Books: Discrete Mathematics and Its Applications by Kenneth H. Rosen

BOOKS
• Discrete Mathematics and Its

Applications
By Kenneth H. Rosen
• Discrete Mathematics
By T.Veerarajan
• Discrete Mathematics
By P.Sivaramakrishna Das
& C.Vijayakumari
TOPICS
• LOGIC AND PROOFS
• COMBINATORICS
• GRAPHS
• ALGEBRAIC STRUCTURES
• LATTICES AND BOOLEAN ALGEBRA

OBJECTIVES
• To extend student‘s logical and mathematical maturity and
ability to deal with abstraction.
• To introduce most of the basic terminologies used in computer

science courses and application of ideas to solve practical
problems.
• To understand the basic concepts of combinatorics and graph

theory.
• To familiarize the applications of algebraic structures.
• To understand the concepts and significance of lattices and

boolean algebra which are widely used in computer science and
engineering.
UNIT-I LOGIC AND PROOFS
• Propositional logic
• Propositional equivalences
• Rules of inference
• Predicates and quantifiers
• Nested quantifiers
• Introduction to proofs
• Proof methods and strategy.
Introduction
• Logic is the discipline that deals with

the methods of reasoning.
• It provides rules and techniques for

determining whether a given
argument is valid or not.
• Logical reasoning is used
▪ In mathematics to prove theorems.
▪ In computer science to verify the

correctness of program.
▪ In physical sciences to prove theorems.
▪ To solve multitude problems in our every

day life.
• Logic is concerned with studying
arguments and conclusions.
• There are two main components of

logic
❖Propositional Logic.
❖Predicate Logic.
Propositional Logic
• The study of propositional logic consist
of syntax (grammar), sematics (meaning),
inference rules and derivation.
• Propositional logic can be considered as
a language of human reasoning.
• It consists of
▪ Propositional Variables denoted by
𝐩, 𝐪, 𝐫, 𝐬, … . (which are simple statements).
▪ Propositional constants denoted by T and
F (True or False)
▪ Connectives or basic logical operators
denoted by ∧, ∨, ∼, → , ↔ .
Propositions (Statements)
• A declarative sentence which is true
or false, but not both, is called a
proposition or statement.
• Sentences which are exclamatory,
interrogative or imperative in nature
are not propositions.
Examples:
1. New Delhi is the capital city of India.
2. How beautiful is rose?
3. 2 + 3 = 3.
4. What time is it?
5. 𝑥 + 𝑦 = 𝑧.
6. Take a cup of coffee.
In the given statements (2), (4) and (6) are not

propositions as they are not declarative in nature.
Statements (1) and (3) are propositions but (5) is not

since (1) is true, (3) is false and (5) is neither true nor false
as the values of 𝑥, 𝑦 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑧 are not assigned.
• If a proposition is true, we say that the truth
value of that proposition is true, denoted by T or
1.
• If a proposition is false, we say that the truth
value of that proposition is false, denoted by F or
0.
Primitive Proposition:
A proposition is primitive or primary or atomic, if
it cannot be broken into simpler propositions.
In otherwords, primitive propositions do not

contain logical connectives.
• Compound Proposition:
A proposition obtained by combining two
or more propositions by means of logical
connectives is called a compound proposition or
compound statement or molecular statement.
• Truth Table:
A table displaying the truth values of a
compound statement in terms of its component
parts is called the truth table.
Logical Connectives or Logical Operators:
• In logic, the letters 𝑝, 𝑞, 𝑟, 𝑠, … . denote
propositional variables.
• Variables can be replaced by propositions.
Example :
p : 2+3=5.
q : It is raining.
Negation(¬), Disjunction(∨), Conjunction(∨) are
called logical connectives or logical operators to
form a new propositions.
NEGATION (¬)[𝑵𝑶𝑻]
If p is a proposition , then the
negation of p is the proposition not p and
it is denoted by ¬𝐩 or ∼ 𝐩.
For example: let p: Today is Monday

¬p : Today is not Monday
The Truth table is given by
T F
F T
DISJUNCTION (∨)[OR]
If p and q are two propositions then
the disjunction of p and q is the compound
proposition p or q and is denoted by 𝒑 ∨ 𝒒.
➢ The compound statement 𝒑 ∨ 𝒒 is false if
both of p and q is false.
➢ 𝑝 ∨ 𝑞 is true if atleast one of p and q is true.
(i.e) Rule : F F implies F otherwise T.
TRUTH TABLE FOR DISJUNCTION
(∨) [OR]
T T T
T F T
F T T
F F F
(i.e) Rule : F F implies F otherwise T.

CONJUNCTION (∧)[AND]
If p and q are two propositions then
the conjunction of p and q is the compound
proposition p and q and is denoted by 𝒑 ∧
𝒒.
➢ The compound statement 𝒑 ∧ 𝒒 is true if
both of p and q is true.
➢ 𝑝 ∧ 𝑞 is false if atleast one of p and q is false
(i.e) Rule : T T implies T otherwise F.
TRUTH TABLE FOR CONJUNCTION
(∧) [AND]
T T T
T F F
F T F
F F F
(i.e) Rule : T T implies T otherwise F.
Conditional statement:(→)[If…then]
If p and q are propositions the compound
statement ‘if p, then q’ is called a conditional
statement or implication and is denoted by 𝒑 →
𝒒.
➢ In this implication p is called the Hypothesis
and q is called the conclusion.
➢ 𝒑 → 𝒒 is false if p is true and q is false.
➢ In other cases 𝒑 → 𝒒 is true.
(i.e) Rule : T F implies F otherwise T.
• NOTE:
➢The conditional statement 𝒑 → 𝒒
is read as
“ p implies q ” or
“ p only if q ” or
“ p is sufficient for q ” or
“ q if p ”
TRUTH TABLE FOR CONDITIONAL
STATEMENT (𝒑 → 𝒒) [𝑰𝒇 … 𝒕𝒉𝒆𝒏]
T T T
T F F
F T T
F F T
• (i.e) Rule : T F implies F otherwise T

VARIATIONS IN CONDITIONAL
STATEMENTS
If 𝒑 → 𝒒 is the conditional statement, then
(i) 𝐪 → 𝐩 is called the Converse of 𝒑 → 𝒒
(ii) ∼ 𝐩 →∼ 𝐪 is called the Inverse of 𝒑 → 𝒒
(iii) ∼ 𝐪 →∼ 𝒑 is called the Contrapositive

of 𝒑 → 𝒒.
❖ Example(2) Write down the contrapositive ,
converse and inverse of the implication
“ If it is raining then I get wet”.

Solution:
Let p : It is raining and q: I get wet
The given implication is p → q
Contrapositive : ¬q → ¬p
“If do not get wet then it is not raining”.
Converse : q → p is
“If I get wet then it is raining”.
Inverse : ¬p → ¬q is
“ If it is not raining then I do not get wet”.
Biconditional Statement (↔) [if and only if]
If p and q are propositions the compound

statement ‘ p if and only if q’ is called a
biconditional statement and is denoted by 𝒑 ↔
𝒒 .
➢ 𝒑 ↔ 𝒒 is true whenever p and q have the same
truth values and false otherwise.
(i.e) Rule: T T
T otherwise F
F F
Truth Table for Biconditional Statement (↔)
T T T
T F F
F T F
F F T
➢ p ↔ q can also be expressed as “ p iff q”
Or “ p is the necessary and sufficient condition for q”

Construct truth table for 𝑷 ∨ 𝑸 → 𝑷 ∧ 𝑸 .
Solution: Let 𝑆 = 𝑷 ∨ 𝑸 → 𝑷 ∧ 𝑸
T T T T T
T F T F F
F T T F F
F F F F T
Construct truth table for 𝒑 → 𝒒 → 𝒒 → 𝒑 .
Solution : Let 𝑆 = 𝒑 → 𝒒 → 𝒒 → 𝒑 .
T T T T T
T F F T T
F T T F F
F F T T T
Construct the truth table for ¬(𝑷 ∨ 𝑸) ∧ (𝑷 ∨ 𝑹)
Solution: Let S = ¬(𝑷 ∨ 𝑸) ∧ (𝑷 ∨ 𝑹)
T T T T F T F
T T F T F T F
T F T T F T F
T F F T F T F
F T T T F T F
F T F T F F F
F F T F T T T
F F F F T F F
WELL FORMED FORMULAS
The statement formula in which the order of

finding the truth values are indicated by using
parenthesis is called a well formed formulas.
For example:
(i) ¬ 𝑃 ∨ 𝑄 is a well formed formula (wff).
(ii) 𝑃 → 𝑄 ∧ 𝑅 is not a Wff,
but 𝑷 → (𝑸 ∧ 𝑹) is a Wff.
(Or) (𝑷 → 𝑸) ∧ 𝑹 is also a Wff.
Order of precedence of logical
connectives
▪ Negation ¬ precedes all other
operators.
▪ Conjunction ∧ precedes disjunction ∨
▪ The implications → and ↔ have lower
precedence. But among these two
→ precedes ↔ .
Tautology and Contradiction
➢ A statement formula which is always true
irrespective of the truth values of the individual
variables is called Tautology.
➢ A statement formula which is always false
is called a Contradiction.
➢ A statement which is neither a Tautology nor a

contradiction is called a contingency (or)
satisfiable.
Show that the statement given below is Tautology
𝑸 ∨ (𝑷 ∧ ¬𝑸) ∨ (¬𝑷 ∧ ¬𝑸)
Solution: Let 𝑺 = 𝑸 ∨ (𝑷 ∧ ¬𝑸) ∨ (¬𝑷 ∧ ¬𝑸)
T T F F F F T
T F F T T F T
F T T F F F T
F F T T F T T
This is a Tautology.
Verify whether the following statement are Tautology
or Contradiction or contingency ¬(𝒒 → 𝒓) ∧ 𝒓 ∧ (𝒑 → 𝒒).
:
Solution Let t = ¬ 𝒒 → 𝒓 ∧ 𝒓 , 𝑆 = ¬(𝒒 → 𝒓) ∧ 𝒓 ∧ (𝒑 → 𝒒)
T T T T T F F F
T T F T F T F F
T F T F T F F F
T F F F T F F F
F T T T T F F F
F T F T F T F F
F F T T T F F F
F F F T T F F F
This is a contradiction.
Verify whether the following statement are Tautology
or Contradiction or contingency (𝑷 ∨ 𝑸) → 𝑷.
Solution: Let S = (P ∨ Q) → P
T T T T
T F T T
F T T F
F F F T
This is a Contingency.
Logical Equivalence
▪ Two propositions P and Q are said to be
logically equivalent if P ↔ Q is a Tautology.
▪ We denoted this by 𝐏 ≡ 𝐐 (Or ) 𝑷 ⇔ 𝑸

❖ Note:
▪ The symbol ⇔ is sometimes used instead of ≡ to
denote logical equivalence.
▪ 𝑷 ≡ 𝑸 if and only if P and Q have the same truth
values.
Logical Implication
• let P and Q be two compound propositions,
if 𝑃 → 𝑄 is a Tautology, then “P is said to be logically
imply Q” and it is denoted by 𝑷 ⇒ 𝑸 .
• It is read as “ P implies Q”
• We also say that “Q logically follows from P”.
Note:
• The symbols → and ⟹ are different.
• → is logical connective (Or) logical operator.
• ⟹ is not a logical connective (Or) logical operator.
Show that 𝑷 → 𝑸 and ¬𝑷 ∨ 𝑸 are logically
equivalent.
Method : I
W.K.T, Two propositions P and Q are said to be
logically equivalent if 𝑷 ↔ 𝑸 is a Tautology.
To show : (𝑃 → 𝑄) ↔ (¬𝑃 ∨ 𝑄) ≡ 𝑇
Let 𝑺 = (𝑷 → 𝑸) ↔ (¬𝑷 ∨ 𝑸)
T T F T T T
T F F F F T
F T T T T T
F F T T T T
Hence the given statements are logically equivalent.

Method : II
W.K.T, 𝑃 ≡ 𝑄 if and only if P and Q have the same
truth values.
Given Statements are 𝑃 → 𝑄 and ¬𝑃 ∨ 𝑄
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)

T T F T T
T F F F F
F T T T T
F F T T T
From column (4) and (5) they are logically equivalent.

Show that 𝒑 → (𝒒 → 𝒓) ⇒ (𝒑 ⟶ 𝒒) → (𝒑 → 𝒓)
Solution: Let s: p → (q → r) and t: (p →q) → (p → r)

To prove : s → t is a Tautology.
T T T T T T T T T
T T F T F F F F T
T F T F T T T T T
T F F F F T T T T
F T T T T T T T T
F T F T T F T T T
F F T T T T T T T
F F F T T T T T T
1.Write the following statement in symbolic form :
If Avinash is not in good mood or he is not
busy, then he will go to New Delhi.
Solution:
Let 𝒑: Avinash is not in good mood.
𝒒 ∶ He is not busy.
𝒓 ∶ He will go to New Delhi.
The symbolic form of the given statement is
(𝒑 ∨ 𝒒) → 𝒓.
2. Negate the statement: “ John is playing
football” in two different forms.
Solution :
Form 1 : John is not playing football.
Form 2 : It is not the case that John is
playing football.
3.State the truth value of “ If tigers have
wings then the earth travels round the
sun”
Solution:
Let 𝒑 ∶ Tigers have wings which is a false statement.
𝒒 ∶ Earth travels round the sun which is a true
statement.
• We have 𝒑 → 𝒒 So we have a combination of 𝑭→𝑻

which is True (T)
• So the truth value of the given statement is T.

Duality Law
• The dual of a compound proposition that
contains only the logical operators ∨, ∧
and ¬ is the proposition obtained by
replacing each ∨ by ∧, each ∧ by ∨, each 𝑻
by 𝑭 and each 𝑭 by 𝐓, where 𝑻 and 𝑭 are
special variables representing compound
propositions that are tautologies and
contradictions respectively.
Laws of Propositional Logic
Name of the
Primal Form Dual Form
Law
Idempotent
Law
Identity Law
Dominant
Law
Complement
F
Law
Associative
Law
Commutative
Law
Laws of Propositional Logic
Name of
Primal Form Dual Form
the Law
Distributive
Law
Absorption
Law
Demorgan’
s Law
Negation
Law
Equivalences Involving Conditionals
2 (Contrapositive)
6
Equivalences Involving Conditionals
4
1.Without using truth table , prove that
¬𝑷 ⟶ 𝑸 ⟶ 𝑹 ≡ 𝑸 ⟶ 𝑷 ∨ 𝑹
Solution:
¬𝑷 ⟶ 𝑸 ⟶ 𝑹 ≡ ¬𝑷 ⟶ ¬𝑸 ∨ 𝑹 (By 𝑷 → 𝑸 ≡ ¬𝑷 ∨ 𝑸)
≡ ¬(¬𝑷) ∨ (¬𝑸 ∨ 𝑹) (By 𝑷 → 𝑸 ≡ ¬𝑷 ∨ 𝑸)
≡ 𝑷 ∨ (¬𝑸 ∨ 𝑹) (By ¬(¬𝑷) ≡ 𝑷)
≡ (𝑷 ∨ ¬𝑸) ∨ 𝑹 (By Associative law)
≡ (¬𝑸 ∨ 𝑷) ∨ 𝑹 (By Commutative law)
≡ ¬𝑸 ∨ (𝑷 ∨ 𝑹) (By Associative law)
≡ 𝑸 ⟶ (𝑷 ∨ 𝑹) (By ¬𝑷 ∨ 𝑸 ≡ 𝑷 ⟶ 𝑸)
2. Without using truth table, show that
∼ 𝑷 ∧ ∼ 𝑸 ∧ 𝑹 ∨ 𝑸 ∧ 𝑹 ∨ 𝑷 ∧ 𝑹 ⇔ 𝑹.
Solution:
∼𝑷∧ ∼𝑸∧𝑹 ∨ 𝑸∧𝑹 ∨ 𝑷∧𝑹
⇔ (∼ 𝑷 ∧ ∼ 𝑸 ∧ 𝑹 ) ∨ ( 𝑸 ∧ 𝑹 ∨ 𝑷 ∧ 𝑹 ) (By Asso Law)
⇔ (∼ 𝑷 ∧ ∼ 𝑸 ∧ 𝑹 ) ∨ ((𝑸 ∨ 𝑷) ∧ 𝑹) (By Dis Law)
⇔ ∼ 𝑷 ∧∼ 𝑸 ∧ 𝑹 ∨ 𝑷∨𝑸 ∧𝑹
(By Asso & Comm Law)
⇔ (∼ (𝑷 ∨ 𝑸) ∧ 𝑹) ∨ ((𝑷 ∨ 𝑸) ∧ 𝑹) (By Demorgan’s Law)
⇔ (∼ 𝑷 ∨ 𝑸 ∨ 𝑷 ∨ 𝑸 ) ∧ 𝑹 (By Dis law)
⇔𝑻∧𝑹 (By Complement law, 𝒑 ∨∼ 𝒑 ≡T)
⇔𝑹 (By Identity law, 𝑷 ∧ 𝑻 ≡ 𝑷)
3. Show that
(𝑃 ∨ 𝑄) ∧ ¬(¬𝑃 ∧ ¬𝑄 ∨ ¬𝑅 ) ∨ (¬𝑃 ∧ ¬𝑄) ∨ (¬𝑃 ∧ ¬𝑅)
is a tautology by using equivalences.
Solution :
(𝑷 ∨ 𝑸) ∧ ¬(¬𝑷 ∧ ¬𝑸 ∨ ¬𝑹 ) ∨ (¬𝑷 ∧ ¬𝑸) ∨ (¬𝑷 ∧ ¬𝑹)
⇔ ( 𝑷 ∨ 𝑸 ∧ ¬ ¬𝑷 ∧ ¬𝑸 ∨ ¬𝑹 ) ∨ ( ¬𝑷 ∧ ¬𝑸 ∨ ¬𝑷 ∧ ¬𝑹 )
(By Associative law)
⇔ ( 𝑷 ∨ 𝑸 ∧ 𝑷 ∨ ¬ ¬𝑸 ∨ ¬𝑹 ) ∨ (¬𝑷 ∧ ¬𝑸 ∨ ¬𝑹 )
(By Demorgan’ s & Distributive law)
⇔ ( 𝑷 ∨ 𝑸 ∧ 𝑷 ∨ 𝑸 ∧ 𝑹 ) ∨ (¬𝑷 ∧ ¬ 𝑸 ∧ 𝑹 )
(By Demorgan’s law)
⇔ (𝑷 ∨ (𝑸 ∧ 𝑸 ∧ 𝑹 ) ∨ ¬(𝑷 ∨ 𝑸 ∧ 𝑹 )
(By Distributive law & Demorgan’ law)
⇔ (𝐏 ∨ 𝐐 ∧ 𝐐 ∧ 𝐑 ) ∨ ¬(𝐏 ∨ 𝐐 ∧ 𝐑 )
⇔ (𝑷 ∨ 𝑸 ∧ 𝑹 ) ∨ ¬(𝑷 ∨ 𝑸 ∧ 𝑹 )
(By Idempotent law, 𝑷 ∧ 𝑷 ≡ 𝑷)
⇔𝑻
(By Complement law, 𝑷 ∨ ¬𝑷 ≡ 𝑻)
Hence the given proposition is a tautology.
4. Prove that (𝑷 → 𝑸) ∧ (𝑸 → 𝑹) ⟹ (𝑷 → 𝑹).
Solution:
To prove (𝑷 → 𝑸) ∧ (𝑸 → 𝑹) ⟹ (𝑷 → 𝑹), we have to prove that
((𝑷 → 𝑸) ∧ (𝑸 → 𝑹)) → (𝑷 → 𝑹) is a tautology.
𝑷→𝑸 ∧ 𝑸→𝑹 → 𝑷→𝑹
≡ ( ¬𝑷 ∨ 𝑸 ∧ ¬𝑸 ∨ 𝑹 ) → (¬𝑷 ∨ 𝑹) (By 𝑷 → 𝑸 ≡ ¬𝑷 ∨ 𝑸)
≡ ¬( ¬𝑷 ∨ 𝑸 ∧ ¬𝑸 ∨ 𝑹 ) ∨ (¬𝑷 ∨ 𝑹) (By 𝑷 → 𝑸 ≡ ¬𝑷 ∨ 𝑸)
≡ (¬ ¬𝑷 ∨ 𝑸 ∨ ¬ ¬𝑸 ∨ 𝑹 ) ∨ (¬𝑷 ∨ 𝑹) (By Demorgan’s law)
≡ ( 𝑷 ∧ ¬𝑸 ∨ 𝑸 ∧ ¬𝑹 ) ∨ (¬𝑷 ∨ 𝑹) (By Demorgan’s law)

≡ 𝑷 ∧ ¬𝑸 ∨ ( 𝑸 ∧ ¬𝑹 ∨ (¬𝑷 ∨ 𝑹))
≡ 𝑷 ∧ ¬𝑸 ∨ ( 𝑸 ∨ ¬𝑷 ∨ 𝑹 ∧ (¬𝑹 ∨ ¬𝑷 ∨ 𝑹))
(By Distributive law)
≡ 𝑷 ∧ ¬𝑸 ∨ ( ¬𝑷 ∨ 𝑸 ∨ 𝑹 ∧ ((¬𝑹 ∨ 𝑹) ∨ ¬𝑷))
≡ 𝑷 ∧ ¬𝑸 ∨ ( ¬𝑷 ∨ 𝑸 ∨ 𝑹 ∧ (𝑻 ∨ ¬𝑷))
(By Complement law, 𝒑 ∨∼ 𝒑 ≡ 𝑻)
≡ 𝑷 ∧ ¬𝑸 ∨ ( ¬𝑷 ∨ 𝑸 ∨ 𝑹 ∧ 𝑻)
(By Dominant law, 𝒑 ∨ 𝑻 ≡ 𝑻)

≡ 𝑷 ∧ ¬𝑸 ∨ ¬𝑷 ∨ 𝑸 ∨ 𝑹
(By Identity law, 𝒑 ∧ 𝑻 ≡ 𝒑)
≡ 𝑷 ∨ ¬𝑷 ∨ 𝑸 ∨ 𝑹 ∧ ¬𝑸 ∨ ¬𝑷 ∨ 𝑸 ∨ 𝑹
(By Distributive law)
≡ ( 𝑷 ∨ ¬𝑷) ∨ (𝑸 ∨ 𝑹 ) ∧ ¬𝑷 ∨ (¬𝑸 ∨ 𝑸) ∨ 𝑹
≡ 𝑻 ∨ (𝑸 ∨ 𝑹 ) ∧ (¬𝑷 ∨ 𝑹) ∨ 𝑻
(By Complement law, 𝒑 ∨∼ 𝒑 ≡ 𝑻)
≡𝑻∧𝑻 (By Dominant law, 𝒑 ∨ 𝑻 ≡ 𝑻)
≡𝑻 (By Idempotent law, 𝒑 ∧ 𝒑 ≡ 𝒑)
Hence, (𝑷 → 𝑸) ∧ (𝑸 → 𝑹) ⟹ (𝑷 → 𝑹).
Normal Forms
• Elementary Product :
A product of the variables and their
negations in a formula is called an
elementary product.
Examples:
𝑃, ¬𝑃 ∧ 𝑄, ¬𝑄 ∧ 𝑃 ∧ ¬𝑃, 𝑃 ∧ ¬𝑃 𝑎𝑛𝑑
𝑄 ∧ ¬𝑄 are some examples of elementary
products.
• Elementary Sum:
A sum of the variables and their
negations in a formula is called an
elementary sum.
Examples:
𝑃, ¬𝑃 ∨∧ 𝑄, ¬𝑄 ∨ 𝑃 ∨ ¬𝑃, 𝑃 ∨ ¬𝑃 𝑎𝑛𝑑
𝑄 ∨ ¬𝑄 are some examples of elementary
sum.
▪ Disjunctive Normal Form
Sum of elementary products is called disjunctive
normal form.
Example :
𝑷 ∨ 𝑷 ∧𝑸 ∨ (𝑷 ∧ ¬𝑸) .
▪ Conjunctive Normal Form

Product of elementary sums is called
Conjunctive normal form.
Example :
𝑷 ∧ 𝑷 ∨𝑸 ∧ (𝑷 ∨ ¬𝑸) .
• Minterms :
Given a number of variables, the
products in which each variable or its
negation but not both, occurs only once are
called minterms.
• For two variables 𝑃 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑄, the minterms
are
𝑷 ∧ 𝑸, 𝑷 ∧ ¬𝑸, ¬𝑷 ∧ 𝑸 𝒂𝒏𝒅 ¬𝑷 ∧ ¬𝑸.
• For three variables 𝑃, 𝑄 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑅, the
minterms are
𝑷 ∧ 𝑸 ∧ 𝑹, ¬𝑷 ∧ 𝑸 ∧ 𝑹, 𝑷 ∧ ¬𝑸 ∧ 𝑹,
𝑷 ∧ 𝑸 ∧ ¬𝑹, ¬𝑷 ∧ ¬𝑸 ∧ 𝑹, ¬𝑷 ∧ 𝑸 ∧ ¬𝑹, 𝑷 ∧
¬𝑸 ∧ ¬𝑹 and ¬𝑷 ∧ ¬𝑸 ∧ ¬𝑹.
• Maxterms :
Given a number of variables,
the sums in which each variable or its
negation but not both, occurs only once
are called maxterms.
• For two variables 𝑃 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑄, the
maxterms are
𝑷 ∨ 𝑸, 𝑷 ∨ ¬𝑸, ¬𝑷 ∨ 𝑸 𝒂𝒏𝒅 ¬𝑷 ∨ ¬𝑸.
• For three variables 𝑃, 𝑄 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑅, the
maxterms are
𝑷 ∨ 𝑸 ∨ 𝑹, ¬𝑷 ∨ 𝑸 ∨ 𝑹, 𝑷 ∨ ¬𝑸 ∨ 𝑹,
𝑷 ∨ 𝑸 ∨ ¬𝑹, ¬𝑷 ∨ ¬𝑸 ∨ 𝑹, ¬𝑷 ∨ 𝑸 ∨ ¬𝑹,
𝑷 ∨ ¬𝑸 ∨ ¬𝑹 and ¬𝑷 ∨ ¬𝑸 ∨ ¬𝑹.
Principal Disjunctive Normal
Form (PDNF)
• A formula consisting of
disjunctions of minterms in the
variable only is known as its principal
disjunctive normal form.
• Example :
(𝑷 ∧ 𝑸) ∨ (¬𝑷 ∧ ¬𝑸).
Principal Conjunctive Normal
Form (PCNF)
• A formula consisting of
conjunctions of maxterms in the
variable only is known as its principal
conjunctive normal form.
• Example :
(𝑷 ∨ 𝑸) ∧ (¬𝑷 ∨ ¬𝑸).
Steps involved in finding PDNF:
▪ First obtain DNF of the formula.
▪ To get the minterms in the disjunctions,

the missing factors are introduced
through the complement law, 𝑃 ∨ ¬𝑃 ≡ 𝑇 .
▪ Then apply distributive law.
▪ Identical minterms appearing in the

disjunctions are then deleted as 𝑃 ∨ 𝑃 ≡P.
• Steps involved in finding PCNF:
▪ First find PDNF of the given formula 𝐴.
▪ To find PCNF, we use the fact that 𝐴 ≡ ∼
∼𝐴 .
▪ Apply Demorgan’s law to the PDNF of ∼
𝐴 repeatedly.
• Note:
If the PDNF of a formula 𝐴 is known, the
PDNF of ∼ 𝐴 will consist of the disjunctions of
the remaining minterms which are not
included in the PDNF of 𝐴.
Find PDNF of 𝑷 ∧ 𝑸 ∨ ¬𝑷 ∧ 𝑹 ∨ 𝑸 ∧ 𝑹 . Also find
PCNF.
• Solution:
Given 𝑷 ∧ 𝑸 ∨ ¬𝑷 ∧ 𝑹 ∨ 𝑸 ∧ 𝑹
≡ 𝑃∧𝑄 ∧𝑇 ∨ ¬𝑃 ∧ 𝑅 ∧ 𝑇 ∨ ( 𝑄 ∧ 𝑅 ∧ 𝑇)
(By 𝑷 ∧ 𝑻 ≡ 𝑷)
≡ 𝑃 ∧ 𝑄 ∧ 𝑅 ∨ ¬𝑅 ∨ ¬𝑃 ∧ 𝑅 ∧ 𝑄 ∨ ¬𝑄
∨ ( 𝑄 ∧ 𝑅 ∧ 𝑃 ∨ ¬𝑃 )
(By 𝑷 ∨ ¬𝑷 ≡ 𝑻)
≡ (𝑃 ∧ 𝑄 ∧ 𝑅) ∨ (𝑃 ∧ 𝑄 ∧ ¬𝑅) ∨ (¬𝑃 ∧ 𝑄 ∧ 𝑅)
∨ (¬𝑃 ∧ ¬𝑄 ∧ 𝑅) ∨ (𝑃 ∧ 𝑄 ∧ 𝑅) ∨ (¬𝑃 ∧ 𝑄 ∧ 𝑅)
(By distributive law)

≡ (𝑃 ∧ 𝑄 ∧ 𝑅) ∨ (𝑃 ∧ 𝑄 ∧ ¬𝑅)
∨ (¬𝑃 ∧ 𝑄 ∧ 𝑅) ∨ (¬𝑃 ∧ ¬𝑄 ∧ 𝑅)
(By 𝑷 ∨ 𝑷 ≡ 𝑷)
which is disjunction of minterms.(PDNF)

PCNF ≡
¬(𝒅𝒊𝒔𝒋𝒖𝒏𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝒐𝒇 𝒓𝒆𝒎𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒎𝒊𝒏𝒕𝒆𝒓𝒎𝒔)
≡ ¬[(𝑃 ∧ ¬𝑄 ∧ 𝑅) ∨ (¬𝑃 ∧ 𝑄 ∧ ¬𝑅)
∨ (𝑃 ∧ ¬𝑄 ∧ ¬𝑅) ∨ (¬𝑃 ∧ ¬𝑄 ∧ ¬𝑅)]
≡ ¬(𝑃 ∧ ¬𝑄 ∧ 𝑅) ∧ ¬(¬𝑃 ∧ 𝑄 ∧ ¬𝑅)
∧ ¬(𝑃 ∧ ¬𝑄 ∧ ¬𝑅) ∧ ¬(¬𝑃 ∧ ¬𝑄 ∧ ¬𝑅)
≡ (¬𝑃 ∨ 𝑄 ∨ ¬𝑅) ∧ (𝑃 ∨ ¬𝑄 ∨ 𝑅)
∧ (¬𝑃 ∨ 𝑄 ∨ 𝑅) ∧ (𝑃 ∨ 𝑄 ∨ 𝑅).
which is conjunction of maxterms.
Obtain PDNF of ¬𝑷 → 𝑹 ∧ 𝑸 ↔ 𝑷 . Also find PCNF.
• Solution:
Given ¬𝑷 → 𝑹 ∧ 𝑸 ↔ 𝑷
≡ ¬(¬𝐏) ∨ 𝐑 ∧ ¬𝐐 ∨ 𝐏 ∧ ¬𝐏 ∨ 𝐐 )
(By 𝐏 → 𝐐 ≡ ¬𝐏 ∨ 𝐐 𝐚𝐧𝐝
𝐏 ↔ 𝐐 ≡ (¬𝐏 ∨ 𝐐) ∧ (¬𝐐 ∨ 𝐏))
≡ 𝐏 ∨ 𝐑 ∧ (𝐏 ∨ ¬𝐐) ∧ (¬𝐏 ∨ 𝐐)
(By double negation & commutative law)
≡ 𝑃∨𝑅 ∨𝐹 ∧ 𝑃 ∨ ¬𝑄 ∨ 𝐹 ∧ ( ¬𝑃 ∨ 𝑄 ∨ 𝐹)
(By 𝑷 ∨ 𝑭 ≡ 𝑷)
≡ 𝑃 ∨ 𝑅 ∨ (𝑄 ∧ ¬𝑄 ∧ 𝑃 ∨ ¬𝑄 ∨ (𝑅 ∧ ¬𝑅
∧ ( ¬𝑃 ∨ 𝑄 ∨ (𝑅 ∧ ¬𝑅))
(By 𝑷 ∧ ¬𝑷 ≡ 𝑭)
≡ (P ∨ 𝑄 ∨ 𝑅) ∧ (𝑃 ∨ ¬𝑄 ∨ 𝑅) ∧ (𝑃 ∨ ¬𝑄 ∨ 𝑅)
∧ (P ∨ ¬𝑄 ∨ ¬𝑅) ∧ (¬𝑃 ∨ 𝑄 ∨ 𝑅) ∧ (¬𝑃 ∨ 𝑄 ∨ ¬𝑅)
(By distributive law)
≡ P ∨ 𝑄 ∨ 𝑅 ∧ 𝑃 ∨ ¬𝑄 ∨ 𝑅 ∧ P ∨ ¬𝑄 ∨ ¬𝑅
∧ (¬𝑃 ∨ 𝑄 ∨ 𝑅) ∧ (¬𝑃 ∨ 𝑄 ∨ ¬𝑅)
(By 𝑷 ∧ 𝑷 ≡ 𝑷)
which is conjunction of maxterms. (PCNF)

PDNF ≡
¬(𝐜𝐨𝐧𝒋𝒖𝒏𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝒐𝒇 𝒓𝒆𝒎𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒎𝒂𝒙𝒕𝒆𝒓𝒎𝒔)
≡ ¬[(𝑃 ∨ 𝑄 ∨ ¬𝑅) ∧ (¬𝑃 ∨ ¬𝑄 ∨ 𝑅) ∧ (¬𝑃 ∨ ¬𝑄 ∨ ¬𝑅)]
≡ ¬(𝑃 ∨ 𝑄 ∨ ¬𝑅) ∨ ¬(¬𝑃 ∨ ¬𝑄 ∨ 𝑅) ∨ ¬(¬𝑃 ∨ ¬𝑄 ∨ ¬𝑅)
≡ (¬𝑃 ∧ ¬𝑄 ∧ 𝑅) ∨ (𝑃 ∧ 𝑄 ∧ ¬𝑅) ∨ (𝑃 ∧ 𝑄 ∧ 𝑅).
which is disjunction of minterms.

Note :
The 𝐏𝐃𝐍𝐅 and 𝐏𝐂𝐍𝐅 can be obtained by

constructing truth tables by finding
minterms corresponding to 𝐓 and
maxterms corresponding to 𝐅 respectively.
3.Find PDNF and PCNF of
(𝑷 ∧ 𝑸) ∨ ¬𝑷 ∧ 𝑹 using truth table.
Solution :
T T T F T F T
T T F F T F T
T F T F F F F
T F F F F F F
F T T T F T T
F T F T F F F
F F T T F T T
F F F T F F F
𝐏𝐃𝐍𝐅 ≡ 𝐏 ∧ 𝐐 ∧ 𝐑 ∨ 𝐏 ∧ 𝐐 ∧ ¬𝐑
∨ ¬𝐏 ∧ 𝐐 ∧ 𝐑 ∨ (¬𝐏 ∧ ¬𝐐 ∧ 𝐑).
𝐏𝐂𝐍𝐅 ≡ ¬𝐏 ∨ 𝐐 ∨ ¬𝐑 ∧ ¬𝐏 ∨ 𝐐 ∨ 𝐑
∧ 𝐏 ∨ ¬𝐐 ∨ 𝐑 ∧ 𝐏 ∨ 𝐐 ∨ 𝐑 .
Inference Theory
• Inference theory is concerned with

the inferring of a conclusion from
certain hypothesis or basic assumptions,
called premises, by applying certain
principles of reasoning, called rules of
inference.
Note :
Suppose that an implication of the form
𝒑𝟏 ∧ 𝒑𝟐 ∧ 𝒑𝟑 ∧ ⋯ ∧ 𝒑𝒏 ⟶ 𝒒 is a tautology,
then we say that 𝒒 logically follows from
𝒑𝟏 , 𝒑𝟐 , … , 𝒑𝒏 . The 𝒑𝒊 ’s are called the
hypotheses or premises and 𝒒 is called the
conclusion.
RULES OF INFERENCE
When a conclusion is derived from

a set of premises by using rules of
reasoning, then such a process of
derivation is called a deduction or a
formal proof and the argument is
called a valid argument.
We state two basic rules of inference called
rules 𝐏 and 𝐓.
RULE 𝐏 : A premise may be introduced at
any step in the derivation.
RULE 𝐓 :A formula may be introduced in
the derivation, if 𝑺 is tautologically
implied by one or more preceding
formulas in the derivation.
RULES OF INFERENCE
RULE IN TAUTOLOGICAL NAME OF THE RULE
FORM
SIMPLIFICATION
q
ADDITION
CONJUNCTION
MODUS PONENS
MODUS TOLLENS
HYPOTHETICAL
SYLLOGISM
DISJUNCTIVE SYLLOGISM
1.Show that 𝑺 is a valid inference from the
premises 𝑷 →∼ 𝑸, 𝑸 ∨ 𝑹, ∼ 𝑺 → 𝑷 and ∼ 𝑹.
Solution:
Step No Statement Reason
1 Rule P
2 Rule P
3 Rule T 1,2 Disjunctive Syllogism.
4 Rule P
5 Rule T 3,4 Modus Tollens
6 Rule P
Rule T 5,6 Modus Tollens and
7
double negation.
2.Show that 𝑹 ∧ (𝑷 ∨ 𝑸) is a valid conclusion
from the premises 𝑷 ∨ 𝑸, 𝑸 → 𝑹, 𝑷 → 𝑴, ¬𝑴.
Solution:

1 Rule P
2 Rule P
3 Rule T 1.2 Modus Tollens
4 Rule P
5 Rule T 3,4 Disjunctive Syllogism
6 Rule P
7 Rule T 5,6 Modus Ponens
8 Rule T 7,4 Conjunction.
3.Show that (𝑷 → 𝑸) ∧ (𝑹 → 𝑺), 𝑸 → 𝑴 ∧ 𝑺 → 𝑵 ,
¬(𝑴 ∧ 𝑵) and 𝑷 → 𝑹 ⟹ ¬𝑷.
SOLUTION:
Step No. Statement Reason
1 Rule P
2 Rule T, 1 Simplification
4 Rule P
7 Rule T 2,5 Hypothetical Syllogism
9 Rule P
Rule T 7,10
11
12 Rule P

4.Using rules of inference, show that 𝑺 ∨ 𝑹 is
tautologically implied by (𝑷 ∨ 𝑸) ∧ (𝑷 → 𝑹) ∧ (𝑸 → 𝑺)
Solution:
1 Rule P
2 Rule T 1,
3 Rule T 2,
4 Rule P
6 Rule T 5,
7 Rule T 6,
8 Rule P
10 Rule T 9,
11 Rule T 10,
RULE CP OR RULE OF CONDITIONAL PROOF
In addition to the two basic rules of

inference 𝑷 and 𝑻, we have one more basic
rule called Rule CP, which is stated below:
RULE CP : If a formula 𝑆 can be derived from
another formula 𝑟 and a set of
premises, then the statement 𝑟 → 𝑠
can be derived from the set of
premises alone.
NOTE :
If the conclusion is of the form 𝒓 → 𝒔, we
will take 𝒓 as an additional premise and
derive 𝒔 using the given premises and 𝒓.

5.Show that 𝑹 → 𝑺 can be derived from
the premises 𝑷 → 𝑸 → 𝑺 , ¬𝑹 ∨ 𝑷 and 𝑸.
Solution:
1 Rule P
2 Rule P
3 Rule T 1.2 Disjunctive Syllogism
4 Rule P
6 Rule P
8 S Rule CP.
6.Prove that 𝑨 → ¬𝑫 is a conclusion from the premises
𝑨 → (𝑩 ∨ 𝑪), 𝑩 → ¬𝑨 and 𝐃 → ¬C by using conditional
proof.
Solution:
1 Rule P (Additional Premise)

2 Rule P
4 Rule P
5 B Rule T 1,4 Modus Tollens
7 Rule P
9 D Rule CP
INCONSISTENT PREMISES
• A set of premises 𝑯𝟏 , 𝑯𝟐 , … … … . , 𝑯𝒏 is
said to be inconsistent, if their
conjunctions implies a contradiction.
• (i.e) 𝑯𝟏 ∧ 𝑯𝟐 ∧ ⋯ ∧ 𝑯𝒏 ⇒ 𝑹 ∧ ¬𝑹, for some

formula 𝑹.
• A set of premises is said to be

consistent if it is not inconsistent.
7. Show that the premises 𝑷 → 𝑸, 𝑷 → 𝑹, 𝑸 → ¬𝑹, 𝑷
are inconsistent.
Solution:
Step Statement Reason

1 Rule P
2 Rule P
4 Rule P
6 Rule P
8 Rule T 1,7 Conjunction.
Hence the given premises are inconsistent.

8. Show that the premises 𝒂 → (𝒃 → 𝒄), 𝒅 → (𝒃 ∧ ¬𝒄)
and (𝒂 ∧ 𝒅) are inconsistent.
Solution :
1 Rule P
2 Rule T 1, Simplification
4 Rule P

6 Rule P
11 Rule T 10,9 Conjunction
Hence the given premises are inconsistent.

INDIRECT METHOD OF PROOF
The notion of inconsistency is

used to derive a proof at times. This
procedure is called the indirect
method of proof or proof by
contradiction or reduction.
The technique used in indirect
method:
➢ Introduce the negation of the desired

conclusion as a new premise.
➢ From the new premise, together with

the given premises derive a
contradiction.
9. Use indirect method of proof to derive 𝑷 → ¬𝑺
from the premises 𝑷 → (𝑸 ∨ 𝑹), 𝑸 → ¬𝑷, 𝑺 → ¬𝑹
and 𝑷.
Solution:
By indirect method of proof , first we find negation
of the conclusion and take it as additional premise.
¬(𝑷 → ¬𝑺) ≡ ¬(¬𝑷 ∨ ¬𝑺) (By 𝑷 → 𝑸 ≡ ¬𝑷 ∨ 𝑸)
≡𝑷∧𝑺 (By Demorgan’s law)

4 Rule P
6 Rule P
9 Rule P
10 Rule P

10. Using indirect method, show that 𝑹 → ¬𝑸, 𝑹 ∨ 𝑺
𝑺 → ¬𝑸, 𝑷 → 𝑸 ⇒ ¬𝑷.
Solution:
By inditect method of proof, first we find negation of
the conclusion and take it as additional premise.
¬(¬𝑷) ≡ 𝑷

2 Rule P
4 Rule P
6 Rule P
8 Rule P

1. Find the validity of the following argument:
If the prices of fuel increases then the prices of
commodities increase.
If the prices of fuel increases then oil companies
make profit.
If the prices of commodities increase then oil
companies do not make profit.
Hence the price of fuel does not increase.
Solution:
Let P : The prices of fuel increases.

Q : The prices of commodities increase.
R : Oil companies make profit.
The premises are 𝑷 → 𝑸, 𝑷 → 𝑹, 𝑸 → ¬𝑹 ⇒ ¬𝑷.

1 Rule P
2 Rule P
4 Rule T 3,
5 Rule T 4,
6 Rule P
8 Rule T 7,
9 Rule T 8,
Hence the given argument is valid.

2.Show that “It rained” is a conclusion obtained from
the statements.
“If it does not rain or if there is no traffic
dislocation, then the sports day will be held and the
cultural programme will go on”. “If the sports day is
held , the trophy will be awarded” and “the trophy was
not awarded”.
Solution:
Let P : It rains
Q : There is traffic dislocation
R : Sports day will be held
S : Cultural programme will go on
T : Trophy will be awarded.
The premises are (¬𝑷 ∨ ¬𝑸) → (𝑹 ∧ 𝑺), 𝑹 → 𝑻, ¬𝑻 ⇒ 𝑷
1 Rule P
2 Rule P
4 Rule T 3, Addition
5 Rule T 4, Demorgan’s law
6 Rule P
9 Rule T 8,
Predicate Calculus
• Sometimes it was not possible to express
the fact that any two atomic statements have
some features in common.
• In order to investigate questions of this
nature, we introduce the concept of a predicate
in an atomic statement.
• The logic based upon the analysis of
predicate in any statement is called predicate
calculus.
Example 1:
1) John is a Bachelor.
2) Smith is a Bachelor.
Here “is a Bachelor” is called

predicate.
Denote the predicate by 𝑩, John by 𝒋 and

Smith by 𝒔 .
Therefore, the two statements (1) and

(2) can be written as 𝑩(𝒋) and 𝑩(𝒔).
• In general any statement of the type 𝑷
is 𝑸 where is 𝑸 is a predicate and 𝒑 is the
subject can be denoted by 𝑸(𝒑).
Example 2:
“John is a Bachelor and this painting is

red”.
This can be written in
symbolic form as 𝑩(𝒋) ∧ 𝑹(𝒑) where 𝑩 is a
Bachelor, 𝒋 denote John, 𝑹 denotes red and
𝒑 denotes painting.
Universe of Discourse
The domain (universe of discourse or
simply universe) of a predicate variable is
the set of all possible values that may be
substituted in place of the variable.
The statement 𝒙 < 𝟓 can be denote by
𝑷(𝒙), where 𝑷 is the predicate “is less than
5” and 𝒙 is the variable.
When a particular value is assigned to 𝒙, 𝐏(𝒙)
is a proposition and has a truth value.
Example:
1) 𝐏(𝟐) is 𝟐 < 𝟓, which is true.
2) 𝐏(𝟔) is 𝟔 < 𝟓, which is false.
The statement 𝒙 − 𝒚 = 𝟏 can be denoted by
𝑷(𝒙, 𝒚), where 𝑷 is the predicate and 𝒙, 𝒚 are the
variables.
When particular values are assigned to 𝒙 and
𝒚, 𝑷(𝒙, 𝒚) is a proposition and has a truth value.
• There is another way to get propositions or
statements from predicates which is known
as quantification.
• There are two types of quantifiers
1. Universal quantifier.
2. Existential quantifier.
Universal Quantifier
Let 𝑷(𝒙) be a proposition function with

universe 𝑨. The statement “for every 𝒙 ∈ 𝑨, 𝑷(𝒙) is
true” is the universal quantification of 𝑷(𝒙). It is
denoted by ∀𝒙 ∈ 𝑨, 𝑷(𝒙) or ∀𝒙 𝑷(𝒙).
Note :
The phrases “for every 𝒙”, “for all 𝒙”, “for

each 𝒙” have the same meaning and all these can
be denoted by (𝒙) or ∀𝒙.
∀𝒙 𝑷(𝒙) has a truth value and it is assigned as below
∀𝒙 𝑷(𝒙) is true if it is true for every 𝒙 ∈ 𝑨.
∀𝒙 𝑷(𝒙) is false iff 𝑷(𝒙) is false for atleast one 𝒙 in 𝑨.
Example:
Let 𝑷(𝒙) be the statement "𝒙 < 𝟓“ . What is the
truth value of the quantification ∀𝒙 𝑷(𝒙), where the
universe of discourse is 𝑹 (the set of all real numbers).
Solution: Clearly 𝑷 𝒙 is not true for all 𝒙 , since

𝑷 𝟔 : 𝟔 < 𝟓 is false.
Therefore, ∀𝒙 𝑷(𝒙) is false.

Existential Quantifier
Let 𝑷(𝒙) be a propositional function

with universe 𝑨, if there exists an 𝒙 in 𝑨
such that 𝑷(𝒙) is true, then we write it as
∃𝒙 𝑷(𝒙) or ∃𝒙 ∈ 𝑨 𝑷(𝒙). The quantifier “∃𝒙“
is called the existential quantifier and it
denotes the phrase “there exists”.
Note :
The phrases “there is a 𝒙”, “there is some
𝒙”, “there is atleast one 𝒙”, have the same
meaning as “there exists an 𝒙” and all these
can be denoted by ∃𝐱.
Example:
Let 𝑷(𝒙) : 𝒙 + 𝟐 < 𝟓
The existential quantification of 𝑷(𝒙), ∃𝒙 𝑷(𝒙)
is a true statement because 𝑷 𝟐 : 𝟐 + 𝟐 < 𝟓 is a
true statement.
Free and Bound Variables
• Given a formula containing a part of the

form 𝒙 𝑷(𝒙) or ∃𝒙 𝑷(𝒙), such a part is called
an 𝒙-bound part of the formula.
• Any occurrence of 𝒙 in an 𝒙-bound part of a

formula is called a bound occurrence of 𝒙,
while any occurrence of 𝒙 or of any variable
that is not a bound occurrence is called a
free occurrence.
Further the formula 𝑷(𝒙) either in 𝒙 𝑷(𝒙) or in
∃𝒙 𝑷(𝒙) is described as the scope of the quantifier.
Example :
1) 𝐱 𝐏(𝐱, 𝐲).
𝑷(𝒙, 𝒚) is the scope of the quantifier and all
occurences of 𝒙 are bound occurences, while the
occurrence of 𝒚 is a free occurrence.
2) 𝐱 𝐏 𝐱 →𝐐 𝐱 .
Scope of the universal quantifier is 𝐏 𝒙 → 𝐐 𝒙
and all occurences of 𝒙 are bound.
3) (𝐱)(𝐏 𝐱 → ∃𝐲 𝐑 𝐱, 𝐲 )
The scope of (𝒙) is 𝑷(𝒙) → ∃𝒚 𝑹(𝒙, 𝒚)

while the scope of (∃𝒚) is 𝑹(𝒙, 𝒚).
All occurrences of 𝒙 and 𝒚 are bound

occurences.
1. Give the symbolic form of “Some men
are giants”.
Solution :
Let 𝑴 𝒙 : 𝒙 is a man.
𝑮 𝒙 ∶ 𝒙 is a giant.
The symbolic form is
∃𝐱 𝐌 𝐱 ∧ 𝐆 𝐱 .
2. Give the symbolic form of “All cats have
tails” and “No cats have tail” .
Solution :
Let 𝐂 𝐱 ∶ 𝐱 is a cat.
𝐓 𝐱 ∶ 𝐱 has a tail.
The symbolic form of (1) is
∀𝐱 𝐂 𝐱 →𝐓 𝐱 .
The symbolic form of (2) is
∀𝒙 𝑪 𝒙 → ¬𝑻 𝒙 .
3.Negate the statement : “ Every student in
this class is intelligent” in two different
ways.
Solution :
Form 1 :
There is a student in this class who is not

intelligent.
Form 2 :
It is not the case that every student in this

class is intelligent.
4. Find the truth value of ∀𝒙 𝒙𝟐 ≥ 𝒙 if the
universe of discourse consists of all real numbers.
Also write the negation of the given statement.
Solution :
The truth value of the given statement is False.
For example for the real number
𝒙 = 𝟎. 𝟓, 𝒙𝟐 = 𝟎. 𝟐𝟓 < 𝒙 = 𝟎. 𝟓
Negation of the given statement is
¬ ∀𝒙 𝒙𝟐 ≥ 𝒙 = ∃𝒙 ¬ 𝒙𝟐 ≥ 𝒙 = ∃𝒙 𝒙𝟐 < 𝒙 .
Inference Theory for Predicate
Calculus
• In addition to rules of inference for

propositions, we shall now consider some
important rules of inference for quantified
statements.
• During the course of derivation it may be
necessary to eliminate the quantifiers.
• This is done by rules of specification 𝐔𝐒
and 𝐄𝐒.
• Once the quantifiers are eliminated, we
proceed as in propositional calculus to
reach the conclusion.
• Sometimes we may require to reach the

conclusion in quantified form.
• This is done by rules of generalization 𝐔𝐆

and 𝐄𝐆.
• Rule 𝐔𝐒 :
Universal specification is the rule of

inference which says that we can conclude
𝐏(𝐜) is true for an arbitrary element 𝐜 of
the universe of discourse if ∀𝐱 𝐏(𝐱) is true.
∀𝐱 𝐏 𝐱 ⇒ 𝐏(𝐜) for some 𝐜.

• Rule 𝐄𝐒 :
Existential specification is the rule

of inference which says that there is an
element 𝐜 in the universe of discourse for
which 𝐏(𝐜) is true if ∃𝐱 𝐏 𝒙 is true.
∃𝒙 𝐏 𝒙 ⇒ 𝐏(𝐜) for particular 𝐜.

• Rule 𝐔𝐆 :
Universal generalization is the rule

of inference which says that ∀𝐱 𝐏(𝐱) is true
if 𝐏(𝐜) is true for an arbitrary element 𝒄 of
the universe of discourse.
𝐏 𝐜 ⇒ ∀𝐱 𝐏(𝐱) for an arbitrary 𝐜.

• Rule 𝐄𝐆 :
Existential generalization is the rule

of inference which says that for a
particular element 𝐜 of the universe of
discourse if 𝐏(𝐜) is true then ∃𝐱 𝐏(𝐱) is
true.
𝐏 𝐜 ⇒ ∃𝐱 𝐏(𝐱) for some 𝐜.

1.Prove that ∀𝐱 𝑷 𝒙 → 𝑸 𝒙 ,
∀𝒙 𝑹 𝒙 → ¬𝑸 𝒙 ⇒ ∀𝒙 𝑹 𝒙 → ¬𝑷 𝒙 .
Solution :
1 Rule P
2 Rule US, 1
3 Rule P
4 Rule US, 3
5 Rule T 2, Contrapositive
7 Rule UG, 6
2. Use indirect method to prove that the
conclusion ∃𝐳 𝐐(𝐳) follows from the premises
∀𝒙 𝑷 𝒙 → 𝑸 𝒙 and ∃𝒚 𝑷(𝒚).
Solution :
By using indirect method, we take ¬ ∃𝐳 𝐐(𝐳) as
additional premise.
3 Rule US, 2
4 Rule P
5 Rule US, 4
6 Rule P
7 Rule ES, 6
8 a) Rule T 7,5 Modus Ponens
10 Contradiction
3. Use indirect method of proof to prove that
∀𝐱 𝑷 𝒙 ∨𝑸 𝒙 ⇒ ∀𝐱 𝐏 𝐱 ∨ ∃𝐱 𝐐(𝐱).
Solution :
By using indirect method, we take ¬ ∀𝐱 𝐏 𝐱 ∨ ∃𝐱 𝐐 𝐱 as
additional premise.
4 Rule T 2, Smplification
5 Rule T 3,
6 Rule T 4,
7 Rule ES, 5
8 Rule US, 6
9 Rule P
10 Rule US, 9
14 F Contradiction
4. Prove that ∀𝒙 𝑷 𝒙 → 𝑸 𝒚 ∧𝑹 𝒙 ,
∃𝒙 𝑷 𝒙 ⇒ 𝑸 𝒚 ∧ ∃𝒙 𝑷 𝒙 ∧ 𝑹 𝒙 .
Solution :
1 Rule P
2 Rule US, 1
3 Rule P
4 Rule ES, 3
9 Rule EG, 8
1.Establish the validity of the following argument
All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Therefore
Socrates is mortal.
Solution :
Let 𝑯 𝒙 ∶ 𝒙 is a man.
𝑴 𝒙 ∶ 𝒙 is a mortal.
The premises are
𝒙 𝑯 𝒙 →𝑴 𝒙 ,𝑯 𝒔 ⇒𝑴 𝒔 .
1 Rule P
2 Rule US, 1
3 Rule P
Hence, the given argument is valid.

2. Use of rule of inference to prove that the
premises “ A student in this class has not read
the book” and “ Everyone in this class passed the
first exam” imply the conclusion “Someone who
passed the first exam has not read the book”.
Solution :
Let 𝐂 𝐱 ∶ 𝐱 is in this class.
𝐁 𝐱 ∶ 𝐱 has read the book.
𝐏 𝐱 ∶ 𝐱 passed the exam.
The premises are
∃𝐱 𝐂 𝐱 ∧ ¬𝐁 𝐱 , ∀𝐱 𝐂 𝐱 → 𝐏 𝐱 ⇒ ∃𝒙 𝑷 𝒙 ∧ ¬𝑩 𝒙 .
1 Rule P
2 Rule ES, 1
5 Rule P
6 Rule US, 5
9 Rule EG, 8
3. Verify the validity of the following argument. Every living
thing is a plant or an animal. John’s gold fish is alive and
it is not a plant. All animals have hearts. Therefore,
John’s gold fish has a heart.
Solution :
Universe of discourse : Set of all living things.
𝑷 𝒙 ∶ 𝒙 is a plant.
𝑨 𝒙 ∶ 𝒙 is an animal.
𝑯 𝒙 ∶ 𝒙 has a heart.
𝒈 ∶ John’s gold fish.

The premises are
𝒙 𝑷 𝒙 ∨𝑨 𝒙 , ¬𝑷 𝒈 , 𝒙 𝑨 𝒙 →𝑯 𝒙 ⇒𝑯 𝒈 .
1 Rule P
2 Rule US, 1
3 Rule P
5 Rule P
6 Rule US, 5
Hence the given argument is valid.

Nested Quantifier
• When we consider propositional
functions containing two or more
variables it is possible, quantifiers occur
in combinations with respect to the
variable.
• Nested quantifiers are quantifiers that
occur within the scope of other
quantifiers.
Example: ∀𝒙 ∃𝒚 𝒙 + 𝒚 = 𝟎 .
• This means that for every real number 𝒙
there exists a real number 𝒚 such that
𝒙 + 𝒚 = 𝟎.
1.Express the statement ‘For every ‘𝒙’ there exists a
‘𝒚’ such that 𝒙𝟐 + 𝒚𝟐 ≥ 𝟏𝟎𝟎” in symbolic form.
Solution :
Let 𝑮 𝒙 , 𝒚 : 𝒙𝟐 + 𝒚𝟐 ≥ 𝟏𝟎𝟎
𝒙 ∃ 𝒚 𝑮 𝒙,𝒚 .
2. Let 𝐐 𝒙, 𝒚, 𝒛 denote the statement "𝒙 + 𝒚 = 𝒛" defined
on the universe of discourse 𝒁 , the set of all
integers. What are the truth values of the
propositions 𝑸 𝟏, 𝟏, 𝟏 and 𝑸 𝟏, 𝟏, 𝟐 .
Solution :
𝑸 𝟏, 𝟏, 𝟏 ∶ 𝟏 + 𝟏 = 𝟏 which is False.
𝑸 𝟏, 𝟏, 𝟐 ∶ 𝟏 + 𝟏 = 𝟐 which is True.
3. Symbolize the following statement with and without
using the set of positive integers as the universe of
discourse “ Given any positive integer, there is a
greater positive integer”.
Solution :
(1) Universe of discourse : Set of positive integers.
Let 𝑮 𝒙, 𝒚 ∶ 𝒙 is greater than 𝒚.
𝒙 ∃𝒚 𝑮 𝒙 , 𝒚 .
(2) Universe of discourse : Set of integers.
Let 𝑷 𝒙 ∶ 𝒙 is a positive integer.
𝑮 𝒙, 𝒚 ∶ 𝒙 is greater than 𝒚.
𝒙 𝑷 𝒙 → ∃𝒚 𝑷 𝒚 ∧ 𝑮 𝒙 , 𝒚 .
3.Show that ¬ 𝑷 𝒂, 𝒃 follows logically from
𝒙 𝒚 𝑷 𝒙, 𝒚 → 𝑾 𝒙, 𝒚 and ¬ 𝑾 𝒂, 𝒃 .
Solution :
1 Rule P
2 Rule US, 1
3 Rule US, 2
4 Rule P

Methods of Proof
• Proofs play an important role in the
development of mathematics because they
guarantee the correctness of mathematical
results.
• Mathematical results or computer

algorithms are accepted only when they are
proved by using the various rules of inference.
• Usually, we use two methods of proof in

mathematics.
(1) Direct Proof and (2) Indirect Proof.

• A theorem in mathematics is a true
proposition. Many theorems are implications of
the form 𝑯 → 𝑪, where 𝑯 ≡ 𝑯𝟏 ∧ 𝑯𝟐 ∧ ⋯ ∧ 𝑯𝒏 is a
conjunction of hypotheses and 𝑪 is the
conclusion. Proving a theorem means verifying
𝑯 → 𝑪 is a tautology.
1. Direct Proof :
In direct proof we assume the hypothesis

𝑯𝟏 , 𝑯𝟐 , … , 𝑯𝒏 are true and using the rules of
inference and known facts we prove that 𝑪 is true.
Thus we prove 𝑯 → 𝑪 is true.
2. There are two types of indirect proof :
(a) Proof by contraposition.
(b) Proof by contradiction.
(a) Proof by contraposition :

Proof by contraposition is a very useful and powerful
method.
• It uses the contrapositive equivalence 𝑯 → 𝑪 ≡ ¬𝑪 →

¬𝑯. In this method, we assume the conclusion 𝑪 is
false, then using the rules of inference and known
facts we prove some hypothesis 𝑯𝟏 is also false and
hence 𝑯 is false.
• This means that indirectly the conclusion is true.

(b) Proof by contradiction :
Proof by contradiction is based on the law

of reduction and 𝒑 → 𝒒 ≡ 𝒑 ∧ ¬𝒒 → 𝑭.
ie. 𝑯 → 𝑪 ≡ 𝑯 ∧ ¬𝑪 → 𝑭, where 𝑯 ≡ 𝑯𝟏 ∧ 𝑯𝟐 ∧ ⋯ ∧ 𝑯𝒏 .
In this method, we assume the conclusion 𝑪 is

false and all 𝑯𝒊 are true( ie 𝑯 is true).
Then by using the rules of inference we reach a

contradiction 𝑭. This implies that our assumption
𝑪 is false is wrong.
Thus, indirectly we prove 𝑯 → 𝑪.

1. Give an indirect proof of the theorem
“ If 𝟑𝒏 + 𝟐 is odd then 𝒏 is odd”.
Solution :
If n is even, then 𝟑𝒏 is also even.

When an even number 𝟐 is added, 𝟑𝒏 + 𝟐 is
also an even number.
Hence the theorem.

2.Prove that 𝟐 is irrational by giving a
proof using contradiction.
Solution :
Let 𝑷 be the proposition “ 𝟐 is irrational”.
Suppose that ∼ 𝑷 is true.
Then 𝟐 is rational.
𝒂
So, 𝟐 = , where 𝒂 and 𝒃 have no common
𝒃
factors.
𝒂 𝒂𝟐
𝟐= ⇒ 𝟐=
𝒃 𝒃𝟐
Hence 𝒂𝟐 = 𝟐 𝒃𝟐 .
This means that 𝒂𝟐 is even, implying that 𝒂 is
even.
Furthermore, 𝒂 = 𝟐𝒄 for some integer 𝒄.
Therefore, 𝟐𝒄 𝟐 = 𝟐 𝒃𝟐
𝟒 𝒄𝟐 = 𝟐 𝒃𝟐
⇒ 𝒃𝟐 = 𝟐 𝒄𝟐
This means that 𝒃𝟐 is also even and hence 𝒃 is
even.
Therefore, 𝐛 = 𝟐𝒌 for some integer 𝒌.
Thus 𝒂 and 𝒃 are even.
Hence they have a common factor 𝟐.
This contradicts the assumption 𝒂 and 𝒃 have

no common factors.
Thus our assumption 𝟐 is rational is wrong.
Hence, 𝟐 is irrational.

Books: Discrete Mathematics and Its Applications by Kenneth H. Rosen

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Books: Discrete Mathematics and Its Applications by Kenneth H. Rosen

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BOOKS

• Discrete Mathematics and Its

• LOGIC AND PROOFS

• LATTICES AND BOOLEAN ALGEBRA

• To introduce most of the basic terminologies used in computer

• To understand the basic concepts of combinatorics and graph

• To familiarize the applications of algebraic structures.

• To understand the concepts and significance of lattices and

• Logic is the discipline that deals with

• It provides rules and techniques for

▪ In computer science to verify the

▪ In physical sciences to prove theorems.

▪ To solve multitude problems in our every

• There are two main components of

2. How beautiful is rose?

4. What time is it?

6. Take a cup of coffee.

In the given statements (2), (4) and (6) are not

Statements (1) and (3) are propositions but (5) is not

In otherwords, primitive propositions do not

For example: let p: Today is Monday

(i.e) Rule : F F implies F otherwise T.

• (i.e) Rule : T F implies F otherwise T

If 𝒑 → 𝒒 is the conditional statement, then

(i) 𝐪 → 𝐩 is called the Converse of 𝒑 → 𝒒

(ii) ∼ 𝐩 →∼ 𝐪 is called the Inverse of 𝒑 → 𝒒

(iii) ∼ 𝐪 →∼ 𝒑 is called the Contrapositive

“ If it is raining then I get wet”.

If p and q are propositions the compound

➢ p ↔ q can also be expressed as “ p iff q”

Or “ p is the necessary and sufficient condition for q”

Solution: Let S = ¬(𝑷 ∨ 𝑸) ∧ (𝑷 ∨ 𝑹)

The statement formula in which the order of

➢ A statement formula which is always false

➢ A statement which is neither a Tautology nor a

Solution: Let 𝑺 = 𝑸 ∨ (𝑷 ∧ ¬𝑸) ∨ (¬𝑷 ∧ ¬𝑸)

logically equivalent if P ↔ Q is a Tautology.

▪ We denoted this by 𝐏 ≡ 𝐐 (Or ) 𝑷 ⇔ 𝑸

▪ 𝑷 ≡ 𝑸 if and only if P and Q have the same truth

Hence the given statements are logically equivalent.

Given Statements are 𝑃 → 𝑄 and ¬𝑃 ∨ 𝑄

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)

From column (4) and (5) they are logically equivalent.

Solution: Let s: p → (q → r) and t: (p →q) → (p → r)

If Avinash is not in good mood or he is not

busy, then he will go to New Delhi.

Let 𝒑: Avinash is not in good mood.

𝒓 ∶ He will go to New Delhi.

The symbolic form of the given statement is

football” in two different forms.

Let 𝒑 ∶ Tigers have wings which is a false statement.

𝒒 ∶ Earth travels round the sun which is a true

• We have 𝒑 → 𝒒 So we have a combination of 𝑭→𝑻

• So the truth value of the given statement is T.

≡ ¬(¬𝑷) ∨ (¬𝑸 ∨ 𝑹) (By 𝑷 → 𝑸 ≡ ¬𝑷 ∨ 𝑸)

≡ 𝑷 ∨ (¬𝑸 ∨ 𝑹) (By ¬(¬𝑷) ≡ 𝑷)

≡ (𝑷 ∨ ¬𝑸) ∨ 𝑹 (By Associative law)

≡ (¬𝑸 ∨ 𝑷) ∨ 𝑹 (By Commutative law)

≡ ¬𝑸 ∨ (𝑷 ∨ 𝑹) (By Associative law)

To prove (𝑷 → 𝑸) ∧ (𝑸 → 𝑹) ⟹ (𝑷 → 𝑹), we have to prove that

((𝑷 → 𝑸) ∧ (𝑸 → 𝑹)) → (𝑷 → 𝑹) is a tautology.

𝑷→𝑸 ∧ 𝑸→𝑹 → 𝑷→𝑹

≡ (¬ ¬𝑷 ∨ 𝑸 ∨ ¬ ¬𝑸 ∨ 𝑹 ) ∨ (¬𝑷 ∨ 𝑹) (By Demorgan’s law)