The Foundations: Logic

and Proofs
Chapter 1, Part II: Predicate Logic

With Question/Answer Animations

Copyright © McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Summary
Predicate Logic (First-Order Logic (FOL),
Predicate Calculus)
The Language of Quantifiers
Logical Equivalences
Nested Quantifiers
Translation from Predicate Logic to English
Translation from English to Predicate Logic
Predicates and Quantifiers
Section 1.4
Section Summary
Predicates
Variables
Quantifiers
Universal Quantifier
Existential Quantifier
Negating Quantifiers
De Morgan’s Laws for Quantifiers
Translating English to Logic
Logic Programming (optional)
Propositional Logic Not Enough
If we have:
“All men are mortal.”
“Socrates is a man.”
Does it follow that “Socrates is mortal?”
Can’t be represented in propositional logic.
Need a language that talks about objects,
their properties, and their relations.
Later we’ll see how to draw inferences.
Introducing Predicate Logic
Predicate logic uses the following new
features:
 Variables: x, y, z
 Predicates: P(x), M(x)
 Quantifiers (to be covered in a few slides):
Propositional functions are a generalization of
propositions.
 They contain variables and a predicate, e.g., P(x)
 Variables can be replaced by elements from their
domain.
Propositional Functions
Propositional functions become propositions (and have
truth values) when their variables are each replaced by a
value from the domain (or bound by a quantifier, as we
will see later).
The statement P(x) is said to be the value of the

For example, let P(x) denote “x > 0”

propositional function P at x.
and the domain be
the integers. Then:
P(-3) is false.
P(0) is false.
P(3) is true.
Often the domain is denoted by U. So in this example U
is the integers.
Examples of Propositional Functions
 Let “x + y = z” be denoted by R(x, y, z) and U (for all three
variables) be the integers. Find these truth values:
R(2,-1,5)
Solution: F
R(3,4,7)

R(x, 3, z)
Solution: T

Solution: Not a Proposition

 Now let “x - y = z” be denoted by Q(x, y, z), with U as the
integers. Find these truth values:
Q(2,-1,3)
Solution: T
Q(3,4,7)

Q(x, 3, z)
Solution: F

Solution: Not a Proposition

Compound Expressions
 Connectives from propositional logic carry over to

 If P(x) denotes “x > 0,” find these truth values:

predicate logic.

∨ P(-1) Solution: T
∧ P(-1) Solution: F
P(3)

→ P(-1) Solution: F
P(3)

→ ¬P(-1) Solution: T
P(3)
P(3)
 Expressions with variables are not propositions and

P(3) ∧ P(y)
therefore do not have truth values. For example,

P(x) → P(y)
 When used with quantifiers (to be introduced next), these
expressions (propositional functions) become propositions.
Quantifiers Charles Peirce (1839-
1914)
We need quantifiers to express the meaning of English
words including all and some:
 “All men are Mortal.”
 “Some cats do not have fur.”
The two most important quantifiers are:
 Universal Quantifier, “For all,” symbol: 
 Existential Quantifier, “There exists,” symbol: 
We write as in x P(x) and x P(x).
x P(x) asserts P(x) is true for every x in the domain.
x P(x) asserts P(x) is true for some x in the domain.
The quantifiers are said to bind the variable x in these
expressions.
Universal Quantifier
x P(x) is read as “For all x, P(x)” or “For every
x, P(x)”

If P(x) denotes “x > 0” and U is the integers, then

Examples:
1)

If P(x) denotes “x > 0” and U is the positive

x P(x) is false.

integers, then
2)

If P(x) denotes “x is even” and U is the integers,

x P(x) is true.

then  x P(x) is false.

3)
Existential Quantifier
x P(x) is read as “For some x, P(x)”, or as
“There is an x such that P(x),” or “For at
least one x, P(x).”

If P(x) denotes “x > 0” and U is the integers,

Examples:

then x P(x) is true. It is also true if U is the

1.

If P(x) denotes “x < 0” and U is the positive

positive integers.

integers, then
2.

If P(x) denotes “x is even” and U is the integers,

x P(x) is false.

then
3.
x P(x) is true.
Uniqueness Quantifier (optional)
 !x P(x) means that P(x) is true for one and only one x in the
universe of discourse.
 This is commonly expressed in English in the following
equivalent ways:
 “There is a unique x such that P(x).”
 “There is one and only one x such that P(x)”
 Examples:
1. If P(x) denotes “x + 1 = 0” and U is the integers, then !x

But if P(x) denotes “x > 0,” then !x P(x) is false.

P(x) is true.
2.
 The uniqueness quantifier is not really needed as the
restriction that there is a unique x such that P(x) can be

x (P(x) ∧y (P(y) → y =x))

expressed as:
Thinking about Quantifiers
 When the domain of discourse is finite, we can think of
quantification as looping through the elements of the domain.
 To evaluate x P(x) loop through all x in the domain.
 If at every step P(x) is true, then x P(x) is true.
 If at a step P(x) is false, then x P(x) is false and the loop
terminates.
 To evaluate x P(x) loop through all x in the domain.
 If at some step, P(x) is true, then x P(x) is true and the loop
terminates.
 If the loop ends without finding an x for which P(x) is true, then
x P(x) is false.
 Even if the domains are infinite, we can still think of the
quantifiers this fashion, but the loops will not terminate in
some cases.
Properties of Quantifiers
The truth value of x P(x) and  x P(x) depend on
both the propositional function P(x) and on the
domain U.
Examples:

“x < 2”, then x P(x) is true, but  x P(x) is

1. If U is the positive integers and P(x) is the statement

false.

“x < 2”, then both x P(x) and  x P(x) are true.

2. If U is the negative integers and P(x) is the statement

If U consists of 3, 4, and 5, and P(x) is the statement

“x > 2”, then both x P(x) and  x P(x) are
3.

true. But if P(x) is the statement “x < 2”, then both x

P(x) and  x P(x) are false.
Precedence of Quantifiers
The quantifiers  and  have higher

For example, x P(x) ∨ Q(x) means (x

precedence than all the logical operators.

P(x))∨ Q(x)
x (P(x) ∨ Q(x)) means something different.
Unfortunately, often people write x P(x) ∨
Q(x) when they mean  x (P(x) ∨ Q(x)).
Translating from English to Logic
Example 1: Translate the following sentence into
predicate logic: “Every student in this class has
taken a course in Java.”
Solution:
First decide on the domain U.
Solution 1: If U is all students in this class, define a

course in Java” and translate as x J(x).

propositional function J(x) denoting “x has taken a

Solution 2: But if U is all people, also define a

x (S(x)→ J(x)).
propositional function S(x) denoting “x is a student

x (S(x) ∧ J(x)) is not correct. What does it mean?

in this class” and translate as
Translating from English to Logic
Example 2: Translate the following sentence into
predicate logic: “Some student in this class has
taken a course in Java.”
Solution:
First decide on the domain U.
Solution 1: If U is all students in this class,

x J(x)
translate as

Solution 2: But if U is all people, then translate as

x (S(x) ∧ J(x))
x (S(x)→ J(x)) is not correct. What does it mean?
Returning to the Socrates Example
Introduce the propositional functions Man(x)
denoting “x is a man” and Mortal(x) denoting
“x is mortal.” Specify the domain as all
people.
The two premises are:

The conclusion is:

Later we will show how to prove that the

conclusion follows from the premises.
Equivalences in Predicate Logic
Statements involving predicates and
quantifiers are logically equivalent if and only
if they have the same truth value
for every predicate substituted into these
statements and
for every domain of discourse used for the

The notation S ≡T indicates that S and T are

variables in the expressions.

logically equivalent.
Example: x ¬¬S(x) ≡ x S(x)
Thinking about Quantifiers as Conjunctions
and Disjunctions
 If the domain is finite, a universally quantified proposition is
equivalent to a conjunction of propositions without quantifiers
and an existentially quantified proposition is equivalent to a

 If U consists of the integers 1,2, and 3:

disjunction of propositions without quantifiers.

 Even if the domains are infinite, you can still think of the
quantifiers in this fashion, but the equivalent expressions
without quantifiers will be infinitely long.
Negating Quantified Expressions
Consider x J(x)
“Every student in your class has taken a course in

Here J(x) is “x has taken a course in Java” and

Java.”

the domain is students in your class.

Negating the original statement gives “It is not
the case that every student in your class has
taken Java.” This implies that “There is a

Symbolically ¬x J(x) and x ¬J(x) are

student in your class who has not taken Java.”

equivalent
Negating Quantified Expressions
(continued)
Now Consider  x J(x)
“There is a student in this class who has taken a

Where J(x) is “x has taken a course in Java.”

course in Java.”

Negating the original statement gives “It is not

the case that there is a student in this class
who has taken Java.” This implies that “Every

Symbolically ¬ x J(x) and  x ¬J(x) are

student in this class has not taken Java”

equivalent
De Morgan’s Laws for Quantifiers
The rules for negating quantifiers are:

The reasoning in the table shows that:

These are important. You will use these.

Translation from English to Logic
Examples:
1. “Some student in this class has visited Mexico.”
Solution: Let M(x) denote “x has visited Mexico”

U be all people.
and S(x) denote “x is a student in this class,” and

x (S(x) ∧ M(x))
2. “Every student in this class has visited Canada
or Mexico.”
Solution: Add C(x) denoting “x has visited

x (S(x)→ (M(x)∨C(x)))
Canada.”
Some Fun with Translating from English
into Logical Expressions
U = {fleegles, snurds, thingamabobs}
F(x): x is a fleegle
S(x): x is a snurd
T(x): x is a thingamabob
Translate “Everything is a fleegle”

Solution: x F(x)
Translation (cont)
U = {fleegles, snurds, thingamabobs}
F(x): x is a fleegle
S(x): x is a snurd
T(x): x is a thingamabob
“Nothing is a snurd.”

Solution: ¬x S(x) What is this equivalent

to?
Solution: x ¬ S(x)
Translation (cont)
U = {fleegles, snurds, thingamabobs}
F(x): x is a fleegle
S(x): x is a snurd
T(x): x is a thingamabob
“All fleegles are snurds.”

Solution: x (F(x)→ S(x))

Translation (cont)
U = {fleegles, snurds, thingamabobs}
F(x): x is a fleegle
S(x): x is a snurd
T(x): x is a thingamabob
“Some fleegles are thingamabobs.”

Solution: x (F(x) ∧ T(x))

Translation (cont)
U = {fleegles, snurds, thingamabobs}
F(x): x is a fleegle
S(x): x is a snurd
T(x): x is a thingamabob
“No snurd is a thingamabob.”

Solution: ¬x (S(x) ∧ T(x)) What is this

equivalent to?
Solution: x (¬S(x) ∨ ¬T(x))
Translation (cont)
U = {fleegles, snurds, thingamabobs}
F(x): x is a fleegle
S(x): x is a snurd
T(x): x is a thingamabob
“If any fleegle is a snurd then it is also a
thingamabob.”

Solution: x ((F(x) ∧ S(x))→ T(x))

System Specification Example
 Predicate logic is used for specifying properties that systems
must satisfy.
 For example, translate into predicate logic:
 “Every mail message larger than one megabyte will be
compressed.”
 “If a user is active, at least one network link will be
available.”
 Decide on predicates and domains (left implicit here) for the
variables:
 Let L(m, y) be “Mail message m is larger than y megabytes.”
 Let C(m) denote “Mail message m will be compressed.”
 Let A(u) represent “User u is active.”
 Let S(n, x) represent “Network link n is state x.
 Now we have:
Lewis Carroll Example
Charles Lutwidge
Dodgson
(AKA Lewis Caroll)
(1832-1898)
 The first two are called premises and the third is called the
conclusion.
1. “All lions are fierce.”
2. “Some lions do not drink coffee.”
3. “Some fierce creatures do not drink coffee.”
 Here is one way to translate these statements to predicate
logic. Let P(x), Q(x), and R(x) be the propositional
functions “x is a lion,” “x is fierce,” and “x drinks coffee,”

x (P(x)→ Q(x))
respectively.

x (P(x) ∧ ¬R(x))
1.

x (Q(x) ∧ ¬R(x))
2.
3.
 Later we will see how to prove that the conclusion follows
from the premises.
Some Predicate Calculus Definitions
(optional)
An assertion involving predicates and quantifiers is valid
if it is true
 for all domains
 every propositional function substituted for the predicates in the
assertion.
Example:
An assertion involving predicates is satisfiable if it is true
 for some domains
 some propositional functions that can be substituted for the
predicates in the assertion.
Otherwise it is unsatisfiable.
Example: not valid but satisfiable
Example: unsatisfiable
MorePredicate Calculus Definitions
(optional)
The scope of a quantifier is the part of an
assertion in which variables are bound by the
quantifier.
Example: x has wide
scope

Example: x has narrow

scope
Logic Programming (optional)
language developed in the 1970s by researchers in
Prolog (from Programming in Logic) is a programming

artificial intelligence (AI).

Prolog programs include Prolog facts and Prolog rules.
As an example of a set of Prolog facts consider the
following:
instructor(chan, math273).
instructor(patel, ee222).
instructor(grossman, cs301).
enrolled(kevin, math273).
enrolled(juana, ee222).
enrolled(juana, cs301).
enrolled(kiko, math273).
enrolled(kiko, cs301).

Here the predicates instructor(p,c) and enrolled(s,c)

represent that professor p is the instructor of course c
and that student s is enrolled in course c.
Logic Programming (cont)
In Prolog, names beginning with an
uppercase letter are variables.
If we have apredicate teaches(p,s)
representing “professor p teaches student s,”
we can write the rule:
teaches(P,S) :- instructor(P,C), enrolled(S,C).
This Prolog rule can be viewed as equivalent
to the following statement in logic (using our

p c s(I(p,c) ∧ E(s,c)) → T(p,s))

conventions for logical statements).
Logic Programming (cont)
Prolog programs are loaded into a Prolog
interpreter. The interpreter receives queries and
returns answers using the Prolog program.
For example, using our program, the following
query may be given:
?enrolled(kevin,math273).
Prolog produces the response:
yes
Note that the ? is the prompt given by the Prolog
interpreter indicating that it is ready to receive a
query.
Logic Programming (cont)
The query:
?enrolled(X,math273).

produces the response: The Prolog interpreter tries

to find an instantiation for
X = kevin; X. It does so and returns X
X = kiko; = kevin. Then the user
no types the ; indicating a
The query: request for another answer.
When Prolog is unable to
?teaches(X,juana).
find another answer it
produces the response: returns no.
X = patel;
X = grossman;
no
Logic Programming (cont)
The query:
?teaches(chan,X).

produces the response:

X = kevin;
X = kiko;
no

A number of very good Prolog texts are available.

Learn Prolog Now! is one such text with a free
online version at http://www.learnprolognow.org/
There is much more to Prolog and to the entire
field of logic programming.
Nested Quantifiers
Section 1.4
Section Summary
Nested Quantifiers
Order of Quantifiers
Translating from Nested Quantifiers into
English
Translating Mathematical Statements into
Statements involving Nested Quantifiers.
Translated English Sentences into Logical
Expressions.
Negating Nested Quantifiers.
Nested Quantifiers
Nested quantifiers are often necessary to express the
meaning of sentences in English as well as important
concepts in computer science and mathematics.

x y(x + y = 0)
Example: “Every real number has an inverse” is

where the domains of x and y are the real numbers.

We can also think of nested propositional functions:
x y(x + y = 0) can be viewed as x Q(x) where Q(x) is
y P(x, y) where P(x, y) is (x + y = 0)
Thinking of Nested Quantification
 Nested Loops
 To see if xyP (x,y) is true, loop through the values of x :
At each step, loop through the values for y.
If for some pair of x andy, P(x,y) is false, then x yP(x,y) is false and both


x y P(x,y) is true if the outer loop ends after stepping through

the outer and inner loop terminate.

each x.
To see if x yP(x,y) is true, loop through the values of x:
At each step, loop through the values for y.


The inner loop ends when a pair x and y is found such that P(x, y) is true.


If no y is found such that P(x, y) is true the outer loop terminates as x



yP(x,y) has been shown to be false.



x y P(x,y) is true if the outer loop ends after stepping through

each x.
 If the domains of the variables are infinite, then this process can
not actually be carried out.
Order of Quantifiers
1. Let P(x,y) be the statement “x + y = y + x.”
Examples:

Assume that U is the real numbers. Then x

yP(x,y) and y xP(x,y) have the same

2. Let Q(x,y) be the statement “x + y = 0.”

truth value.

Assume that U is the real numbers. Then x

yQ(x,y) is true, but y xQ(x,y) is false.
Questions on Order of Quantifiers
Example 1: Let U be the real numbers,
Define P(x,y) : x ∙ y = 0
What is the truth value of the following:
1. xyP(x,y)
Answer: False
2. xyP(x,y)

xy P(x,y)
Answer: True
3.

x  y P(x,y)
Answer: True
4.
Answer: True
Questions on Order of Quantifiers
Example 2: Let U be the real numbers,
Define P(x,y) : x / y = 1
What is the truth value of the following:
1. xyP(x,y)
Answer: False
2. xyP(x,y)

xy P(x,y)
Answer: False
3.

x  y P(x,y)
Answer: False
4.
Answer: True
Quantifications of Two Variables
Statement When True? When False
P(x,y) is true for There is a pair x, y
every pair x,y. for which P(x,y) is
false.
For every x there is a There is an x such
y for which P(x,y) is that P(x,y) is false for
true. every y.
There is an x for For every x there is a
which P(x,y) is true y for which P(x,y) is
for every y. false.
There is a pair x, y P(x,y) is false for
for which P(x,y) is every pair x,y
true.
Translating Nested Quantifiers into English
Example 1: Translate the statement
x (C(x )∨ y (C(y ) ∧ F(x, y)))
where C(x) is “x has a computer,” and F(x,y) is “x
and y are friends,” and the domain for both x and y
consists of all students in your school.
Solution: Every student in your school has a

Example 2: Translate the statement

computer or has a friend who has a computer.

xy z ((F(x, y)∧ F(x,z) ∧ (y ≠z))→¬F(y,z))

Solution: There is a student none of whose
friends are also friends with each other.
Translating Mathematical Statements into
Predicate Logic
Example : Translate “The sum of two positive integers
is always positive” into a logical expression.
Solution:
1. Rewrite the statement to make the implied quantifiers
and domains explicit:
“For every two integers, if these integers are both positive, then
the sum of these integers is positive.”
2. Introduce the variables x and y, and specify the
domain, to obtain:
“For all positive integers x and y, x + y is positive.”

x  y ((x > 0)∧ (y > 0)→ (x + y > 0))

3. The result is:

where the domain of both variables consists of all integers

Translating English into Logical Expressions
Example
Example: Use quantifiers to express the
statement “There is a woman who has taken a
flight on every airline in the world.”

1. Let P(w,f) be “w has taken f ” and Q(f,a) be “f

Solution:

is a flight on a .”
2. The domain of w is all women, the domain of f
is all flights, and the domain of a is all
airlines.

w a f (P(w,f ) ∧ Q(f,a))
3. Then the statement can be expressed as:
Calculus in Logic (optional)
Example: Use quantifiers to express the definition of the limit
of a real-valued function f(x) of a real variable x at a point a
in its domain.
Solution: Recall the definition of the statement

is “For every real number ε > 0, there exists a real number

δ > 0 such that |f(x) – L| < ε whenever 0 < |x –a| < δ.”
Using quantifiers:

Where the domain for the variables ε and δ consists of all

positive real numbers and the domain for x consists of all
real numbers.
Questions on Translation from English
Example 1: “Brothers are siblings.”
Choose the obvious predicates and express in predicate logic.

Solution: x y (B(x,y) → S(x,y))

Example 2: “Siblinghood is symmetric.”
Solution: x y (S(x,y) → S(y,x))
Example 3: “Everybody loves somebody.”

Example 4: “There is someone who is loved by everyone.”

Solution: x y L(x,y)

Example 5: “There is someone who loves someone.”

Solution: y x L(x,y)

Example 6: “Everyone loves himself”

Solution: x y L(x,y)

Solution: x L(x,x)
Negating Nested Quantifiers
Example 1: Recall the logical expression developed three slides back:
w a f (P(w,f ) ∧ Q(f,a))
Part 1: Use quantifiers to express the statement that “There does not exist a

Solution: ¬w a f (P(w,f ) ∧ Q(f,a))

woman who has taken a flight on every airline in the world.”

Part 2: Now use De Morgan’s Laws to move the negation as far inwards as
possible.

¬w a f (P(w,f ) ∧ Q(f,a))

Solution:

w ¬ a f (P(w,f ) ∧ Q(f,a)) by De Morgan’s for 

1.
2.
3. w  a ¬ f (P(w,f ) ∧ Q(f,a)) by De Morgan’s for 
w  a f ¬ (P(w,f ) ∧ Q(f,a)) by De Morgan’s for 
w  a f (¬ P(w,f ) ∨ ¬ Q(f,a)) by De Morgan’s for ∧.
4.

Part 3: Can you translate the result back into English?

5.

Solution:
“For every woman there is an airline such that for all flights, this woman has
not taken that flight or that flight is not on this airline”
Return to Calculus and Logic (Opt)
Example : Recall the logical expression developed in the calculus example three slides back.
Use quantifiers and predicates to express that does not exist.

1. We need to say that for all real numbers L,

2. The result from the previous example can be negated to yield:

3. Now we can repeatedly apply the rules for negating quantified expressions:

The last step uses the equivalence ¬(p→q) ≡ p∧¬q

Calculus in Predicate Logic (optional)
4. Therefore, to say that does not exist
means that for all real numbers L,
can be expressed as:

Remember that ε and δ range over all positive

real numbers and x over all real numbers.

every real number L, there is a real number ε

5. Translating back into English we have, for

> 0, such that for every real number δ > 0,

there exists a real number x such that 0 < | x –
a | < δ and |f(x) – L | ≥ ε .
Some Questions about Quantifiers
(optional)
 Can you switch the order of quantifiers?
 Is this a valid equivalence?
Solution: Yes! The left and the right side will always have the same truth
value. The order in which x and y are picked does not matter.
 Is this a valid equivalence?

for some propositional functions for P. Try “x + y = 0” for P(x,y) with U being
Solution: No! The left and the right side may have different truth values

the integers. The order in which the values of x and y are picked does matter.
 Can you distribute quantifiers over logical connectives?
 Is this a valid equivalence?
Solution: Yes! The left and the right side will always have the same truth
value no matter what propositional functions are denoted by P(x) and Q(x).
 Is this a valid equivalence?
Solution: No! The left and the right side may have different truth values.
Pick “x is a fish” for P(x) and “x has scales” for Q(x) with the domain of
discourse being all animals. Then the left side is false, because there are
some fish that do not have scales. But the right side is true since not all
animals are fish.