in connection with a definitely related government procurement operation, the U. S. Government thereby incurs no responsibility, nor any obligation whatsoever; and the fact that the Government may have formilated, furnished, or in any way supplied the said drawings, specifications, or other data is not to be regarded by implication or otherwise as in any manner licensing the holder or any other person or corporation, or conveying any rights or permission to manufacture, use or sell any patented invention that may in any way be related thereto.
tERANDUM 9PR
7
ANALYSIS OF THE DECISION RULES IN DECISION TABLES
Solomon L. Pollack
PREPARED FOR:
UNITED STATES AIR FORCE PROJECT RAND
74
POH CDALIORA T A
SANTA MONICA  CALIFORNIA
MEMORANDUM RM3669PR
MAY 1963
ANALYSIS OF THE DECISION RULES IN DECISION TABLES
Solomon L. Pollack
This research is sponsored by the United States Air Force under Project RANDcontract No. AF 49(638)700 monitored by the Directorate of Development Planning, Deputy Chief of Staff, Research and Development, Hq USAF. Views or conclusions contained in this Memorandum should not be interpreted as representing the official opinion or policy of the United States Air Force.
1700
MAIN ST, *
SANTA
MONICA
CAJIFOINIA
by re ducing needs for computer storage and reducing the length of computer running time. Decision tables offer system analysts the potential to eliminate inconsistencies and redundancies among a set of specified decision rules. the author has discussed with many Air Force people the possibilities and advantages of using decision tables to describe complex applications that involve numerous decision rules. this Memorandum develops a theoretical basis for analyzing the decision rules of decision tables in general. Their interest is predicated upon the improvement in communication and documentation that decision tables offer over previous techniques. a framework for describing a set of related decision rules. Over the past year. and to insure completeness of problem statement.iii PIFACE The Systems Group of the CODASYL (Conference on Data System Languages)(1)(2) Development Committee has produced an experimental language.system analysts. This Memorandum will interest a wide reading audience . military and business managers. we must understand the fundamental characteristics of decision rules and their relationships within a decision table. DETABX. (3)(4I) ( that is structured on decision tables. The Air Force. has indicated a strong interest in the tables in order to apply decision rules in such areas as personnel and financial accounting. To realize these and other benefits. may make it The tables possible to have more efficient computer programs. Toward this end. such as flow chart and narrative foxm. mthua~ticians and computer . and of a specific type of table used in DNTABX. in turn.
those readers having a working knowledge of decision tables can move directly to Sec. in the theories advanced here. both of Space Technology Laboratories. The comments of Stanley Naftali and Harley Robertson. The second part states the basic assumptions of the theorems and then provides proofs for each of them. . in two parts.iv programmers may find. California. were extremely useful to the author. the text has been developed The first (Secs. To ease the reader's task. particularly in the early stages of development of the decision table theory. V and VI. specific applications to their own work. V. El Segundo. I through IV) gives background infor mation on decision tables. discusses the implications of the basic theorems developed in Secs. and provides examples to illustrate the relationships among decision rules in a table.
to determine if Decision tables also enable the system analyst of the possible decision rules he has considered all that can be formed from a particular set of conditions. As background for this development. particularly those contain In addition. enable them to insure the following: 1. shortening computer running time. IIV. and decreasing programaing and . This Memorandum develops for decision tables a theoretical structure that serves as the foundation for achieving these benefits. The immediate effect of achieving the above is an improvement in computer programing by reducing the number of computer instructions. that all possible combinations of conditions for the problem have been considered. paper (Secs. ing many complex decision rules. 2. The theorems developed in this VVII) provide a basis for system analysts and programmers Rules are established that to verify the logic of their analysis. that the system does not prescribe different actions for the same situation.V Decision tables. decision rules. decision tables offer system analysts the potential to eliminate inconsistencies and redundancies in each set of specified decision rules and to produce com puter programs that are efficient in the use of computer storage and computer running time. 3. and that the system describes each situation and its actions once only. the author describes a basic structure of decision tables in Secs. a framework for describing a set of related can improve the communication and documentation achievable by previous techniques such as flow charting and narrative descriptions of data processing problems.
This Memorandum provides a basis for having additional decision rules in which a series of actions can be taken if any one of a set of specified conditions is satisfied. redundancies. In the future. 1 The text also presents an extension of decision table theory. This type of decision rule can be extremely useful in editing and information retrieval. and inconsistencies using the rules developed here. we can expect computers to take over the task of checking decision tables for completness. ing areas. Most current decision tables consist of decision rules for which every condition in a set of conditions must be satisfied before a series of actions can be taken.vi debugging time. This extension should prove valuable in many data process .
.. Decision Tables ...............................o........ 9 10 III.............................................................. Limited Entry Versus Extended Entry ............ _...... Decision Tables Containing Simple Decision Rules Only .........................................o............. 10 ..5 Notation and Definitions .................... 33 33 33 34 ANDFUNCTIONS Based on Cl..................... .e I*i v Section I...... Definitions ........................... Structure for ORFUNCTIONS .... Assumptions ...... Cn ............ Redundant Decision Rules ...... Summary of Procedure for Checking Decision Tables for Completeness........... .... . Swnmary in DecisionTable Form of Contradiction and Redundancy ............................... 35 36 36 36 36 38 45 46 4..vii CONTENTS PRFJ ACZ ....................................... o Completeness of Decision Tables ....... ............................................................................ SUM ARY •....... Analysis of Decision Rules Containing ANDFUNCTIONS and ORFUNCTIONS ...... Dependency of ANDFUNCTIONS in a Table .............. Redundancy and Contradictions ... THE USE OF ORFUNCTIONS .............................. 7 .................. 1 BASIC SRUCTURE OF DECISION TABLES ........... Decision Rule Notation ............. Condition Requirements ......... •.. ANDFUNCTION THEORE4S .......................1 13 16 17 20 20 Decision Tables Containing One or More Complex Decision Rules and No ELSEDecisionRule .............. Contradictions and Redundancies Among Decision Rules ........ ANALYSIS OF DETABX DECISICq TABLES ...... e o........ Definitions ........ INTRODUCTION ............................................ IV......................................... 24 25 25 26 V........... Decision Tables VisaVis Flow Charts ............... Definition ..... C2 .............................. Example of Two Independent ANDFUNCTIONS ........o ....... Decision Tables Containing an ELSEDecisionRule .... ... Example of Two Dependent ANDFJUNCTIONS .............. II........ Independence of Conditions .................................... 4 5 5...........
... ................. oo......... 46 46 47 49 49 51 54 Techniques for Discovering the Dependence of ANDFUNCTIONS . . ORFUNCTION THEOREMS .... Consequences of Conversion ........... o ..... REFERENCES .... ........... ............. Decision Table Requirements for DETABX . .................. Complex Decision Rules ............viii Implicit Decision Rules . .. ..................... The ELSEDecisionRule .... 54 56 58 59 65 68 Conversion of an ORFUNCTION to an ANDFUNCTION ..... .......... APPENDIX ooo.. a...................... ........ .....................ooo... ......o........ * ... VI.. ............. .. Example of Conversion ..... .......... .................. ..........*......*.. The ELSEDecision Rule (DL) .............. Extension of DETABX Decision Tables ............. ......... .........
First.6) while the business area has TABSOL(T) . it is hard to insure the specification of the same series of actions These same drawbacks apply in a for a particular set of conditions. Computer languages. The need for faster and better communication and analysis has led to the development of Decision Tables. the charts are difficult to Second. however. it is difficult And fourth. Exmples in the scientific area are FORTAB(5) and STRUCTURE TABLE andA wANGUAGE(. to determine whether the charts cover all possible cases. Decision rules can be written in any language and in any form as long as they are intelligible. has serious defects. structures for describing a set of decision rules. of conditions and actions through the charts. larger degree to the freeform English used to describe the decision rules. in that it is hard to follow the exact path of a series Third. A popular method of expression is by The flow chart technique means of flow charts (illustrated in Fig. 1). one example of such a rule is the policy governing hourly wage earners if an employee works more than 40 hours in one week and is not salaried. instance. adapted for decision tables. they are difficult draw because of the symbols and spacing. to comprehend. a series of actions is taken only when a set of conditions is satisfied. then that employee shall be paid an overtime rate.I. The expression that For describes the conditions and actions is called a Decision Rule. have been developed for describing and processing scientific and business problems. INTRODUCTION Throughout military and business systems.
(no 0o cr o z cr 4. ITtL w I. 0j W (I z 0 .ww 00 Ld a: w m n I. $4 LL.
. the author briefly explains the basic structure of decision tables. and contains no redundant or contradictory rules. *For a fuller description of decisiontable structure and development. As backThe ground for the discussion. this Memo randum describes a set of rules for insuring that each decision table is complete.3System analysts and programmers use decision tables to describe the decision rules for their business data processing systems or for their scientific problems.* and then shows how the theorems apply to a particular decisiontable language. rules described here are based on a collection of decisiontable theorems formulated in the latter half of this Memorandum. DETABX. To assist these specialists. see refs. 8 and 9.
all below are actions. the boxes to the right are called entries. however. Single horizontal lines separate each con Single vertical lines separate each decision rle. .II. All entries above the horizontal double line are The boxes to the left of the ver conditions. Table 1 DECISION TABLE STRUCTURE Decision Decision Decision Decision Decision Decision Rule 1 Rule 2 Rule 3 Rule 4 Rule 5 Rule 6 if and and and  0%o ° _ _ _ _ _ _ then and and  o   The vertical and horizontal double lines divide the table into four major parts. tical double line are called stubs. one that is in general use is described here and illustrated in Table 1. an action is described by what is in a stub and entry below. the tables is universal. BASIC STRUCTURE OF DECISICW TABLES Decision tables contain decision rules. tables can be of maney types. varies depending While the format of decision on the application being described. A condition is described by what is in a stub amd entry above the double horizontal line. The basic structure of Their language. dition and action.
then pay his regular salary. Table 2 SAMLE DECISION TABLE Rule 1 SAIARIEDEWLOYEE HEWSWOCED > 40 PAY N Y OVERTIMERATE Rule 2 N N EGULARRATE Rule 3 Y I REGUlARUSALAR For example. LIMITED ENTI• VERSUS E. the condition in the stub must be satisfied. Table 2 is read this way: Decision Rule 1 states: If employee is not salaried and worked over 40 hours. N (no).EWDED ElVTI• Each horizontal line of a table must be either limited entry sr extended entry. The combination of the contents of the condition stubs and entries specifies a condition that must be satisfied. zontal is read as "if." combining each entry with its stub. Decision Rule 2 states: If employe% is not salaried and worked 40 hours or less. the combination of the contents of the action stubs and entries specifies an action that must be executed." as "and. . Decision Rule 3 states: If employee is salaried. a Y (yes). then pay his overtime rate." The top hori All other single horizontal lines are read The decision The "Y" says The horizontal double line is read as "then. rules are reed down. the "N" says the condition in the stub must not be satisfied. then pay his regular rate.5We interpret Table 1 in this manner. regardless of whether he worked over 40 hours or not. the "I" says the condition in the stub is imaterial. A limitedentry condition line contains the whole or I (immaterial) in each condition in the stub.
limitedentry lines can be converted to extendedentry lines and viceversa.e. DIABX(4)(11) specified by the CODASIL Systems Group.6entry box of that line. An extendedentry line contains part of the condition (or action) in the stub and pert of the condition (or action) in the entry box of that line.. i. It is permissible to have both limitedentry lines and extendedentry lines in the same table. an X (execute) or "" box of that line. but any one line is either limitedentry or extendedentry. For example. the action shall not be executed. line 2 in Table 2 could have been written as follows: HOURSWORKED >40 < 40 20 0 or line 3 in Table 2 could have been written PAY OVERTIMERATE Y  PAY REmULARRATE PAY REGULARSALARY Note: The dash ""   Y Y listed in the stub is to be ignored. For example. lines 1 and 2 in Table 2 are each limitedentry lines. For one effort in this area. A limited entry action line contains the whole (don't execute) in each entry action in the stub. line 3 is an extendedentry line. i.e. is presently under test in the UConcurrent research on extendedentry condition lines is going en. If re quired.. .* A apecial class of decision tables. 10. The remainder of this paper deals only with decision tables that have limitedentry lines in the condition area of the table. signifies that the action limitedentry lines above the horizontal doubleline. see Ref.
Again referring to But first. if an employee hands in a work report on which he states that he is not salaried and he worked 45 hours. The act of coiparing a transaction against each of the rules of a decision table is called testing the decision rules. On a transaction of each salaried greater than 40 or is not. then Rule 1 is satisfied by that work report. Rule 1 is satisfied and Rule 2 is not. referring once more to Table 2. A decision rule is satisfied by a transaction if all the conditions specified by its ANDFUNCTION are identical with the corresponding conditions specified in the transaction. the A•. and the ANDFUNCTION of Rule 3 = YI. either the hours worked is they are greater than 40.FUNCTION of Rule 2 = NN. The next section describes the require ments of DETABX decision tables and the implications on them of the theorems developed in the latter half of this paper. If employee. DECISION RULE NOTATION The ANDFUNCTION of a decision rule is the ordered set of Y. Otherwise.7data processing cmmunity. For example. offer some additional notation. We now define two ANDFUNCTIONS to be dependent if there exists at least one transaction such that both ANDFUNCTIONS are satisfied by that transaction. they are independent. N. or I that appears in the condition entry boxes of that decision rule. if . in Table 2 the AMDFUNCTION of Rule 1 = WY. For example. ANDFUNCTION 1 and ANDFUNCTION 2 are independent. we Table 2.
contains no I. a complex decision rule is one whose ANDFUNCTION is mixed. A mixed ANDFJNCTION contains one or We define a simple decision rule as one whose ANDFU!ECTION is pure.. i. it more I's. Rule 1 and Rule 2 in Table 2 are each simple decision rules. Hence We define a pure ANDFUNCTION as one that contains only Y's and/or N's.e. Rules 1 and 2 are independent.they are less than 40. Rule 2 is satisfied and Rule 1 is not. . Rule 3 is complex.
the actions of the satisfied decision rule are then executed. it is pos sible to satisfy more than one decision rule with a single transaction. Every decision rule must specify at least. ANALYSIS OF DETABX DECISION TABLES In this section. to say "Give every employee an extra holiday. But first. For We discuss these areas subse example.9III.one It makes no sense to say "If employee works overtime and he is an hourly worker. and inconsistencies. redundancy and contradiction of decision rules would require more complex rules than those we now describe. Other computer languages have alternatives to Requirement 2. of them. Requirement 2: Each transaction that tests the decision rules of a decision table must be able to satisfy one. and only one." without specifying any conditions. we use the theorems developed in Sec. FOM!AB tests rules in order starting from the left and working toward the right until one rule is satisfied. quently. With FORTAB then. and the special type of decision tables specified for DETABX to describe how table rules can be analyzed for completeness. however. with the leftmost satisfied rule being executed. Checking FORAB tables for completeness. V. This requirement offers advantages in two vital areas: (1) it insures completeness of decision tables. It is perfectly reasonable. . Requirement 1: action." without specifying at least one action to take if these conditions are met. redundancies. we describe two significant requirements that the CODASYL Systems Group specified for DETABX decision tables. and (2) it reduces contradictions and redundancies among decision rules.
10 CCMPWLITINES OF DECISION TABLES As previously stated. determining if Requirement 2 is satisfied (each transaction satisfies only one rule) requires a further explanation which we shall give by examining decision tables that contain: 1. and only one. Hence a table must specify or Imply 2n independent decision rules in order for there to exist one. (1) every decision rule contains at least one action. and (2) each transaction that tests the table rules satisfies one. One or more complex decision rules and no ELSEDecisionRule. 3. A natural question is "How does one determine that a decision table is complete"? It is easy to satisfy Requirement 1 by verifying But that each decision rule in the table has at least one action. As an example. and only if. decision rule a transaction can satisfy. a decision table based on 3 conditions should contain 23 (or 8) independent ANDFUNCTIONS (see Table 3). Theorem IV states that a table based on n conditions contains exaetly 2n distinct pure A)I•J TXIONS each of which In Independent . Decision Tables Containing Simple Decision Rules Only Theorem V states that there exist exactly 2n independent AMD MUNCTIONS in a table based on n conditions. Simple decision rules only. and only one. An ELSEDecisionRale. decision rule. a decision table is complete if. This means that the table must contain all of the possible independent ANDFUNCTIONS that can be formed from the possibilities listed in the condition stubs. 2.
regardless of whether the condition in .. contain no I's. least one position.. Are they independent? 23 = 8 decision rules.. it says do not execute the action in the Stub. Theorem I states that two ANDFUNCTIONS are independent if. they are independent. one function contains Y and the other function Table 3 CREDIT APPROVAL DECISION TABLE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 CRED3T KC Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N N N N Y N N N Rule PAYEXPJERIECE FAVORABIE SPECIALCLEARANCE OBTAINED N N Y N Y N Y N Y APPROVE ORDER RETURN ORDER TO SALES XXX . and each decision rule contains at least one action.. since in at The table is based en 3 conditions. its ANDFUNCTIONS should contain Yes. if a decision table contains simple deci sion rules only. this occurs for every pair of ANDFUNCTIONS. i. it It does.. t contains N. Table 3 contains simple decision rules only.Rules 1 through 7  which take the sam action.e.. X X X X Note: "X" says execute the action in the Stub. a decision table that is based on n conditions and contains simple decision rules only is complete if it has 2n distinct decision rules.. Decision Tables Containing One or More Complex Decision Rules and No ELSEDecisionRule Table 3 contains several decision rules ... it must contain exactly 2n distinct pure ANDFUNCTIONS. hence.. Therefore.. In summary.11 of every other. In Table 3..
those whose AMDFUNCTIONS contain at least one I. Use Theorem I to show that the ANDFJNCTIONS of Table 4 are independent.. Table 3 can be rewritten as a table which contains simple and complex decision rules. (See Appendix for the statement of all theorems. using Theorem IlI. Rules 1 through 4 of Table 3 we rewrite as complex Decision Rule 1 in Table 4. *The reader. Check that each decision rule contains at least one action. the ANDFUNCTIONS are independent. Hence. Therefore. as an exercise.e. Note that this is true for every pair of ANDFUNCTIONS in Table 4.12one of the stubs has a Y or N associated with it. the procedure described earlier for show ing that Table 3 is complete could be followed thereby deducing the completeness of Table 4.) . Table 4 CREDIT APPROVAL DECISION TABLE Rule 1 Rule 2 CREDIT OK PAYEXPERIENCE FAVORABLE SPECIALCLEARANCE OBTAINED APPROVE ORDER RETURNORDER TO SALES Y I I X  Rule 3 Rule 4 N N Y X  N Y I X  N N N  X Assuming Table 4 as a starting point. i. one function contains Y and the other function contains N. Rules 5 and 6 we rewrite as complex Decision Rule 2. it is possible to reverse the process described above and expand it to Table 3 using Theorem III. Following expansion. 2. can expand Table 4 to Table 3. Theorem I states that two ANDFUNCTIONS are independent if in at least one position. Another preferable procedure' for testing the completeness of Table 4 exists and is presented below: 1.
therefore the ANDFUN=?ION of ELS is equal to the disjunction of (is the equivalent of) ADIUNMCTIOM 4. The ANDIUNCITION of the ELSEDecisionRule is equal to the disjunction of all independent AMDFUNCTIONS not specified or implied by the written decision rules in the table. and 6 of Table 5. The ELSEDecisionRule satisfies this purpose. 3. it is often highly desirable to group as one these decision rules that specify the same series of actions. refer to Theorem VI which states that each decision rule containing an ANDFUNCTION with I in r positions is equivalent to 2r simple decision rules. and 4 of Table 4 are equivalent to 8 simple independent decision rules. Then show that the 4 decision rules in Table 4 imply (or are equivalent to) 8 decision rules. Hence. Since Rules 1. Table 4 is complete. thereby reducing errors and decreasing the anount of computer storage required for the program. Rule 2 is equivalent to 21 (or 2) simple decision rules.13 3. 5. Assume. for example. . to Table 5. This decreases the amount of writing and reduces the amount of computer coding. 5. and 6. that Table 6 is equivalent Then the ELSEDecisienRule (abbreviated ELS) in Table 6 replaces Rules 4. and ( simple decision rule. 2. For this. Decision Tables Containing an ELSEDecisionRule In decision tables based on many conditions. Rule 3 is Rule 4 is equivalent to equivalent to 1 Total 8 simple decision rule. and consequently containing many decision rules. in Table 4: Rule 1 is equivalent to 22 (or 4) simple decision rules.
..... X XX Table 6 DEPRECIATION EXPENSE Rule 1 ASSETPURCHASED PROPERTYCLASS >"A" Y Y Y Y SUM OF DIGITS  2 Y Y T N STRAIGHT LINE  3 N I I I  ELS  PROPERTYCLASS < "J" ASSETNEWWHENPURCHASED COMPUTE DEPRECEXPENSE BY GO TO ASSETLEASEDTABLE WRITE ERRORMESSAGE X  X .. 5 6 T Y T Y T Y N Y N Y N N I I I SUM OF D•GIT•$TRAIGHT  GO TO ASSETLEASEDTABLE WRITE ERRORMESSAGE X ..14Table 5 DEPRECIATION EXPENSE Rule 1 ASSETPURCHASED PROPERTYCLASS 2!"A" PROPERTYCLASS 5 "J" ASSETNEWWHENPURCHASED COMPUTE DEPRECEXPENSE BY 2 T Y Y N LINE 3 4 N T I I I .
Expanding the specified ANDFUNCTIONS of Table 6 results in t = 10 ANDFUNCTIONS shown below. the second. Hence. 5. if t independent AIDFUNCTIONS are specified or implied in a table based on n conditions. and 8 will have N in the first row.16. The above 6 ANDFUNCTIONS were derived by noting that Among the where there are 4 conditions. Hence.6. third and fourth rows are similar. The following are expressed by the ELSE ANDFUNCTION: These are equivalent to the ANDFUNCTIONS of Rules 4. 2n = 2ý . ing at the ist and 2nd row only.11] Y N] . there are 16 AMDFUNCTIORB. 6 of Table 5.1610 .maining 6 ANDFUNCTIONS must have a Y in the first row.[[ N J Therefore. In the second row. The original 10 ANDFUNCTIONS had 2 Y's and 8 N's in the first row. No pair can be equal. the ZLSEDecisionRule is defined as the equivalent of ( 2 1t) decision rules. and and since n = 4. the remaining 6 AIDFUNCTIONS must have 2 Y's and 4 N's. each of whose ADFUNCTIONS are independent of each other and the t specified or implied . 8 will have Y in the first row. the r. 16.15 In the general case. there should be Look .ADFUNCTIONS. ( 2 nt) . Y!! ! N [N . the original 10 ANDFUNCTIONS had 6 Y's and 4 N's.
2. all the rows have been filled in. 2. Rules 1. 6. no"Y" Hence. and 3 must satisfy one and only one rule. This process is completed until A decision table having an ELSEDecisionRule is complete if each decision rule (including EM•) contains at least one action. CONTRADICTIONS AND REZJlDANCIES AMONG DECISION MMLE The preceding discussion on completeness of decision tables assumes that Requirement 2 is not violated. E11 is automatically satisfied. For example. 4. 2. if Rules 1. following discussion assumes that Requirement 1 is not violated. 2 and[y must exist in the 6 ANDFuMCTIONS.16 44 "[Y]~ 44 *j1[t NJ and ~4 [N There exisut only 2 f'Yand. 4. and 3 must be tested first in any order. or if we test Rules 3. and 1W8 represents the remaining decision rules. if they all fail. entry into Table 5 with a transaction is the same whether we test Rules 1. 2. This follows because each transaction Therefore. testing order is immaterial since awy transaction can satisfy only one rule. their DecisionRule must be tested last. and 6 in order. . and 1 in that order. the ElSEAs to rules other than EIW. however. of all the rules in a decision table. Hence. 3. the The decision table contains redundant and/or contradictory rules. are not satisfied. 5. the transaction must satisfy it. It is interesting to note that the ELSEDecisionRule is automatically satisfied when all the specified or implied decision rules are not satisfied. If it is violated. 5. In Table 6.
the decision rule that contains the pure ANDFUNCTION is redundant.Both ANDFUNCTIO0S are mixed. even though they are dependent..17Redundant Decision Rules If Requirement 2 is violated. there exists at least one transaction that satisfies two or rzre decision rules. someone mistakenly repeated a decision rule.One of the ANDFUNCTIONS is pure and the other is mixed: inde There are then two possible Case II . then one of them is redundant. i. both of which can be satisfied by one transaction.. If the two ANDF•JNCTIONS are identical and the sequence of actions specified for Rules 1 and 2 are identical.e. This can be illustrated by looking at Rules 1 and 2 of Table 7. explanations: Case I . refer to Theorem IV. which states that if a pure ANDFUNCTION and a mixed ANDFUNCTION are dependent. For ease of discussion consider Rules 1 and 2. corollary 3. their ANDFUNCTIONS are dependent.e. Since Rules 1 and 2 have the same sequence of actions. . the pure ANDFUNCTION is contained in the canonical form* of the mixed ANDFUNCTION. i. "*The canonical form describes a mixed ANDFUNCTION in pure terms. the AMDFUNCTIONS of two or more decision rules are dependent. For Case I. It is not as apparent that redundancy exists if the two ANDFUNCTIONS are not identical. for ANDFUNCTION 1 and ANDFUNCTION 2 cannot both be pure ANDFUNCTIONS by virtue of Theorem II which states that each pure ANDFJNCTION is pendent of every other pure ANDFUNCTION.
18 Table 7 CREDIT APPROVAL Rule 1 CREDIT OK PAYEXPERIENCE FAVORABLE APPROVE ORDER REFTJRN ORDER TO SALES Rule 2 Y Y X  Rule 3 N Y X  Rule 4 N N  Y I X  X Rule 1 breaks Their ANDFUNCTIONS are dependent (by Theorem I). Table 7 is redundant. The one or more common pure ADFUNCTIONS constitute the redundancy in this case and can be eliminated by removing each redundant comon ANDFUNCTION. if credit is ok. Rule 1 breaks down as follows: Y4 [Y] Y] . ANDFUNCTIONS 1 and 2 are dependent. refer to Theorem IV. approve order. In other words. where both ANDFUNLTIONS Corollary 4. down as follows: X T (1) (2) (3) Hence. which states that if two mixed ANDFUNCTIONS are dependent there exists in their canonical form at least one pure ANDF•/NCTION that is common to both. are mixed. by Theorem I. Rule 2 of Note that (2) is identical to Rule 2. For example. in Table 8. Table 7. Case II.
19Rule 2 breaks down as follows: [I]  [Y N] The common ANDAJNCTION is [_] which can be eliminated from Rules 1 anM 2. Eliminating it from Rule 2 produces the redundancyfree Decision Table 9. In Table 9. the number of independent decision rules is 21+ 1+1 4. by eliminating a redun dant decision rule. Table 8 CREDIT APPROVAL Rule 1 CREDIT CK PAYEXPERIENCE FAVORABLE APPROVE ORDER RETURN ORDER TO SALES Y I X  Rule 2 I Y X  Rule N N  3 X Table 9 CREDIT APPROVAL FRule 1 CREDIT QCK PAYEJCERIENCE FAVORABLE APPROVE ORDER Y I X  Rule 2 N Y X  Rule 3 N N  RETRN ORDER TO SALES X . Note that there are 5 decision rules in Table 8 (21+ required 21+ 1 = 5) which is more than the 4 = 22(2 conditions).
it is difficult to recognize The each decision rule. reader has no way of determining whether a particular decision has been omitted from the chart.20Sumary in DecisionTable Form of Contradiction and Redundancy All possible contradiction and redundancy situations can be sa=marized in decision table form by representing all pairs of decision rules In a decision table by Rules 1 and 2 whose ANDFUNCTIONS are AFI and AF2 respectively. . Table 10 is complete because each decision rule has at least one action (passive) and the ANDFUNCTIONS of the decision rules are independent of each other. 11Bi. 1). and IIC contain no contradictory or redundant decision rules. thus making the satisfaction by certain transactions impossible. and whose series of actions are Al and A2 respectively. decision rules. l1B. is should be 25 = 32 independent decision rules. in the tables each rule is clearly defined. This is shown in Table 10. and 11C. In the flow chart. Any redundancies and contradictions among the decision rules in a table can be located using Theorem I. there Table 10. 1 are written into Tables 11A. this cannot be determined from the flow chart (see Fig. the decision rules diagrammed in Fig. then. DECISION TABLES VISAVIS FLOW CHARTS To illustrate some advantages decision tables have over flow charts. the ELSEDecisionRule will reject it as an error. There are 24 + 22 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 23 = 32 Since the table is based on five conditions. Tables 11A. The first time a transaction tests a deci sion table and does not satisfy one of the specified decision rules. complete.
4 Z Z 6NH cm I Z WN 0        vi IN IN Z IN IN H IN H I ~iN a Cu I a a I ~~~c to ý 1 11 H  I to F .21 ~~4 H 4 ~Z >4 >.
Lr N* >4 4 H H H HH HH H >4 ý H I >4 >.4H >4 i4H 4 H H H 8I H~E HH~4 H ~ H I I H s 0 ý4ý4H ar . H ýH H H H H H H H m u sI04 s e I O~Z H H H4 z H H I .22 co Ot z 4 H H.
in a decision table. the decisions in a flow chart must be tested in the order in which they appear. the decisions can be tested in any This enables prograuers to consider the relative frequency .23 Table 11B SUBSTITUTION AND ALLOCATION PROCEDURE FOR HANDLING REQUESTS Rule 1 Rule 2 PRIORITY Rule N I  3 < 3 Y N X  Y Y  ? ROINDER UNFILLEDT ISSUE AS MUCH AS POSSIELE FROI > 1 IM GET NEXr REQUEST GO TO TABLE A Table 11C x X X X X SUBSTITUTION AMD ALLOCATION PROCEDURE FOR HANDLIN3 REQUESTS Rule 1 2 APPROPRIATE SUBSTITUTE? INTERCHANGEABLE OR REQUESTED ITEM? IAST ITEM? LAST SUBSTITUTE? Y N 3 4 5 6 7 I Y N I Y 8 9 ELS N I Y Y  N N N Y Y Y Y I N I I N N N Y Y YI I I I I  N Y I INTERCHANGEABLE? PRIORITY = 5 BACKORDER & UPDATE REEST GET N REQUEST I II I I N N Y I I I I I I I  N N Y X  X GO TO TABIE A BBA B A A B A Erro To further compare the two. order. except for the ELSEDecisionRule.
the table has not specified all possible This can be corrected by either or allowable decision rules. a. check to see if the decision table contains an ELSEDecisionRule. Then the decision table contains =2 r+2 ++ 2rM +2 m independent decision rules. Suppose Rules 1. b. missing decision rules). If N is less than 2n. . 2. Be sure every pair of ANDFUNCTIONS is independent by verifying that in at least one position of each pair there exists a Y in one function and an N in the other. either specify the action(s) or remove the decision rule. 2. If N is greater than 2n.. SUMMARY OF PROCEDURE FOR CHECKING DECISION TABLES FOR CQWLE8TEIRESS. r . After all contradictions and redundancies have been deleted and all decision rules have at least one action. m contain rl r 2 .. all redundant or contradictory rules have not been eliminated. 4. when policy changes occur. If the decision table contains no ELSEDecisionRule.24 with which transactions satisfy decision rules and should lead to more efficient computer programs. it And finally. 3. count the I's in each decision rule. . inserting an ELSEDecisionRule. checking which of the 2 n independent decision rules are missing from the table and inserting them (see page 15 for method of finding missing ANDFUNCTIONS. N should equal 2 n. REDUNDANCY AND CONTRADICTIONS 1. For each pair that is dependent. and hence. If the table contains n independent conditions. is easier to correct each of the affected decision rules than it is to correct a series of interconnected flowchart boxes. the table is complete and contains no contradictions or redundancies. If it does. Where no action is specified. Be sure that each decision rule contains at least one action. . and the analyst should go back to step 2. refer to Table 10 to determine where redundancy or contradiction exists and take appropriate steps to correct this deficiency.
Rule 3 says that if field is not numeric or the number of chwracters is greater than 7.25IV. otherwise continue processing. go to error procedure. and/or a decimal point is missing. operators. This decision rule is not con cerned with whether or not the 5th character is a decimal point. . then it is invalid and an error procedure must be executed. need decision rules that specify a series of actions if any one of a number of conditions is satisfied. those that have conditions connected by inclusive "OR" effect is to ignore the conditions). Where I in the ANDFUNCTIONS says "immaterial" (having the same effect as Y or N). by decision rules containing ANDFUNCTIONS. For example. THE USE OF ORFUNCTIONS Many data processing areas. 0 in the ORFUNCTIONS says "immaterial" (here the i. While this can be handled it generally requires a great deal of writing that could be eliminated if it were possible to connect condition requirements with an inclusive "OR" stead of the "AND" operator used in ANDFUNCTIONS.e. Table 12 depicts these decisions in DETABX form.. The decisions described in Table 12 are now shown in Table 13 with the ORFUNCTION to the right of the rightmost double vertical line and above the double horizontal line. in Table 14. STRUCTURE FOR ORFUNCTIONS We can illustrate the structure and features of ORFUNCTIONS by using an input editing example. such as editing and information retrieval. A double vertical line separates the decision rules that have ANDFUNTIONS from those that have ORFUNCTIONS. in has more than 7 characters. If a particular field is not numeric and/or operator.
26 Table 12 INPUT EDIT Rule 1 FIELD IS NUMiERIC NO. However. ANALYSIS OF DECISICO RULES COyIAIIN3 AtIDFUNCTIONS and ORFUNCTIONS Decision table Requirements 1 and 2 specified earlier for ANDFUNCTIONS continue to apply to ORFUNCTIONS. GO TO ERROR PROCEDURE Y N Y  N Y N X  CONTINUE PROCESSING X The ELSEDecisionRule still appears as the rightmost rule. CP CHARACTERS > 7 5th CHARACTER = DECIMAL PT. GO TO ERROR PROCEDURE CONTINUE PROCESSING iRule 2 Rule 3 Rule 4 Y Y I X  N I I X  Y N N X  Y N Y  X Table 13 INPUT EDIT Rule 1 Rule 2 FIELD IS M14ERIC NO. and represents the remainder of the 2n possible independent rules that have not been specified or implied in the decision table (see Table 15). the criteria for determining the . of CHARACTERS > 7 5th CHARACTER = DECIMAL PT. the definition given for dependence and independence of ANDFUNCTIONS applies equally well to ORFUNCTIONS. Also.
Table 14. fore. the ORFUNCTION of Rule 2 has no 0. and when an ORFUNCTION and an ANDFUNCTION are dependent.20) = ( 2 n . Table 14 IMT EDIT Rule 1 Rule 2 Rule 3 FIED IS NUMERIC NO. and ORFUNCTION 3 is equivalent to (2n 2) pure ANDFUCriONs. it is necessary to state when ORFUNCTIONS are dependent. . GO TO ERROR PROCEDURE INSERT DECD4AL POINT Y N Y  Y N N  N Y 0 X  X CONTINUE PROCESSING X X  Theorem VI' states that an ORFUNCTION that contains 0 in r positions is equivalent to ( 2 n 2 r) pure ANDFUNCTIONS. In order to make checks on completeness. Therefore r (2 n . for example.2 1) = 1.27 dependence of a pair of ORFUNCTIONS or the dependence of an ANDFUNCTION and an ORFUNCTION are different from those previously described. the rules for counting ORFUNCTIONS differ. and ORFUNCTION 2 is equivalent to ( 2 n . redundancy. In another example. There In Table 13. OF CHARACTERS > 7 5th CHARACTER = DECD4AL PT. the ORFUNCTION of  Rule 3 has one 0. the following sections are confined to explaining the equivalence relation between ORFUNCTIONS and ANDFUNCTIONS. r = 0. Because the completeness of decision tables in terms of ANDFUNCTIONS was described earlier. Also.1) pure ANDFUNCTIONS. where 0 ! r < n. and contradictions described earlier for decision tables containing AND FUNCTIONS.
in Table 14. or both contain an N. both contain a Y. pendent. Con Requirement 1 is satisfied. ANDFUNCTION 1 and ORFUNCTION 3 are inde Similarly. ANDFUNCTION 1 and ORFUNCTION 3 do not both contain a Y. ANDFLIMTION 2 and ORFUNCTION 3 are independent. Table 16 corrects this dependence and shows all the ANDFUNCTIONS and ORFUNCTIONS as independent. For example. we note that ANDFUNCTION 1 and ORFUNCTION 5 are dependent because for the condition "PropertyClass > 'J"'. also there is no I in ANDFUNCTION 1. and the latter has a Y. or an N in both. III of this paper. ANDFUNCTION 1 has an I and ORFUNCTION 5 has a Y. ANDFUNCTION 2 and ORFUNCTION 5 are dependent because for the condition "PropertyClass < 'A"'. Also. or there exists an I in the ANDFUNCTION and a Y or N in the ORFUNCTION. nor do they both contain an N. states that an ANDFUNCTION and an ORFUNCTION are in at least one position.and ORFUNCTIONS can now be tested according to the procedures specified in Sec. every decision rule has In checking all pairs of ANDFUNCTIONS and OR at least one action.28Theorem I' states that two ORFUNCTIONS are dependent if. in at Other least one position. Therefore. they are independent. wise. there exists a Y in both. FUNCTIONS for dependence. Otherwise they are independent. the former has an I. sider Table 15. Theorem I" dependent if. Decision tables containing AND. Counting the number of ANDFUNCTIONS specified or implied in Table 16 we derive the nunber of decision rules contained therein . on lines 1 and 2.
29 0 co GL >S 4 ý4 S I 6 N I 1~~ E1 d H ~ 0 P04 30 ORid 0 ti a 0 1 9t' v.um A4 .
30 C\ E4) Z Z H E 4 4) .
we develop the theorems on dependence of ANDFUNCTIONS and ORFUNCTIONS as well as the theorems on number of functions and decision rules contained within a decision table. In the next sections.31 AWDFJNCTION 1 implies 2 AMDFUNCTION 2 implies 21 ANDEUNCTION 3 implies 21 ANDFUNCTION 4 Implies 21 = 2 = 2 = 2 = 2 = 24 ORFUNCTION 5 implies (2523) TOPAL 32 decision rules. Since there are 5 conditions. the required number of decision rules is 25 = 32. . the ELSEDecisionRule is not necessary and Table 17 illustrates the correction. taining independent ANDFUNCTION). Having specified the 32 decision rules (each pair conthe decision table is then complete. Consequently.
32 cc) 19L~~ > 4 IX H~~~W 4 I T9 @0 C)n Go .
Cn.33V. C2 . <.. consists of two oper1 ands and a relational operator (=. C2 . then S= Note that the components of S represent the truth value of the corresponding conditions for a given set of values of the condition variables. 2. We begin our development of deciAMDFUNCTION THEOMW4S siontable theory by assuming there exist n conditions. S. each of which can be either true or false. For example. a 1 signifies that Ck is true. c4 = (z ! 0) and if the condition variables have the following values: (1001). . status (true or false) of the n conditions. a 3 . Y = 3. C1 . Let S = (al. Cn each of which can be either true or false at any point in time. J). C2 = (x = 3). an) where a= 0 or 1. ASSUMPTIONS Every decision table is based upon a set of conditions.. .. z. V(Ck) denotes the truth value of Ck Independence of Conditions Each of the n conditions. C3 = (y > 4). z = 1. if I have four conditions: C1 = (w < 3). Examples of conditions 1. >.. One operand must be a condition variable and the other must be a condition variable or a constant. while a 0 in the same position algnifies that Ck is false. c C (x 5) (x >y) .. !. a 2 .. CY. . w = 2. represent the In the kth position of S. . x = 5. C .
Y). IfCk=(Y<5) and Ce = k 5). Ni that signifies CI must not be satisfied .3. (x . are dependent if variables. Otherwise. Yi that signifies Ci must be satisfied. 2. Condition Requirements For each Ci. c= (13=x) "4. 3. IfCk=(X<5) and Ce Ck = (X < 7). we assume that the tables are based on n independent conditions.. For the remainder of this paper. If Ck = (X z Y) andC. are dependent since for any X < 5. Examples 1. c=(Y=12) . and if both contain the same condition these variables have at least one set of values such  that V(Ck) = 1 and V(Ce) independent. we can specify one of the following requirements: 1. Ck and Ce are independent since there exists no value of Y such that V(Ck) .1. ck and Ce are dependent since for X .  1 and V(Ce) 1.1 and V(Ce) .Y. conditions Ck and Ce are 1. V(Ck)  and C. 2. Conditions Ck and C.1 and V(Ce)  1. V(Ck) .
1. n. S  (1 1 0 1 0) satisfies B).35 where "" signifies "not. ". ANDFUNCTIONS as a table. C2 .ij . .• ... it is immaterial what values the condition variables of Ci assume." will be the Boolean "AND" operator. . . Ni. In addition.Cn Let W be a variable that represents Y. We denote the set of 3 (2) T Let V(Bj) denote the truth value of Bj. J = 3n. ANDFURNCTIOS BASED ON Cl. Then V(Bj) = 1 or 0.. depending An AND on whether or not all of the n requirements of Bj are met.N5 and S = (1 1 variables. 0 1 To illustrate. "0"will be the Boolean "EXCLUSIVE OR" operator.. 1i that signifies either Ci must or must not be satisfied.  represents one of three requirements. fine an ANDFUNCTION We now de (1) Bj WW 2j*w3 j ." 3. B M Y . i = Wn. however. FJUNCTION is satisfied if its truth value is 1. 2. Wnj Since each Wi.Y . or I. suppose 0) for a given set of values of the condition  Then V(B4) 1. i M Yi + Ni where + denotes the Boolean "INCLUSIVE OR" operator.. If Ii has been specified. If. N3.
0. both V(B5) .1.(1 0 1 0). then V(%) = 0.N. there exists no set of  values of the condition variables such that both V(Bk) 1 and V(Bt) = 1. 8 ae dependent. 0 1 1 0).1 v(B8) . both V(Bk) = 1 and V(Bt) = 1.YN Then for that set of values of the condition variables that yields S .. i. For this set of values. Example of Two Dependent ANDFUNCTIONS Suppose and B = YI'N2" 3" 4 (Note: 14 = Y4 + NO)' 4 B8 . Otherwise.y 3•Y *N Y 3*Y N 5 2 4 5 The only set of values of the condition variables for which V(B 3 ) is the one that yields S = (1 V(B7 ) a = 1.e.36S = (0 1 0 1 0) for another set of values of the condition variables. Hence B3 and variables such that both V(B 3 ) are independent. Therefore there exists no set of values of the condition 1 ad V(B 77) 1. Bk and Bt are independent.YN. Example of Two Independent ANDFUNCTIONS Suppose and 7 B3 = Y1 . . DEPENDENCE OF ANDFJNCTIONS IN A TABLE Definition The ANDFUNCTIONS Bk and Bt are dependent if for at least one set of values of the condition variables. Be5 a Bndaer.
where B and B Let B r and B s be two AMDFUNCTIONS in T. N.. i. Wn. Bp =1 YI2 then where Bq d 'Nd+l d+e Id+e+l n I'I2. Br and B are independent.s..e.. in at least one position. P Suppose Y exists in the first d positions.e. one function contains Y and the other Otherwise. theorem.... N in the next e positions. contains N. they are dependent. Br Bs rW r .(i 1 .37Within a Table. k nlrnr is 2s . V(B) =0. I'Id+1 .1 d• 0 0 0 Ad+e+l Ad+e+2 A) Where AJ = 1 if W Y .. suppose B and Bq are two ANDFUNCTIONS p in T. We will show that B and Bq are dependent. contains a Y in at least one position. contains an N in that same position...Wns W The only possible sets of values of the condition variables that can enable V(Br) to equal 1 are those that result in S's that have a 1 in the kth position. and an N in the other. I in the next (nde) positions of Bp.. Proof of Theorem I.. or I 0 !d n o!e_5n for S ....+eIWd+&+l .. This proves the first part of the To prove the second part.W W= Y. and in every position of each there does not exist a Y in one. With every one of those sets of values. two ANDFUNCTIONS are independent Theorem I. if. say the kth position.. i.
. .5. Definitions A pure ANDFUNflION is one that has exactly n terms.YI'N2"N3NY4"Y5 is a pure ABDFUNCTION. or I S= d+e+l.m'Znm *We will show later how a mixed AMDFUNCTION containing om or more I's can be expanded into a mixed AND1WL'ION containing a combination of pure ARDFUNCTIONS.z a *mz 3*znl. for n .0 if Wj = N. N appeanr the remaining (nde) positions. 2 G0P 3 "* Within a Table T.P .. for example A mixed ANDFUNClTION either. Let Let Z be a variable that represents Yi i Pm = Zl'Za'~ . We can apply the same logic where Y appears in any e positions. signify a pure ANDFUNCTION. n both V(B) 1 and V(B) q 1 for all possible values of d and e. P will For example. BP and Bq are dependent. each of which is either a Y or an N. d+e+2. each pure A=IFUNCTION is inde pendent of every other pure AhDFUNCTICU. nlm 2nz 1. 1) contains ene or more I's.. all connected by "EXCLUSIVE OR" operators. Proof of Theorem II. . for eample "XWP ®P Theorem II. In the remainder of this paper. A mixed ANDFUJCTION is one that is not pure. M N*Y Y 12 3 I 4 NN5 6 or 2) is expressed as a combination of pure AIDFUNCTIONS.38and Ai . or N. P . Hence... It will be signi fied by M in the remainder of this paper. and I appears in in any d positions.
there exists exactly Each of the remaining (3n .. 2. s = 1. Proof of Theorem III. and P contains Yk. Let ZMt be a variable that represents Ym . Corollary to Theorem II. say the kth position. 2n. is mixed. Theorem III. EB where P1 ' P 2 '  ' P 2 n are the only pure ANDFUNCTIORS of T. Either Pr contains Yk . Then P and P This is true for all pairs of AIMFUNCTIONS of 3. . 5. . 3. k or. p r and P s differ from each other in at least one position. Pr contains 6. 7. 2. 2n pure ANDFUNCTIONS. and Ps contains 7k.2n) ANDFUNCTIONS in r positions (1 r r < n) can be expanded into a canonical form that consists of 2r pure ANDFUNCTIONS each connected by an exclusive "OR" operator Q®). are independent (by Theorem I). and there exists 2.. and Theorem II is proved. or N. Consider all the pairs (Pr' Ps) of Table E r i . The form of a mixed ANDFUNCTION that contains I Within a Table T.Since Z represents one of two requiranents. r j s 4. 2n. m a subtable of T P1 2n] SP2  2n.
.n Let 1..(Y + N r)*Zr~lt*Znt] Repeating this expansion (r . we get a tree effect where an "AND" operator connects each element in a line to the next and an inclusive "OR" operator connects each line across to the next. Mt =(Yi + N )'(Y 2 + N 2 ). 3.t . r + 2. . nt An accepted theorem in Boolean logic is (R + S)'T = R. Mt= [Y1 Y2+ + N 2 ). Mt 1i'12 rl. r+. (Yr. 4..T + S'T.t [Nj (Y 2 + N2 ) 1 CT.t' Zr+2.1) times. r nt IY+N..Ir.40 m= r + 1.. Applying this theorem to the 1st term of 3.1 + Nrl)'(Yr + Nr) 1 • r+lt .zr lt*.(Yr + Nr). 2.
N / \ IN .t*Zr+2.% Zr l tzr 2 t . ...t y3.t* Z z .~2.. ' .I* 3 = 5.~.. .y / N r*Zr4... *n..t n't Yi . e N2 o 3..t r+2. tr +l r +2t *~ l . r r+i..
Corollary 2 of Theorem III. 1. pure ANDFUNCTIONS of T. every mixed ANDFUNCTION that is dependent upon each of 2r contains I in r positions (i i r < n) Theorem IV. U. The logic used in this proof can be applied for I appearing in any r positions.P2r are each independent of each other. form. APq Hence. we can expand M to its canonical I in r positions.42of Pr Since Yi and Ni appear in r positions.)P2r vhere P1 ' P2' ""' P2r are all . The theorem is therefore proved. Mt consists pure ANDFUNCTIONS connected by " Mt = P1 + P2 + P3 + "'" + P2r where Pip P 2 ' ""' P 2 r are all contained in T. Let M be a mixed ANDFUNCTION that contains Then. We showed this theorem to be true when I appears in the first r positions. P q) there exists no set of values of the condition variables. Pl 9. P1' P2 I . M . Within a Table T. Mt = 10. 8. (by Theorem II). The canonical forn of a mixed AND FUNCTION contains at least two pure ANDFUNCTIONS. such that both V(Pr) = 1 and v(r ) = 1. P2 ®®P 2r. FUNCTION contains an even number of pure ANDFUNCTIONS. For every pair of (p . The canonical form of a mixed AN) Corollary 1 of Theorem III. 7. Proof of Theorem IV.P+1) P2 ®P 3 ®. 6. 1 ! r ! n.
M is dependent upon each of 2 r pure ANDFUNCTIONS of T. V(M) = 1. if P2EaP3nDPd•P8(ZP9(DPI2.%. Within a Table T. A mixed ANDFUNCTION is dependent on each of the pure ANDFUNCTIONS contained in its canonical form. For example. Proof of Theorem V. 2. there exists at least one pure ANDFUNCTION in their canonical forms that is common to both. and only one. If two mixed ANDFUNCTIONB are dependent. set of 2n independent ANDFUNCTIONS. M and P 2 are dependent.143 contained in T. M and P 2 r are dependent. the canonical form of the mixed function contains the pure function. M3 = PI then M1 and M3 are dependent since P2 is common to both. Corollary 2 of Theorem IV. M andP1 are dependent. 1. . based on n conditions. Table T. 1.. Corollary 3 of Theorem IV. = I. 3. Corollary 1 of Theorem IV.. When AP 1 ) When = (by Theorem III). Two mixed ANDFUNCTIONS are dependent if their canonical forms each contain one or more pure ANDFUNCTIONS that are common to both. V(M) = 1. . . contains one. When V(P 2 r) = 1. . there exists exactly 2n pure AIDFUNCTIONS (by corollary to Theorem II). Theorem V. S= 1P20P5 OP6®Pll0P13. If a pure ANDFUNCTION and a mixed AIDFUNCION are dependent. •M) = 1. Corollary 4 of Theorem IV.
where t > 1. cannot contain 2 n independent ANDFUNCTIONS (by Corollary 1 to Theorem IV). Now. ANDFUNCTIONS. T. Since there are exactly 2n pure ANDFUNCTIONS in T. since t 1 0. 8. *1) For each t. In each of these sets of R. we consider all the remaining sets of 2 Thus.* 5. 3. 1 ! t ! 2 n. ANDFUNCTIONS 4. 9. 6. The 2n pure ANDFUNCTIONS are independent of each other (by Theorem II).442. The set of 2 n pure ANDFUNCTIONS Is not in R. let there be t mixed ANDFUNCTIONS and ( 2 n  t) pure ANDFUNCTIONS. Those sets of R containing one or more pairs of mixed ANDFUNCTIONS that contain one or more pure ANDFUNCTIONS common to both. there exists one set of 2n independent n ANDFUNCTIONS that can be formed from the 3 in T. In each of the sets of Q. there exists at least 2n pure ANDFJNCTIONS. the canonical form of the t mixed functions contains at least 2t distinct pure functions (by Corollary 2 of Theorem III). to show that this is the only set of 2 n independent i 2n ANDFUNCTIONS. We therefore look at the Domain Q of R that comprises all those sets of R that contain no pairs of mixed ANDFUNCTIONS whose canonical forms contain pure ANDFUNCTIONS common to the pair. at least one of them is repeated within each set of Q. In each set of Q. we form all the possible sets of 2n ANDFUNCTIONS. t + 2t= 2n t 2) . Denote their domain as R.
again J . This violates 6 above. each of which can be true All notation previously described applies here. Let D3 denote Decision Rule J. A denote the entire series of actions in D Then A a a2j Ca3J ( . . a3 denote one action in D. The symbol "C)" signifies the Boolean "AND.*.4510.e. there exists at least one pure ANDFUNCTION in every set of Q.t) pure ANDFUNCTIONS where 1 ! t < 2n. 11. and . There exists no set in Q that contains 2n independent ANDFUNCTIOI.3n. there exists a pair of dependent ANDFUNCTIONS (by Corollary 2 of Theorem IV). the pair of identical pure ANDFUNCTIONS (see 9 above) exists as one of the functions and as part of a mixed function. C2. i. . We now consider the general case of a decision table based on n independent conditions.. C1 . DECISION TABLES Notation and Definitions Let us now turn our attention to decision tables. Hence. C3 . 14. Cn. there exists at least one pure ANDFUNCTION comnon to one pair of the 2n mixed ANDFUNCTIONS in every set of Q." that . In every set of Q. Q then contains all sets of t mixed and ( 2 n . If t = 2n. The actual number ans kinds of conditions vary from table to table.. We assume that each table is based upon a number of independent conditions. 1 or false. 12. in every set of Q. 13.
Complex Decision Rules Theorem VI. A decision rule is contains a mixed ANDFUNCTION in noncano" 4 ^al form. unless otherwise stated. Implicit Decision Rules Decision rules can be implied in a decision table by one of two types of decision rules. V(B) = 1. . = P 1 complex if it A 1 + N2 + N3 + Y4 + N5' is a simple decision rule. Proof of Theorem VI.A says.. specifies actions a l. the words "decision table" will refer to both the structure and the expression.146. if PI = then D. For example.. must be executed serially. at. Let Dk = . For example.Ak where Mk contains I in r of its positions. either complex decision rules or ELSEdecisionRules. if M1 then D1 = MH1 1 1 + N2 + Y3 + N4 + Y ' 5 A1 is a complex decision rule.. "If a2j) . A comlex decision rule that contains I in r positions of its ANDFUNCTION is equivalent to 2r simple decision rules. D j Bi . 1. 1 ®Dq q !3 Hereafter. execute actions AJ" A decision table is a structure for describing the expression DT = D()D 2 ® (Dq. Definitions A decision rule is simple if it contains only one pure ANDFUNCTION.
A•7 2. For example. Dk 5. actions AL are executed when a particular set of values of the condi tion variables yields a truth value 0 for each of the s simple rules and the c complex rules. One reason for using the ELSEDecisionRule (ELS) is to avoid having to write a set of rules that each contain the same series of actions. suppose there are two conditions CI and C2 such that if both are satisfied we want to execute actions A. A A)" 3. Ak) (P 2 Ak)E"®(P r 2 2r Hence Dk is equivalent to simple decision rules. implies 2r I in r positions of its ANDyUNCTION simple decision ruleL The ELSEDecisionRule (DL) DL = EWE AL If a decision table contains s simple rules and c complex rules.Ak. Dk 4. it would be written as follows: D C1I Y IY 12 D D D 3 4 N N C2Y A 1 N Y A 2T22 N A A . ®P 2r (by Theorem 111) (P 1 (P 1 ®2EP2r) . A complex rule that conta. •k Pl®EP2 ® .. otherwise we want to execute actions A Without the ELSEDecisionRule....
. 14 times the hrs. For example. He therefore sets up the following: Table 18 EMPLOM SALARYHOURS F HrsWorked >_ 0 Y D D2 D3 DL  y Y HrsWorked HrsWorked HrsWorked OvertimeHrs SalaryHrs = _< 40 _< 50 _< 60 = Y I I 0 HrsWorked  N N N Y I HrsWorked  Y 40 HrsWorked . worked Although it is inconceivable that any one in this plant will work more than 60 hours. suppose for 040 hours.With the ELSEDecisionRule. the system designer wants to be notified if it happens. 50.160 hrs. worked. 40. an employee gets regular time.150 hrs. 5 * OTFIrs  0 X Print Error . the above statements would be written: C1 D1 Y DL  y 1 A1 A2 2 Another possible use for the EIA is to enable the system designer to detect any omission of a condition or appropriate ANDFUNCTION. 25 * OTHrs 40 + 1. 11 times the hrs.40 0 40 + 1.
D2 . 2. For example. For any given set of values of the condition variables of a decision table. and D3 will each have a truth value 0. and only one. and DL will cause "ERROR" to be printed. These particular ANDFUNCTIOWS can appear as part of a simple decision rule or be implied by the ANDFUNCTION of a complex decision rule. decision rule in that table must assume the truth value 1. The ELSEDecisionRule A consequence of Requirement 2 is that the ELSEDecisionRule must appear in those decision tables that do not contain 2n independent pure AI•FUNWTIONS. The system designer will then learn that he has not taken carm of the condition "HOUR(SW1OID > 60" in this decision table. Rule 2 implies 2  1 4 pure ANDFUNCTIONS. when a time card containing 65 hoursworked goes through this decision table. D1 . we use a special set of decision tables that meet the following requirements: 1.2 pure AMDFUNCTIONS for a total of 8 pure ANDFUNCIONS.Thus. Rule 3 implies 2 . Every decision rule must have at least one action. . D D D D cc Y I I C2 N C Y A I Y Y I Y I Y A2 22 A3 Rules 1 and 4 each contain one pure ANDFUNCTION. DWISICK TABLE REQUIRC(E• FOR DE1ABX For DETABX. the ARDFUNCTION of one.
and then D6 . .N A consequence of Requirement 2 is that the ARDFU!NTION of all decision rules other than the EIW can be tested in any order.N. a set of values of the condition variables can be applied to the ANDFUNCTION of D5 .50 These 8 are also independent since each of the four rules are independent (each pair of rules has a Y in one rule and an N in the other in corresponding positions). Hence. etc. Or they can be applied to D3 . C2 Y N N I I D)  C3Y A.N. then D3 . then D6 . In vhatever order they are tested. For example. the same series of actions will occur if Requirements 1 and 2 are not violated. A2 A3 A ADFUNCTION of Rule 1 ANIDUINCTION of Rule 2 = = Y. ing an ELSEDecisionRule follows: ELSEDecisionRule C. This table is conplete since 2n= 23 =8. then D .YY (DN.Y.NY (EN.Y.Y N. An example requir it does not require an EISEDecisionRule.Y ®Y.N Then the ANDFUNCTION of DL = Y. etc.
FUNCTIONS. Techniques for Discovering the Dependence of ANDFUNCTIONS A contradiction between two decision rules exists when their ANDFUNCTIONS are dependent (a violation of Requirement 2) and their series of actions are not identical. we execute it only after we have tested all the other decision rules and found their truth values equal 0. check the pair's sequence of actions. Pair one of these ANDFUNCTIONS with each of the other specified functions. paired Y and N is found. Repeat this for each set of remaining AND . puter reject the pair as invalid. it If their series of actions are To find these contradictions or redunWe is necessary to examine the ANDFUNCTIONS in pairs. These two techniques are predicated on Theorem I which states that two ANDFJNCTIONS are dependent if there exists no position of each in which one contains Y. suggest here two techniques for examining (in a computer) all pairs for dependence. The logical design of each computer will determine which of these two should be used or in fact whether some new technique ought to be devised for detecting the dependencies. If If no In that case. redundancy exists. the functions are dependent. If they differ. dancies. identical. scan the next pair. scanning each pair for a Y in one function and an N in the other in a corresponding position.51 Since the ELSE decisionrule requires each of the other rules of the decision table to have a truth value 0. Technique Number 1. have the comone pair of Y and N is found. the other contains an N.
N. Hence. Bl and B4 are dependent.N pair. (Bi. their series of actions are identical. more efficiently than scanning. the ANDFUNCTIONS into binary 01. but their actions are different. B3 and B2 They are independent. there is a paired Y. B4). B2). and I's of The Technique Number 2. and 10 respectively. B4). 00. Reject Rule 2 and Rule 3. They B2 and B4 are valid. are valid.N. reject Rule 1 and Rule 4. consider the pair (B3.52Consider the following decision table: D1 C1 C2 C3 C 4 Add a to Go to Y N I I b Table 13 D2 N N Y N c Table 15 D3 I N Y N b D4 Y N Y Y e Table 11 Table 23 Consider the following pairs (3l. 31 and B3 are dependent since there is no Y. above decision table becomes: . pendent since they have no Y. there exists a Y. we map the Y# N. Some computers may do logical arithmetic Hence. B4). One or more redundant decision rules exist in the table. there is a paired Y. (3l. consider the pairs (B2. B3). Finally.N pair. B2 and B3 are de Their actions are different. (B2. are independent. Next. They are independent.N pair. B3).
.(Bm 1 ) =o oo 11 1o L(B 1 . to 01. B 3 ). check their series of actions and reject those pairs that do not have identical series of actions. B3) have no 01 diad. then Br and Bt are independent. and L(B2. i J J. Again. L.01 00 00 00 00 00 01 L(B . Bt) contains one or more diads equal Otherwise. B4 ) = 00 1 L(B 2 .B) UO0O0 U 10 00 U1 U1 L(B . B4 ) . and B2 and B3 are dependent. B1 and B3 Since L(BI. B3) 11 00 11 10 L(BI. If L(B. B4 ) = U 00 00 01 3 B).'3 D2 D1 D3 D_4 C1 C2 01 00 00 00 10 00 01 00 C3 C4 Addta to Go to 10 10 b Table U 01 00 c Table 15 01 00 b Table 11 01 01 e Table 23 Form the logical suns of all pairs of Boolean function denoted by L(Bi. B 3). L(B. B3 ) = 10 L(B 2 . B1 and B. they are depeMdent.
then the field is invalid. require 3 decision rules: Currently in DETABX. it requires a great deal of writing that could be eliminated if it were possible to connect condition requirements with an inclusive "OR" operator. a need often exists to execute a series of action(s) if any one of p(p ! n) conditions is satisfied. and/or has more than 7 characters (C2 ).A2 2 D3 =( C2 ) " A2 The table structure would be as follows: D[ D C 1 Y 23 N Y D N N Y C2 I CII A2 IA2 IA2 It should prove useful to express the above as a single decision rule: D 2 = (C + C + C ) 1 2 3 A 2 where we dezote the expression C1 + C2 + C3 as an ORFUNCTION. For example. and an error procedure must be executed (A2 ). While this can be handled in DETABX decision tables. in input editing if a particular field is not numeric (C 1 ). To . we would D = C1 . ORFUNCTION THEORM4S EJ0ENSION OF DETABX DECISION TAkNM For tables based on n conditions. and/or has a decimal point missing (C3 ).VI.
A double line acccnplishes For instance. this separation. it becomes necessary to separate the decision rules that contain ANDFUNCTIONS (those whose cordition requirements are separated by the "AND" operator) from the decision rules that contain ORFUNCTIONS (those connected by the inclusive "OR" operator). Decision Rule 2 says if condition 1 is satisfied .55implement this in the decision table structure of DETABX. then execute actions AI. the following decision table: D1 D Y I D3 N Y D4 N N C IN 02 N 03 N A1 I A2 I 2 Y A2 can be expressed: D1D2 C 1 N Y C2 N N Y Y C 3 A1A2 In the latter. Decision Rule 1 says if condition 1 is not satisfied and condition 2 is not satisfied and condition 3 is not satisfied.
or 0. we now explore the relations between ANDFUNCTIONS and ORFUNCTIONS. on the basis of the definition of the inclusive "OR" operator.3 'nj =3n where Wi represents Yi.. 13 14 In *The "OR" is inclusive. Ni.56or* condition 2 is satisfied or condition 3 is satisfied. . have been postulated for ANDFUNCTIONS. 3. If UIj If Uj If U2J If U2j 0. B2 = 0. Ni. 1. J Ej 1 i and the ORFUNCTION as Unl. i= i (Y + Ni) =(Ni " Yi)" We denote • as the null Denote the ANDFUNCTION as 3i a W 3 * '2 j . Ni.+ Un1.BI = U 0. or i 2.j + Unj. An ORFUNCTION can be converted to an ANDFUNCTION with the following procedure. Ui represents Yi. •1 • U2J 12 3 . j = 3n. 0.j + Unj Since all our theorems whee Ui represents Yi. or Ii. then execute actions A2 CONVERSION OF AN ORFUNCTION TO AN ANDFUNCTION Define requirement. Suppose E = UIj + U2J + .B = 0 B2 = 1._ * nl .
. then 2 N3.. UM 3 114 15 . If we use YI.e. to convert E to G. For exmple: Let E = Y1 + N2 + N3. i. equivalent. the two G's will be found to be identical. then N . B 1 B3( 0 . B = 0 Let G denote :B 2 in converted form 6. LetG = Bi .. If each of the B's that contain I's are converted to their canonical forms. B3 " 0. they have the same truth table for all possible valuox of the condition variables. we could have started with ary U. This is because both G's were derived on the basis of the definition of the inclusive "OR" operator. in fact. This would They have resulted in a G that looked different from the original G.. 3' G~~Y *2*3) 1 3 (N N2 13)DN 1 72 N3) . If U 0. and taken away any of the rasaining U's.57" IfU3J 0' 3 * . are.nl Bn In Where BI =0 if UIj Although we started with U. to convert E to G. I3 and continued with U 2j then U 3V etc. etc. 1 If U33 = 0.
7.58 GN = YI" Y2 1. 5 .E*N3 i" Y2 "N 7. EXAMPLE OF CONVERSION Let E = Y + N2 + ¢3 + ¢4 + Y5 3 then G = (YI * '2 I (y " R2 "3 G= (Y * 12 I * 4 "I) 5 ( N2 " 13 I4 1 E5)0 Y) " 4 " Y5)' 13 • 14 *i5 )0(Nl . N2"Y3 ®*yN N2 • % *"EN2" . EGyj "2 " Y3 2.. 6. ON. 1.' G2 = YI N2 " Y3 4. 5. . N2 (D1" (N 1 N2 Y3 N3 N3 5.N 2 Y2 If we use N2 then N3 then Y. Hence G1 G 2 Notice that G1 and G2 contain the same B's. 4 *DY" Y3 Y2 N33 ( (Dy N2 "3 1Y. 6. ON.3 2. 3. 7 2 * 13 *14 (N • Y2 1 13• 14 y ). 1.
For the same values of the condition variables. B for which V(B) = 1. To illustrate.59 Example 1 is equivalent to Example 2 D1 D2 C1 C2 D3 D4 N N ED  D1 D2 EI2 C1 C2 N Y Y I N Y NY Y N  C3 C4 Y N I I I I I I  C3 C4 Y N ¢ ¢  o N I I Y A2  N A 1 Y A2  A 1 A2 A Example 1 A3 Example 2 CONSEWb"E OF CM'ERSION equivalent) to the excluThe truth table Every ORFUNCTION can be converted (is sive union of one or more independent ANDFUNCTIONS. EThis is true because each B that contains more than one U (that is either Y or N) contains one original U and the remaning U terms are negations of the original U's.7 Since V(B) . either Y or N is satis one or more of the requirements. B(G) . there exists one.B ®Bn. 1 i. . consider E =U 1 +U 2 +U3 + . of this converted form is the same as the original function for all possible values of the condition variables.1.e.. V(E) .1.1. fied. and only one. The nonnegated U is different for each B.+ U that converts to G =B If 1 1 n B 2(B 3E .
Consider an ORFUNCTION that contains 0 in the last r positions. equivalent to 2r pure + 2n2 + 2nl distinct ANDFUNCTIONS. n 3.+ Z + nr+l +n E can be expanded to: G = (z 1 * 12 (2(1 * 2 " 2 "" I)(( " ZnrI " • nr 13 . IV' and I' presented out of sequence so that the ORFUNCTION discussion can parallel the ANDFUNCTION argument. and Zi (which represents Y or Ni) in the first  2 r) distinct pure ANDFUNCTIONS.* An ORFUNCTION that contains ( in r(o c r < n) positions is equivalent to ( 2 n Proof of Theorem VI'. the negation of every U occurs. V(G) = 0 only if V(B) = 0 for every This can occur only if the negation of every U occurs. . have the same truth table for all possible values of the condition variables. *The reader will find Theorems VI'. I's. E and G. Z + Z2 + 1 . The first tern contains (n1) I's.. 1. (nr) positions: E 2. since each B contains one nonnegated U (that is either Y or N) and all U (that are either Y or N) are contained in G. B.60V(E) = 0 if. It is (nr)th term contains r I's.. 3n I nr+l . It It is equivalent to The second term contains (n2) The is equivalent to 2n2 pure ANDFUNCTIONS. G is equivalent to 2r + 2rl + pure ADFUNCTIONS.. Further. and only if.. 4. If the negation of every U occurs V(G) = 0. therefore. 2nl pure ANDFUNCTIONS. Theorem VI' .
example. 2r I.=N 1 + Y2 + Y3 = (Y " N2 " 1 and V(E) = 1 since )3m. (0 5 r < n) Every ORFUfCTION that contains 0 in r positions 2 r) is dependent on (2n  distinct pure ANDFUNCTIONS. V(E) . An ANDFUNCTION and an ORFUNCTION are dependent if there exists at least one set of values of the condition variables such that both assume a truth value 1. Proof of Theorem IV'. V(u) . suppose B = Y1 N2 " N3. . This same reasoning could have been used if I appeared in any r positions. 3. they are independent.1. Although 0 was in the first r positions. Theorem IV'. the logic of this proof applies no matter in what r positions they appear.When V(Pl ) = 1. 6. Therefore. 6. The theorem is therefore proved. + Y2 + Y3" Otherwise.615. Hence E is dependent upon 2n distinct pure AIDFUNCTIONS. 5.1 When V(P2 n _ 2 r) . G is equivalent to ( 2fn 2 r) distinct pure ANDFUNCTIONS. P(2n  2 r) are distinct pure AND FUNCTIONS. For Then there exists no S such that V(B) E. The theorem in therefore proved.1. 1.V(E) = 1 When V(P2) = 1. E = PlOP 2 0OP( 2 n " where P1 ' P 2 ' "'. B and E are independent. Let E = 1 + 2 + "'" + r + U r+l + "'" 2 r) + Un 2.
Hence C1 and C2 are dependent. 4. 8. they are independent. Otherwise they are independent. there exists a Y in both. 2. both functions cannot have a truth value 1 for any transaction. . i. or an N in both. 3. A transaction that satisfies the condition in that position of C also satisfies the condition of C2. Hence C1 and C2 are dependent.e. For those cases where one ORFUNCTION contains a Y and the other contains an N. or 0 and 0. if. vc 2 ) = 1 for a particular transaction. C1 and C2. I'.. Theorem I". a 0 and Y. The same proof holds for an N in a particular position of tvo ORFUNCTIONS. 0 and N. or an N in both. there exists a Y in both. Any transaction that has a condition value in the position where the 0 appears contributes nothing to make the truth value 0 or 1. Assume there exists no position of C1 and C2 such that both contain a Y or both contain an N. V(CI) = 1. Assume there exists a Y in a particuaar position of two ORFUNCTIO(S. An AMDFUNCTION and an ORFUNCTION are dependent in at least one position. 5. or there exists an I in the ANDFUNCTION and a Y or N in the ORFUNCTION.62in at leant Otherwise Theorem I'. 7. 6. one position. Hence those positions that contain 0 can be ignored. each position either contains a Y and N. Two ORFUNCTIONS are dependent if. Proof of Theorea 1. Hence C1 and C2 are independent and the theorem is proved.
or ¢I +Un V(B) V(E) = 1 for S = (1 a 2 a 3 ). = Yi.. Proof of Theorem I''. 2..63Examples: 1.3 W 3 Wn W B = I W... Let B or where and where Y W 2 W W 2. ai V(E) = 1 for S = (a 2 a3 and B and E are dependent. . a. 1. 2 * I4 E = N1 + Y2 + N3 + 04 Y3 B and E are independent.. B E Y N1+ *2 * Y3 N4 N2 + N3+ 3. B=Y1 " N.. N. Then B and E are dependent.  [V(Wi) 1] = 1 for S = (1 a2 a3 ). *W " W2 W 3 ... E = Y1 + U2 + U3 + U. N. 2. Wn + Un [v(Wi) = E = NI + U + U3 + 2 V(B) = 1 for S = (0 a 2 a 3 ). = Yi. or I. N4 N " 13 B= Y 2 E = N1 + Y2 + Y3 + 04 B and E are dependent. or and NB Similarly forB = B = Ii W2 • W3 . B and E are dependent.
3.
Regardless where the pair of Y's or the pair of N's or the I in the ANDFUNCTION and the Y or N in the ORFUNCTION appear, an S exists with the 1 or 0 in the corresponding position such that V(B) = 1. Arid for that same S, V(E) = 1.
This proves the first part of the theorem. 4. Suppose there exists no pair of Y's or no pair of N's or no I in the ANDFUNCTION with a Y or N in the corresponding position of the ORFUNCTION in any position of B and E.
5.
In converting E to ANDFUNCTIONS, the ¢ contributes no ANDF¶JNCTION so that those positicns containing O's can be disregarded.
6.
From those positions that contain Y or N, the conversion will yield ANDFUNCTIONS each of which either a. Contains at least one Y in the same position in which B contains an N, or
b.
Contains at least one N in the same position in which
B contains a Y.
7.
Hence if V(B) = 1, V(E) = 0 since each of the ANDFUNCTIONS of the converted form have a truth value 0.
8.
Therefore B and E are independent Q.E.D.
65
APPENDIX SUMMaRY OF THEOREMS FOR ANDFUNCTIONS AND ORFUNCTIONS We now list and extend previous theorems to include ORFUNCTIONS as well as the ANDFUNCTIC5S. and ORFUNCTIONS. Theorem I. Within Table T, two ANDFUNCTIONS are independent if, A Table T comprises all ANDFUNCTIONS
in at least one position, one function contains Y and the other function contains N. Theorem I'. Otherwise, they are dependent. Within Table T, two ORFUNCTIONS are dependent if,
in at least one position, both functions contain a Y, or both functions contain an N. Theorem I''. are dependent if, Otherwise, ther are independent. Within Table T, an ANDFUNCTION and an ORFUNCTION in at least one position, both functions contain a
Y, or both functions contain an N, or the ANDFUNCTION contains an I, and the ORFUNCTION contains a Y or N. Theorem II. Otherwise, they are independent. is indepen
Within Table T, each pure ANDFUNCTICt
dent of every other pure ANDFUNCTION. Corollary of Theorem II. Within Table T, there exists exactly
2n pure ANDFUNCTIONS.
Each of the remaining [2(3n)2n] functions
is either a mixed ANDFUNCTION or an ORFUNCTION. Theorem III. The form of a mixed ANDFUNCTION that contains I
in r positions (1 r r < n) can be expanded into a canonical form that consists of 2r pure ANDFUNCTIONS each connected by an exclusive "OR" operator. Corollary 1 of Theorem III. The canonical form of a mixed AND
FUNCTION contains an even number of pure ANDFUNCTIONS.
66Corollary 2 of Theorem III. The canonical form of a mixed AND
FUNCTION contains at least two pure AMDFUNCTIONS.
Theorem III'. An ORFUNCTION that contains 0 in r positions
2 r)
(0 ! r < n) can be converted to (is equivalent) to (2n pure ANDFUNCTIONS. Theorem IV.
distinct
Within Table T, every mixed ANDFUNCTION that con
tains I in r positions (1 < r < n) is dependent on each of 2r pure ANDFUNCTIONS of T. Corollary 1 of Theorem IV. Two mixed ANDFUNCTIONS are dependent
on each other if their canonical forms each contain one or more pure ANDFUNCTIONS that are coanon to both. Corollary 2 of Theorem IV. A mixed ANDFUNCTION is dependent
on each of the pure ANDFUNCTIONS contained in its canonical form. Corollary 3 of Theorem IV. If a pure ANDFUNCTION and a mixed
AiD1FUNCTION are dependent, the pure ANDFUNCTION is contained in the canonical form of the mixed ANDFUNCTIONS. Corollary 4 of Theorem IV. If two mixed ANDFUNCTIONS are de
pendent there exists at least one pure ANDFUNCTION in their canonical forms that is common to both. Theorem IV'. Within Table T, every ORFUNCTION that containso

in r positions (0 c r < n) is dependent on ( 2 n
2
r) distinct pure
ANDFUNCTIONS. Theorem V. Table T, based on n conditions, contains one, and only one, set of 2n independent ANIDFUNCTIONS; each of these is a
pure ANDFUNCTION.
Theorem VI'. A complex decision rule (a rule that contains mixed ANDFUN1rIONS) that contains I in r positions (1 ! r < n) of its ANDFUNCTION is equivalent to 2 r simple decision rules (rules that contain pure ANDY'UNCTIONS). A decision rule that contains an ORFUNCTION with 2 r) 0 in r positions (0 • r < n) is equivalent to ( 2 n sion rules.67Theorem VI. simple deci .
68 RER3MCES 1. The RAND Corporation. 1962. "Structure Table Language. presented at the SHARE meeting in Toronto." Datemation. A. AIEE. 12.. Phillips. Jr. Burton. May 35. C. Michael. "TABSOL: A Fundanental Concept for SystemsOriented Languages. Orren Y. Systems Group (CODASYL). Kavanagh. Grad. July. January. September. 10. Hall. December 14'. J. A. October 22.." Datonation. Howard. "Current Status of COBOL. FORTAB: A Decision Table Language for Scientific Computing Applications.. 1962. and E. published by AIEE.. New York. F. and ACM. Armerding. October 26. and ACM4. 5. 9. "Tables. Soloman L. Bromberg. "COBOL and Compatibility. February. 1962. Clarke. 6. DETABX: An Improved BusinessOriented Computer SThe RAND Corporation. September. 11. Proceedings of the Decision Tables Symposium. Dorothea S. 1961. Dolotta. 1962. R13273PR. 1961. August. 1 SHARE Secretary Distribution (SSD) 96. W. 3. 1960.. Preliminary Specifications of DETABX." 13 General Information Manual No." Proceedings of the Eastern Joint Computer Conference7 sponsored by IRE.. 8. Frank B." Proceedings of the USAF World Data Systems and Statistics Conference. sponsored by IRE. pp.. "Boolean Prime 7kplicants by the Binary Sieve Method. AIME. sponsored by the CODASYL Systems Group and the Joint Users Group of ACM. "Tabular Form in Decision Logic. 7. 13. Montalbano." I13 Systems Journal. Flow Charts and Program Logic. Evans. 1960. 1962. 4. "Advanced Analysis Method for Integrated Electronic Data Processing. Pollack. 1962.. G. 1962. McCluskey. 1961.. 2. F208047. "Encoding of Incompletely Specified Boolean Matrices. T. 3034." Caiunications and Electronics. Ontario. September 1921. September 1113. R33306PR. ." Proceedings of the Western Joint Computer Conference. 1961. 1962. T. August.
"A Chart Method for Simplifying Truth Functions. New York. Pennsylvania. "Simplification of a Class of Boolean Functions. Suppes. Axiomatic Set Theory Inc. 1. January. 16. Edwin. Pittsburgh. Van Nostrand Company. sponsored by ACM and the Mellon Institute. E." Journal of the Association for Ceputing Machinery. May 23. 5. Vol. Veitch. 19r0 the D. 15. Hirschhorn. No..69 14. Patrick." Proceedings of the Association for Cmnuting Machinery. 1958. .. W. 1952.