CSC510 Lecture Slides 25/09/2017

Normal Forms
Standard clause forms of expression
 Disjunctive Normal Form (DNF) is disjunction of terms
Propositional Logic whose literals (i.e., P and ¬P) are connected via
conjunction
(cont.)  Conjunctive Normal Form (CNF)is conjunction of terms
whose literals are connected via disjunction
 Conversion to clause forms
 Resolve all , 
Muthukkaruppan Annamalai  Resolve negated compound sub-expressions
mk@tmsk.uitm.edu.my  Apply distributive laws to reduce the scope of ⋁ (or ⋀)

28/3/2017 mk 2

Truth Table and Full DNF

For each pair of propositions, state whether they
are equivalent or not (Use logical axioms)
(P  Q)  (Q  R) and (P  R)
(S  (P  ¬R))  ((P  (R  Q))  S) and
(S  P  Q  ¬R)
 Each row of a truth table describes one combination
of truth values for the variable, represented as a
conjunction of literals, i.e., a minterm
 The logical form of a proposition can be composed
using the minterms corresponding to the true (1)
values of the proposition described by a truth table
 A logical form of a proposition can be expressed in
full DNF as disjunction of minterms
 Truth table is a graphical representation of full DNF

28/3/2017 mk 3 28/3/2017 mk 4

mk 1
CSC510 Lecture Slides 25/09/2017

Proving Validity of Argument Using

Truth Table and Full CNF
theTruth Table
 An argument is a sequence of
 Lets say Y is the conclusion in the Truth statements representing premises
(or hypotheses) and ends with a
Table conclusion statement
P1; P2; … ; Pn
 Write the complement of Y, i.e., Y (in Full
Q
written as P1 ⋀ P2 ⋀ … ⋀ Pn  Q
DNF)
 The truth of the conclusion
 To obtain Y, we complement Y =  (Y) logically follows/ inferred from the
truth of its premises
=Y  An argument is satisfiable if there
is a case when all the premises of
 The resulting expression is Full CNF the argument are true, the
conclusion is also true
e.g. A  ¬B is satisfiable
28/3/2017 mk 5 28/3/2017
 Construct truth table showing the
truth values of all the premises
and the conclusion
 Select the rows in which all the
premises are true
 The argument is valid if for each
of the selected row, the conclusion
is also true
Q. Is A  ¬B valid?
 A valid argument can also be
expressed as a tautology
 An argument is valid if the
conditional proposition
P1 ⋀ P2 ⋀ … ⋀ Pn  Q
is a tautology
mk 6

Consistent Propositions
 A set of propositions are consistent, if there is at least
Are the following arguments valid? one case when the propositions can be true
simultaneously, i.e., the conjunction of the propositions is
satisfiable.
(P  Q)  (Q  R)  (P  R)

Are the following pair of propositions consistent?

(P  Q)  (P  R) 

(P  ¬Q) and (P  Q)
(P  ¬Q), (P  Q) and P

28/3/2017 mk 7 28/3/2017 mk 8

mk 2
CSC510 Lecture Slides 25/09/2017

Consistent Propositions and Two Ways to Demonstrate the

Logical Consequence Validity of Argument
 A conclusion (Q) is a logical consequence of a set of
premises (P1, P2, …, Pn), if whenever all the premises are
consistent (i.e., true simultaneously), the conclusion is true
P1 ⋀ P2 ⋀ … ⋀ Pn ⊨ Q

 An argument is valid if the conclusion is the logical

consequence of its premises
Check the validity of the above argument
 Alternatively, an argument is valid if the premises Hint: Is P1 ⋀ P2 ⋀ … ⋀ Pn  Q a tautology?
together with the ¬conclusion {P1, P2, …, Pn,¬Q} is Is {P1, P2, …, Pn,¬Q} inconsistent?
inconsistent; or the conjunction of the propositions is not
satisfiable, i.e., (P1 ⋀ P2 ⋀ … ⋀ Pn ⋀ ¬Q) is a contradiction
28/3/2017 mk 9 28/3/2017 mk 10

Proving Validity of Argument Using

Truth Table – An Example
 Premise 1: If the violinist plays the concerto, then crowd
will come if the prices are not too high.
 Premise 2: If the violinist plays the concerto, the prices
will not be too high.
 Conclusion: If the violinist plays the concerto, crowd will
come.
Check the validity of the above argument
Hint: Is P1 ⋀ P2 ⋀ … ⋀ Pn  Q a tautology?
Is {P1, P2, …, Pn,¬Q} inconsistent?
Another Example
 If Aminah studies the sciences then she prepares to earn a
good living.
 If Aminah studies the arts, then she prepares for a good life.
 If Aminah prepares for a good living or for a good life then the
years are well spent.
 Aminah’s years were not well spent.
 Aminah didn’t study science or arts.
Using a truth table, prove the above argument is valid.
How many proposition variables are required? How
many cases do we need to consider?

28/3/2017 mk 11 28/3/2017 mk 12

mk 3
CSC510 Lecture Slides 25/09/2017

Propositional Logic Rules of Inference

Yet, Another Example Valid arguments that derive a conclusion from a set of premises
Disjunctive syllogism
 A; B ⊨ A ⋀ B  A ⋁ B; ¬A ⊨ B
A ⋀ B ⊨ A Conjunctive simplification A ⋁ B; ¬B ⊨ A
particularising
Prove the following argument is valid. How A⋀B⊨B
¬A  B; A  B ⊨ B
Dilemma

many cases do we need to consider for this  A⊨A⋁B
Disjunctive addition
generalising

expression? B⊨A⋁B  A ⋁ B; ¬A ⋁ C ⊨ B ⋁ C
Modes ponens Resolution
 A; A  B ⊨ B affirmation  AB⊨AB
¬B; A  B ⊨ ¬A AB⊨BA
(((S  R)  T) )  (Q  R )  (Q  (P  W ))  (P  P ) Modes tollens denial
Conditional simplification
 A  B; B  C ⊨ A  C
Hypothetical syllogism
the most commonly used inferencing techniques are proof by affirmation
(modus ponens) and proof by refutation/ contradiction (modus tollens)
28/3/2017 mk 13 28/3/2017 mk 14

Recap: Proving Logical Equivalence vs. Recall: Proving Validity with

Logical Consequence Resolution Refutation in Prolog
 Applying resolution to show that the negation of a given proposition
 Logical Equivalence (query) to produce a contradiction with the known propositions (facts
P ≡ Q , means Q is logically equivalent to P and rules)
Convert all propositions to CNF
 P  Q is a tautology (P is necessary and
1.
2. Select two clauses with resolvable literals: L and ¬L and eliminate both of them
sufficient for Q) from the resolvant
3. If the resolvent is an empty clause, then a contradiction has been found
4. If not, add the resolvent to the set of clauses and return to (2).

 Logical Consequence  E.g. The following facts and rules are known: P, T, P ⋀ Q  R, S ⋁ T
P ⊨ Q, means Q logically follows from P  Q; and, a query R is given. Show there is a contradiction in a
particular interpretation
 P  Q is a tautology (P is sufficient for Q)

28/3/2017 mk 15 28/3/2017 mk 16

mk 4
CSC510 Lecture Slides 25/09/2017

Resolution is a Rule of Inference Proving with Resolution

 Resolution is a refutation theorem-proving  Given the following rules:

technique If it rains, Salmah brings her umbrella
 Iteratively applying the resolution rule in a If Salmah brings an umbrella, she doesn't get wet
suitable way allows for telling whether a given If it doesn't rain, Salmah doesn't get wet
proposition (query) is satisfiable.
 Prove: Salmah doesn’t get wet

28/3/2017 mk 17 28/3/2017 mk 18

Dealing with Logical Consequences

using Inferential Rules
Adapted from the example on application of deduction (Epp 1993, p. 43)
I am about to leave for office in the morning and discover that I don’t
have my pen. The following statements are true.

 If my pen is on the dining table, then I saw it at breakfast.

 I was writing my diary in the living room or I was writing my diary in the
kitchen.
 If I was writing my diary in the living room, then my pen is on the coffee
table.
 I did not see my pen at breakfast.
 If I was writing my diary in bed, then my pen is on the bed table.
 If I was writing my diary in the kitchen, then my pen is on the dining table.

Where is my pen? Solve the problem using propositional logic.

28/3/2017 mk 19

mk 5