Chapter Two

Exercises
Page 77

New Problems:

A. (To be placed before number 1)

Using a truth table, show that the sentence is true.

Solution:

P Q R
T T T T T F F F T
T T T F F F F F F
T F F T T F T T T
T F F F T F T T T
F T F T T T F T T
F T F F T T F T T
F F F T T T T T T
F F F F T T T T T

B. (To be placed before number 10)

Write predicate calculus expressions for the following English sentences:

i. Emma is a German shepherd, all German shepherds are dogs, therefore Emma is a dog.
ii. People who like cats don’t like dogs.
iii. Some English sentences cannot be represented with predicate calculus.
iv. If we have cheese, I will make a sandwich.

Solution:
i. Emma is a German shepherd, all German shepherds are dogs, therefore Emma is a dog.
(german_shepherd(Emma) ( X german_shepherd(X) → dog(X))) → dog(Emma)

ii. People who like cats don’t like dogs.

X (cat_lover(X) → ¬ dog_lover(X))

iii. Some English sentences cannot be represented with predicate calculus.

Y English_sentence(Y) ¬ predicate_calculus(Y)

iv. If I have cheese, I will make a sandwich

have_cheese → make_sandwich
Rewritten Problems:

2. A new operator, , may be defined by the following truth table:

P Q
T T F
T F T
F T T
F F F

Create a propositional calculus expression using only and ¬ that is equivalent to

. Prove their equivalence using truth tables.

Solution:

P Q
T T F F F
T F T F T
F T T T F
F F F T T

F T F T
F T T F
T F F T
F T F T

T F
F T
F T
T F

10. Jane Doe has three dependents, a steady income of $45,000 and $21,000 in her
savings account. Add the appropriate predicates describing her situation to the general
investment advisor of the example in Section 2.4 and perform the unifications and
inferences needed to determine her suggested investment.
Solution:
Jane Doe can be described by:

amount_saved(21000)
earnings(45000, steady)
dependents(4)

minsavings(4) ≡ 5000 * 4 = 20000

minincome(4) ≡ 15000 + (4000 * 4) = 31000

Unify the conjunction of earnings(45000, steady) and dependents(4) with first two
components of the premise of rule 6, under the substitution {45000/X, 4/Y}, yielding the
new implication:
earnings(45000, steady) dependents(4) greater(45000, 31000) → income(adequate)

amount_saved(21000) dependents(4) unifies with the first two elements of the premise
of assertion 4 under the substitution {21000/X, 4/Y} yielding the implication:
amount_saved(21000) dependents(4) greater(21000, 20000) →
savings_account(adequate)

By rule 2, savings_account(adequate) income(adequate) → investment(stocks)