5. Four witnesses to a crime state the following cryptic hints for the police. One of them is the criminal,
lying about what they have seen. The other three are innocent and speaking the truth. Who is the
criminal?
A. Indy: I am innocent!
B. Roy: Indy and Michelle are both innocent.
C. Michelle: If Sean didn’t commit the crime, then it must have been Roy!
D. Sean: Who me? No, it was Michelle!

Answer: If Indy lies, they are the criminal. This is clearly impossible as this means Michelle tells the
truth and so Roy must be the criminal according to that. Hence Indy tells the truth.
If Roy lies, then either Indy or Michelle did it. But if he lies, he must be the criminal. Hence Roy is
telling the truth.
If Michelle lies, then the negation of that implication is true. In other words: Sean did not commit
the crime and neither did Roy. That is fine, except that Roy must also be lying then, which cannot
be the case!
If Sean lies, then that means it was not Michelle. Furthermore this does not contradict any of the
other statements! Hence Sean is the criminal.

6. Consider the following constants and predicates:

• s for Socrates
• p for Pythagoras
• Philosopher (x) for x was a philosopher
• Fears(x, y) for x fears y
• Bean(x) for x is a bean
If all we know is that Pythagoras fears all beans and that Socrates is the only Philosopher who does not
fear all beans, which of the following situations is impossible?
A. ∃x(Bean(x) ∧ Philosopher (x ))
B. ∀x(Bean(x) → ¬Fears(s, x))
C. Philosopher (p) ∧ ∃x(Bean(x) ∧ ¬Fears(p, x))
D. ∀x(Philosopher (x) ∧ ∃y(Bean(y) → ¬Fear (x, y)))

©2020 TU Delft
Reasoning and Logic (CSE1300) page 5 of 11 16 September 2020

Answer: There is nothing that excludes a bean from being a philosopher with all the knowledge we
have.
There is also nothing preventing Socrates from fearing no beans at all (we know he does not fear all
beans, and this could mean that he fears none at all. Therefore this situation is possible.)
It’s fine for Pythagoras to also be a philosopher, but in that case he must fear all beans (as Socrates
is the only one who does not fear all of them). Hence this situation is impossible.
The last one looks like it might be wrong, but look at the connectives used. It reads that all objects
are philosophers (that’s perfectly possible) and that there exists a thing y such that if it is a bean
then it is not feared by the philosopher. Had the ∧ and → been reversed this would have been a
problem (since we know p and s both exist and so this would also apply to p), as then all philosophers
had not feared all beans. In this case however, just take p for y for all values of x and since p is not
a bean, this makes the implication true. Hence this situation is possible.

7. Consider again the predicates and constants from the previous question. Which of the following accurately
expresses the statement: There is only one philosopher that does not fear any beans and that philosopher
is not Pythagoras.
A. ∃x(x 6= p ∧ Philosopher (x) ∧ ∀y(Bean(y) → ¬Fears(x, y)) ∧ ∀z((Philosopher (z) ∧ z 6= x) →
∃a(Bean(a) ∧ Fears(z, a))))
B. ∃x(x 6= p ∧ Philosopher (x) ∧ ∀y(Fears(x, y) → ¬Bean(y)) ∧ ∀z(∃a(Bean(a) ∧ Fears(z, a)) →
(Philosopher (z) ∧ z 6= x)))
C. ∀x((x 6= p ∧ Philosopher (x)) → ∀y(Fears(x, y) → ¬Bean(y)) ∧ ∀z((Philosopher (z) ∧ z 6=
x) → ∃a(Bean(a) ∧ Fears(z, a))))
D. ¬∀x(x = p ∧ ¬Philosopher (x) ∧ ¬∀y(Bean(y) → ¬Fears(x, y)) ∧ ¬∀z((Philosopher (z) ∧ z 6=
x) → ∃a(Bean(a) ∧ Fears(z, a))))

Answer:

8. A hard problem in computer science is finding out if a proposition is satisfiable. That is, is there an
assignment of truth values to the literals such that the proposition as a whole becomes true.
Although it is labelled a hard problem, we can use a truth table to find the answer. In fact based on the
connectives in the proposition, we can already wager a guess based on the following information.
Given two compound propositions A and B containing the same set of n atoms, where A is true in x
scenarios and B is true in y scenarios and we know that x ≥ y, it holds that:
A. A ∧ B is true in at least x − y scenarios.
B. A ↔ B is true in at most x + y scenarios.
C. A → B is true in at most x + y scenarios.
D. A ∨ B is true in at least x − y scenarios.

Answer: Consider the truth tables of ∧, ∨, →, ↔.

For both ∨ and → (which are equivalent except for a negation after all!) we see that from x = y = 2
we get to 3 scenarios that are true. However if x = y = 0, then A → B is a tautology, being true in
all 2n cases which is more than x + y = 0 + 0 = 0.
For the ∨ we know that the number of trues cannot become smaller than either x or y as A ∨ B is
true when at least one of them is true. Hence the number of trues in A ∨ B is ≥ x ≥ x − y.
For ∧ we go from x = y = 2 to 1 scenario that is true. Hence answer A is false.
Finally for ↔ we observe that if x = y = 0, then A ↔ B is a tautology, being true in all 2n cases
which is more than x + y = 0 + 0 = 0.

©2020 TU Delft
Reasoning and Logic (CSE1300) page 6 of 11 16 September 2020

NB: This problem is really a ‘hard’ problem in computer science as it requires exponential work to
solve! The best solution we have for this problem is creating a truth table, and remember that for n
variables this would make it 2n work to check!

9. Consider the following truth table:

p q r Z
0 0 0 1
0 0 1 1
0 1 0 1
0 1 1 1
1 0 0 0
1 0 1 1
1 1 0 1
1 1 1 0
Which of the following propositions could Z represent?
A. (p → q) ∨ r
B. (p ↔ q) ∧ r
C. (p ∨ r) → q
D. p → ¬(q ↔ r)

Answer: Row 8 is a counterexample to answer A. Row 1 is a counterexample to answer B. Row 1

is a counterexample to answer C.

10. Which of the following is true?

A. The number of disjunctions for a proposition in DNF allows us to determine the number of
ones in the truth table of the main connective.
B. The number of conjunctions for a proposition in CNF allows us to determine the number of
zeroes in the truth table of the main connective.
C. If A is a compound proposition in CNF, then ¬A is always in DNF.
D. If A is a compound proposition in DNF, then ¬A is never in CNF.

Answer: Putting a negation in front of a compound proposition A (e.g. (p ∨ q) becoming ¬(p ∨ q))
in a normal form does not ever yield the other normal form. Only non-compound propositions (e.g.
p) could work for that.
As a counterexample for the first two take (p ∨ q ∨ r). This has 7 ones in the truth table, but not 7
disjunctions, nor does it have 1 conjunctions (for the one zero).

11. Consider the following two depictions of a rather strange collections of animals. These Coati (a very
interesting species) have come to listen to their Queen, depicted at the bottom of the grid. Since Covid
has also hit the Coati kingdom hard, social distancing is important in their kingdom as well and their
queen is providing new guidelines here.
Now although it may not look like it, these diagrams are actually different ways of representing truth
tables. The coati that have come to listen to their queen are carrying signs with a letter. We say the
compound proposition they represent is true if and only if all selected coati are at least three squares
apart from each other and their queen. (Note that coati cannot move diagonally, hence r is exactly two
squares apart from the queen!)
We say a coati is selected if the corresponding atom is true. Let the speech depicted represent a compound
proposition S.

©2020 TU Delft
Reasoning and Logic (CSE1300) page 7 of 11 16 September 2020

As an example, when selecting only the coati carrying the p on the left the proposition is true (and thus
S is true for p = 1, q = 0, r = 0). When selecting only the coati carrying r however, the proposition is
false as that coati is too close to the queen. (and thus S is false for p = 0, q = 0, r = 1). When selecting
both the coati carrying p and q however, the proposition is true as they are placed sufficiently far from
each other and the queen (thus S is true for p = 1, q = 1, r = 0).

q p

Which of the following statements is true?

A. S is a contingency now, and also if we move the queen one square to the right.
B. (S ∧ r) is a contradiction.
C. (S ∨ ¬r) is a tautology.
D. S is a contradiction if we move the queen one square up.

p q r pond left
0 0 0 1
0 0 1 0
0 1 0 1
Answer: 0 1 1 0
1 0 0 1
1 0 1 0
1 1 0 1
1 1 1 0
Notice that S ≡ ¬r and so answer B is correct.

12. Consider again the coati listening to their queen. Which of the following statements is true assuming no
two coati can be in the same square.
A. No possible configuration of 15 atoms in a 4 by 4 coati grid will be a contradiction.
B. Every possible configuration of 15 atoms in a 4 by 4 coati grid will be a tautology.
C. Every possible configuration of 4 atoms in a 4 by 4 coati grid will be a contradiction.
D. No possible configuration of 2 atoms in a 4 by 4 coati grid can be a tautology.

Answer: Answer A is true, as 15 atoms + the queen means the entire grid is filled. Hence the two
coati at opposite corners of the grid (at least) ensure one row will at least be true (namely the row
in which only they are selected). Furthermore the situation where no coati are picked will always be
true.
Answer B is false, if all squares are filled some are too close together resulting in false.
Answer C is false, as picking no coati always results in a true.
Answer D is false, simply put them in opposite corners away from the queen.

©2020 TU Delft
Reasoning and Logic (CSE1300) page 8 of 11 16 September 2020

13. Consider three propositions A, B, C, where we know that A ∨ B ≡ C. Which of the following statement
is true?
A. ¬A → ¬B is equivalent to the contrapositive of B → ¬A
B. C is equivalent to the converse of the inverse of ¬A → B
C. The inverse of ¬A → B is equivalent ¬C
D. The converse of ¬A → ¬B is equivalent to the inverse of A → B.

Answer: The first answer is incorrect, as the contrapositive of B → ¬A is ¬A → B.

The second is correct as the converse of the inverse of ¬A → B is ¬B → A and that is exactly
B ∨ A which is equivalent to C.
¬C is ¬A ∧ ¬B which is not an implication.
The converse is ¬B → ¬A, the inverse is ¬A → ¬B. These are not equivalent.

14. Consider the following argument:

If you find the gold, then you win the game.
If you are a dwarf, then you can place tunnels.
You can only find the gold, if your tunnel can reach it.
Therefore you can only win the game if you are a dwarf.
Which of the following statements is true?
A. This argument is valid.
B. This argument is invalid, taking the converse of the third premise makes it valid.
C. This argument is invalid, removing the word ‘only’ from the conclusion makes it valid.
D. This argument is invalid, removing the word ‘only’ from the third premise and the conclusion
makes it valid.

g→w
d→t
Answer: The argument reads:
g→t
∴w→d
However nothing in these rules prevents you from winning the game in another way. Thus the
argument is invalid. By removing the word ‘only’ from the conclusion it reads: d → w which is still
not necessarily true. But if we also remove it from the 3rd premise, then we get t → g for that and
we have d → w by transitivity.

15. Which of the following is a negation of the following statement?

All readers of DFoC will do at least one exam on which they will answer at least one question correctly.
A. All readers of DFoC will do at least one exam on which they will answer at least one question
incorrectly.
B. All readers of DFoC will answer all questions incorrectly on all of the exams they do.
C. At least one reader of DFoC will do at least one exam on which they will answer all questions
incorrectly.
D. At least one reader of DFoC will answer all questions on all exams they do incorrectly.

Answer: ∀x(Reader (x) → ∃y(Exam(y) ∧ ∃z(Question(z) ∧ On(z, y) ∧ AnswersCorrectly(z, x))))

The negation of this is: ∃x(Reader (x)∧∀y(Exam(y) → ∀z((Question(z)∧On(z, y)) → ¬AnswersCorrectly(z, x))))

©2020 TU Delft
Reasoning and Logic (CSE1300) page 9 of 11 16 September 2020

16. Consider the following truth tables of compound propositions A, B, C, D that are all combinations of the
atoms p, q, r.
p q r A B C D
0 0 0 1 1 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 1
0 1 0 1 1 0 0
0 1 1 1 0 0 1
1 0 0 0 1 0 1
1 0 1 0 0 0 1
1 1 0 1 0 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 0
Which of the following arguments is valid?
A
A.
∴B
B
B.
∴D
C
C.
∴A
D
D.
∴C

Answer: Whenever C is true, A is also true. This cannot be said for any of the other arguments.

17. Someone argues that it is necessary that all students own a bike for a bike repair shop to exist. Which of
the following is an equivalent phrasing of that claim, where Student(x) means x is a student, Bike(x)
means x is a bike, Owns(x, y) means x owns y, and Bikeshop(x) means x is a bike repair shop.
A. ∀x(Student(x) → ∃y(Bike(y) ∧ Owns(x, y))) → ∃z(Bikeshop(z))
B. ∃z(Bikeshop(z)) → ∀x(Student(x) → ∃y(Bike(y) ∧ Owns(x, y)))
C. ¬∃z(Bikeshop(z)) → ¬∀x(Student(x) → ∃y(Bike(y) ∧ Owns(x, y)))
D. ∀x(Student(x) → ∃y(Bike(y) ∧ Owns(x, y) ∧ ∃z(Bikeshop(z)))

Answer: We need an implication p → q where q is all students having a bike and p is there being a
bike repair shop. Hence the second option is correct.

18. To which of the following arguments is the structure S with domain D = {a, b, c, d} a counterexample?
• P S = {a, b, c}
• QS = {c, b}
• RS = {(a, b), (c, b), (b, c)}
∃x(R(a, x))
A. ∀x(P (x))
∴ Q(a)
∃x(R(a, x))
B. ∃x(P (x))
∴ Q(a) ∨ Q(b)
∃x(R(a, x))
C. Q(a) ∨ Q(b)
∴ ∀x(P (x))
∃x(R(x, b))
D. ∃x(Q(x))
∃x(Q(x) ∧ R(x, b))

©2020 TU Delft
Reasoning and Logic (CSE1300) page 10 of 11 16 September 2020

Answer: The first answer fails to make all the premises true and thus cannot be shown to be invalid
with this structure.
The second answer has a conclusion which is true and is therefore valid.
The third answer makes both premises true and the conclusion false and is therefore invalid.
The fourth answer makes both premises true, but the conclusion is also true (take x = c).

19. Back before Covid hit, the proud folk of the coati built a lot of snowmen in all kinds of different shapes
and forms. Loudly singing their favourite Christmas songs like: “Rudolf the red-nosed Coati” and “You’re
a mean one, Mr. Owl” (the long-lasting rivalry between the owls and coati is something we will save for
another day).
Note that some snowman have been decorated, some are wearing their tophats, some have been dressed
up as Santa, and some have even been given handbags!

d i c

h g

b a e

Which of these statements about this festive figure is true?

A. ∃x(Tophat(x) ∧ (Coati (x) → LeftOf (x, g)))
B. ∃x(Coati (x) ∧ (¬Tophat(x) → RightOf (x, g)))
C. ∃x(Santa(x) ∧ (¬Tophat(x) → Coati (x)))
D. ∃x(Handbag(x) ∧ (Snowman(x) → AboveOf (x, g)))

Answer: Take x = d for the first one, since d is not a coati, the implication is true.

20. Which of the following claims is true for the coati world from the previous question?
A. ∀x((Coati (x) ∧ x 6= h) → ¬∃y(LeftOf (y, x)))
B. ∀x(Coati (x) → ∃y(Snowman(y) ∧ (LeftOf (x, y) ∨ BelowOf (x, y))))
C. ∀x(Santa(x) → ∃y((Coati (y) ∨ Snowman(y)) ∧ AboveOf (x, y)))
D. ∀x(Handbag(x) → ¬∃y(Coati (y) ∧ BelowOf (x, y)))

©2020 TU Delft
Reasoning and Logic (CSE1300) page 11 of 11 16 September 2020

Answer: Answer A: Coati b is counterexample that has nothing to the right of it. Answer B: This
is true for all coati (g is right of c and above the others). Answer C: This answer is also correct
(by accident), as all santas are above Coati a for example. Answer D: Coati c is above all handbag
wearing snowmen.

End of the exam