1 / 20

Propositional Calculus – Methods of Proof Predicate Calculus

Propositional Calculus – Methods of Proof Predicate Calculus. Math Foundations of Computer Science. Propositional Calculus – Methods of Proof. Logic is useful in design theory Also useful in reasoning about mathematical statements: Case Analysis Proof of the contrapositive

alcina
Télécharger la présentation

Propositional Calculus – Methods of Proof Predicate Calculus

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Propositional Calculus – Methods of ProofPredicate Calculus Math Foundations of Computer Science

  2. Propositional Calculus – Methods of Proof • Logic is useful in design theory • Also useful in reasoning about mathematical statements: • Case Analysis • Proof of the contrapositive • Proof by contradiction • Proof by reduction to truth Math Foundations of Computer Science

  3. Law of Excluded Middle • Handy for Case Analysis: • Can now prove

  4. Dual of the Excluded Middle • A proposition and its negative can’t be simultaneously true • Does this jive with the real world? • Do we have contradictions in mathematics? • Handy for proofs by Contradiction

  5. Contrapositive • Example: Prove “If x is greater than 2 and prime, then x is odd” • The contrapositive is: “If x is even, then x <= 2 or x is composite” • Propositional logic fails at this point; we need to talk about the meaning of our terms

  6. Contradiction • Rather than proving E, we assume NOT E, and look for a contradiction • Example (from previous slide) • We want to prove ab → c (cont.)

  7. Contradiction - example • So, as assume a b and NOT c • Derive a contradiction

  8. Equivalence by Truth (p ≡ 1) ≡ p • Use the tautologies to reduce the expression to 1 • Probably most like the examples we’ve been looking at

  9. Deduction • The use of logic in sequences of statements that constitute a complete proof • Start with certain hypotheses (“givens”) • Apply a sequence of inference rules • Results in a conclusion • Most familiar to you, from geometry

  10. Deduction • Given expressions E1, E2, …, Ek as hypotheses, we wish to draw conclusion E, another logical expression • Generally, none of these is a tautology • Show that E1∩E2∩ … ∩Ek → E is a tautology

  11. Deduction – guidelines • Any tautology may be a line in a proof • modus ponens – if E and E→F are lines, then F may be added as a line • If E and F are lines in a proof, then we may add the line E ∩F • If E and E≡F are lines, the F can be added

  12. Resolution – a handy inference rule • Based on this tautology: • Just another inference rule • But a common one • Often used in a deductive proof

  13. Resolution • Applied to clauses (your hypotheses) (as in deduction) • Convert hypotheses into clauses (conjunctive normal form) • Write each clause as a line • Use resolution to write other lines

  14. Simplifying clauses • Consider a clause as a set of literals • Given commutativity, associativity and idempotence of OR • Remove duplicate literals:

  15. Simplifying clauses • Eliminate clauses that have contradictory literals • , by the annihilator law of OR • These clauses are equivalent to 1, and are not needed in a proof

  16. Resolution - example • Given these 2 clauses: • Rearrange terms, and apply resolution • Remove duplicates

  17. Put Expressions into Conjunctive Normal Form • Get rid of all operators but NOT, AND, and OR NAND and NOR are easily replaced with ANDandOR followed by a NOT • Apply DeMorgan’s laws to push negations down as far as they will go

  18. Put Expressions into Conjunctive Normal Form • Apply distributive law for OR over AND • Push the ORs as low as they’ll go • E.g. • Replace the implication • Push that outer NOT down:

  19. CNF – Example (cont.) • Push the first OR below the first AND • Regroup • Push that OR down over the inner AND • And now you have an expression in CNF

  20. Resolution Proofs by Contradiction • A more common use • Start with both the hypotheses, and the negation of the conclusion • Try to drive a clause w/no literals • This clause has value 0

More Related