CENTURION UNIVERSITY

TECHNOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT

DISCRETE MATHEMATICS
Project 2.- SET OF PROPOSITIONAL LOGIC
AND CONTIFIRES STATEMENTS USING RULE
OF INFERENCES

Prepared by:-
Shubham Kumar
Reg. -210101120017 Guided by:-
Dr. Ashok Misra
SET OF PROPOSITIONAL LOGICS
Q1. Prove that the following statement are equivalent.

(A ∧ ¬B) V (A ∧ B) V C
PROOF:
≡ (A ∧ ¬B) V (A ∧ B) V C
≡ ( A ∧ (¬BVB)) V C { by distributive low}
≡ (A ∧ T) V C
≡ ( A ∧ C )
 Q2. PROVE THAT THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT ARE EQUIVALENT

(p ∧ q) →(p V q) is tautology
(p ∧ q) →(p V q) ≡ ¬ (p ∧ q) V (p V q) {¬pVq and p →q
both truth value same}
≡ (¬p V ¬q ) V (p V q) {de morgan law }
≡ (¬p V p) V (¬q V q) {associative law}
≡ T V T {commutative laws}
≡ T
Q3. PROVE THAT THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT ARE EQUIVALENT

¬( p V (¬ p∧ q)) and ¬ p ∧ ¬q are equivalent

¬( p V (¬ p∧ q)) ≡ ¬ p ∧ ¬(¬p ∧ q) {de morgan law}

≡ ¬ p ∧ [¬(¬ p) V ¬q) {de morgan law}
≡ ¬ p ∧ (p V ¬q)
≡ (¬ p ∧ p) V (¬ p ∧ ¬ q) {distributive law}
≡ F V (¬ p ∧ ¬ q)
≡ ¬ p ∧ ¬q
Q4. PROVE THAT THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT ARE EQUIVALENT

¬ (p → q) and p ∧ ¬q are equivalent

¬ (p → q) ≡ ¬ (¬ p V q) {¬pVq and p →q
both truth value same}
≡ ¬ (¬ p ) ∧ ¬q {de morgan law}
≡ p ∧ ¬q
QUANTIFIED STATEMENTS USING
RULES OF INFERENCES
Q1. Dishonest people live long
Rohan was dishonest.
derive that “Rohan live long”.

D(x) : x is dishonest
L(x) : x is live long
DP(p) : x is dishonest people live long
∀x(D(x) ⇒ L(x)

Premises used No. of inferences Rule of inferences

{1} ∀x(D(x) ⇒ L(x) Rule P
{1} D(p ⇒ L(p)) Universal specification (1) →2
{3} D(p) Rule p
{1,3} L(p) Rule t (2∧3) →4
“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.”

Let C(x)= “x is in this class,” B(x)= “x has read the book ,”

P(x)= “x is passed the first exam”.
Premises are:- 1. ∃ x(C(x) ∧ ¬B(x)) 2. ∀ x(C(x) → P(x))
conclusion :- ∃x(P(x) ∧ ¬B(x))

Premises used No. of inferences Rule of inferences

{1} 1. ∃x(C(x) ∧ ¬B(x)) Rule p
{1} 2. C(a) ∧ ¬B(a) Existential instantiation (1) →2
{1,2} 3. C(a) Simplification (2) → 3
{4} 4. ∀x(C(x) → P(x)) Rule p
{4} 5. C(a) → P(a) Universal instantiation (4) →5
{1,4} 6. P(a) Modus ponens (3) (5) →6
{1} 7. ¬B(a) Simplification (2) - 7
{1,4} 8. P(a) ∧ ¬B(a) Conjunction (6) ∧(7) → 8
{1,4} 9. ∃x(P(x) ∧ ¬B(x)) Existential generalization (8) →9
“every living things is a plant or animals.”, “David’s dog is alive and it is not a
plant. ” and “all animals have hearts.” Hance “David’s dog has a heart.”

Let p(x)= “x is a plant ,” A(x)= “x is a animal ,”

H(x)= “x has a heart ”.
a: David’s dog
Premises are:- 1. ∀x[P(x) V A(x)] 2. ¬P(a) 3. ∀x[A(x) → H(x)]
conclusion ::-- H(a)

Premises used No. of inferences Rule of inferences

{1} 1. ∀x[P(x) V A(x)] Rule p

{2} 2. ¬P(a) Rule p

{1} 3. P(a) V A(a) Universal specification (1)

{1,2} 4. A(a) Disjunctive syllogism (2) and (3)

{5} 5. ∀x[A(x) → H(x)] Rule p

{5} 6.A(a) → H(a) Specification and (5)

{1,2,5} 7. H(a) (4),(6)and rule if inference (1)

 Thank
you…….