Propositional Logic, Truth Tables,

Predicate Logic
Logic?
 What is logic?

Logic is a truth-preserving system of inference

Truth-preserving:
System: a set of
If the initial
mechanistic
statements are
transformations, based
true, the inferred
on syntax alone
statements will
be true Inference: the process of
deriving (inferring) new
statements from old
statements
 Propositional Logic
 A proposition is a statement that is either true or
false
 Examples:
 This class is M.Sc (3rd semester) in Computer Science
(true)
 Today is Sunday (false)
 It is currently raining in Singapore (???)
 Every proposition is true or false, but its truth
value (true or false) may be unknown
 Propositional Logic (II)
 A propositional statement or well-formed formula
wff) is one of:
 A simple proposition

denoted by a capital letter, e.g. ‘A’.
 A negation of a propositional statement

e.g. A : “not A”
 Two propositional statements joined by a connective

e.g. A  B : “A and B”

e.g. A  B : “A or B”
 If a connective joins complex statements, parenthesis
are added

e.g. A  (BC)
 Truth Tables
 The truth value of a compound
propositional statement is determined by
its truth table
 Truth tables define the truth value of a
connective for every possible truth value of
its terms
 Logical negation
 Negation of proposition A is A

 A: It is snowing.
 A: It is not snowing

 A: Newton knew Einstein.

 A: Newton did not know Einstein.

 A: I am not registered for CS195.

 A: I am registered for CS195.
Negation Truth Table

A A
0 1
1 0
 Logical and (conjunction)
 Conjunction of A and B is A  B
 A: CS160 teaches logic.
 B: CS160 teaches Java.
 A  B: CS160 teaches logic and Java.

 Combining conjunction and negation

 A: I like fish.
 B: I like sushi.
 I like fish but not sushi: A  B
Truth Table for Conjunction

A B AB
0 0 0
0 1 0
1 0 0
1 1 1
 Logical or (disjunction)
 Disjunction of A and B is A  B
 A: Today is Friday.
 B: It is snowing.
 A  B: Today is Friday or it is snowing.

 This statement is true if any of the following hold:

 Today is Friday
 It is snowing
 Both
 Otherwise it is false
Truth Table for Disjunction

A B AB
0 0 0
0 1 1
1 0 1
1 1 1
 Conditional & Biconditional
Implication
 The conditional implication connective is 
 The biconditional implication connective is 
 These, too, are defined by truth tables

A B AB A B AB
0 0 1
0 1 1 0 0 1
0 1 0
1 0 0
1 0 0
1 1 1
1 1 1
 Conditional implication
 Shown by A  B
 A: A programming homework is due.
 B: It is Tuesday.
 A  B:
 If a programming homework is due, then it must be
Tuesday.
 A programming homework is due only if it is Tuesday.

 Is this the same as:

 If it is Tuesday, then a programming homework is due.
 Bi-conditional
 A: You can drive a car.
 B: You have a driver’s license.

 You can drive a car if and only if you have a

driver’s license.
 AB

 What if we said “if”?

 What if we said “only if”?
 Compound Truth Tables
 Truth tables can also be used to determine
the truth values of compound statements,
such as (AB)(A) (fill this as an exercise)
A B A AB (AB)(A)
0 0 1 0 0
0 1 1 1 1
1 0 0 1 0
1 1 0 1 0
 Tautology and Contradiction
 A tautology is a compound proposition that is
always true.
 A contradiction is a compound proposition that
is always false.
 A contingency is neither a tautology nor a
contradiction.
 A compound proposition is satisfiable if there is
at least one assignment of truth values to the
variables that makes the statement true.
Examples

A A AA AA

0 1 1 0

1 0 1 0
Result is always
false, no matter
what A is
Result is always
true, no matter
what A is Therefore, it is a Therefore, it is a
tautology contradiction
 Logical Equivalence
 Two compound propositions, p and q, are
logically equivalent if p  q is a tautology.
 Notation: p  q
 De Morgan’s Laws:
•  (p  q)   p   q
•  (p  q)   p   q
 How so? Let’s build a truth table!
 Prove (p  q)  p  q

p q p q (p  q) (p  q) p  q
0 0 1 1 0 1 1

0 1 1 0 0 1 1

1 0 0 1 0 1 1

1 1 0 0 1 0 0

=
 Show (p  q)  p  q

p q p q (p  q) (p q) p  q
0 0 1 1 0 1 1

0 1 1 0 1 0 0

1 0 0 1 1 0 0

1 1 0 0 1 0 0

=
 Other Equivalences
 Show p  q  p  q

 Show Distributive Law:

 p  (q  r)  (p  q)  (p  r)
Show p  q  p  q

p q p p  q p  q
0 0 1 1 1

0 1 1 1 1

1 0 0 0 0

1 1 0 1 1

=
 Show p  (q  r)  (p  q)  (p  r)
p q r q  r p  q p  r p  (q  r) (p  q)  (p  r)

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0
0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1
1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1
1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
=
More Equivalences

Equivalence Name
pTp Identity
pFp
pqq p Commutative
pqq p
p  (p  q)  p Absorption
p  (p  q)  p
 Equivalences with Conditionals and
Biconditionals
 Conditionals  Biconditionals
 p  q  p  q  p  q  (p  q)  (q 

 p  q  q  p p)
 (p  q)  p  q  p  q  p  q

 (p  q)  p  q
 Prove Biconditional Equivalence

p q q p  q (p  q) p  q
0 0 1 1 0 0

0 1 0 0 1 1

1 0 1 0 1 1

1 1 0 1 0 0

=
 Predicate Logic
 Some statements cannot be expressed in
propositional logic, such as:
 All men are mortal.
 Some trees have needles.
 X > 3.
 Predicate logic can express these
statements and make inferences on them.
 Statements in Predicate Logic
P(x,y)
 Two parts:
 Predicate P describes a relation or property,
 Variables (x,y) can take arbitrary values from
some domain.
 Still have two truth values for statements
(T and F)
 When we assign values to x and y, then
P has a truth value.
 Example
 Let Q(x,y) denote “x=y+3”.

What are truth values of:

Q(1,2) false

Q(3,0) true

 Let R(x,y) denote x beats y in

Rock/Paper/Scissors with 2 players with
following rules:

Rock smashes scissors, Scissors cuts paper,
Paper covers rock.

What are the truth values of:

R(rock, paper) false

R(scissors, paper) true
 Quantifiers
 Quantification expresses the extent to
which a predicate is true over a set of
elements.
 Two forms:
 Universal 
 Existential 
 Universal Quantifier
 P(x) is true for all values in the domain
xD, P(x)
 For every x in D, P(x) is true.
 An element x for which P(x) is false is
called a counterexample.
 Given P(x) as “x+1>x” and the domain of
R, what is the truth value of:
x P(x) true
 Example
 Let P(x) be that x>0 and x is in domain
of R.
 Give a counterexample for:
x P(x)
x = -5
 Existential Quantifier
 P(x) is true for at least one value in the
domain.
xD, P(x)
 For some x in D, P(x) is true.
 Let the domain of x be “animals”,
M(x) be “x is a mammal” and
E(x) be “x lays eggs”,
what is the truth value of: true
Platypuses
x (M(x)  E(x)) echidnas
 English to Logic
 Some person in this class has visited the
Grand Canyon.
 Domain of x is the set of all persons
 C(x): x is a person in this class
 V(x): x has visited the Grand Canyon
 x(C(x)V(x))
 English to Logic
 For every one there is someone to love.
 Domain of x and y is the set of all persons
 L(x, y): x loves y
 xy L(x,y)
 Is it necessary to explicitly include that x
and y must be different people (i.e. xy)?
 Just because x and y are different variable
names doesn’t mean that they can’t take the
same values
 English to Logic
 No one in this class is wearing shorts and a ski
parka.
 Domain of x is persons in this class
 S(x): x is wearing shorts

 P(x): x is wearing a ski parka

 x(S(x)P(x))

 Domain of x is all persons

 C(x): x belongs to the class

 x(C(x)S(x)P(x))
 Evaluating Expressions:
Precedence and Variable Bindings
 Precedence:
 Quantifiers and negation are evaluated
before operators
 Otherwise left to right
 Bound:
 Variables can be given specific values or
 Can be constrained by quantifiers
 Predicate Logic Equivalences
• Statements are logically equivalent iff they have the
same truth value under all possible bindings.
• For example:

– In English, given domain of students in CS160, all students

have passed M124 course (P) and are registered at CSU (Q);
hence, all students have passed M124 and all students are
registered at CSU.
 Other Equivalences
• Someone likes skiing (P) or likes swimming (Q); hence, there exists someone
who likes skiing or there exists someone who likes skiing.

• Not everyone likes to go to the dentist; hence there is someone who does not
like to go to the dentist.

• There does not exist someone who likes to go to the dentist; hence everyone
does not like to go to the dentist.