QUANTIFICATION THEORY

Objectives:
Define propositional functions;
State and illustrate some rules of quantification;
Use quantification identities in proving valid arguments.
Definition 17. Atomic Proposition – is a simple proposition which can be understood as
attributing a property to one specific thing or as attributing a relation to two or more
specific things.
Example:
a. You are kind
b. He loves her

Definition 18. General Proposition – a proposition that attributes a property or relation

to unspecified persons or objects.
Example:
a. Everybody is kind
b. Everybody loves somebody

Definition 19. Terms – are words that function as grammatical subject or object in a
sentence.
Example:
a. Term: You
b. Term: He, her

Definition 20. Predicate – expresses the property or relation of terms.

Example:
a. Predicate: (are) kind
 b. Predicate: loves

Definition 21. Individual Variable – is a variable which represents any arbitrary element
of a certain collection of terms or domain
Notation: X1 , ... , Xn
U,V,W,X,Y,Z
Definition 22. Universe of Discourse – the collection of all terms from which values of
individual variables must be drawn out.
Definition 23. Constant Term – any specific element of the universe.
Notation : a, b, c,…

Definition 24. A simple propositional function of n variables is defined to be an

expression consisting of an n-ray predicate symbol and n variables such that the
expression becomes a proposition when each of the variables is replaced by a constant
belonging to its domain.
Notation:
P(X1,X2, … , Xn)
P is n-ary predicate
X1, … , Xn are u variables
Example:
P(x, y): x loves y
R(x, y ,z): 3xy+z2<0

Definition 25. A propositional function is an expression obtained by using the ff. rules:
a. Every simple propositional function is a propositional function.
b. If P is a propositional function, then ¬P is a propositional function.
c. If P and Q are propositional functions, then so are
P^Q, P∨Q, P ⇒Q, P ⇔Q.
d. Only those expressions obtained by using rules 1 to 3 a finite number of times
are propositional functions.
Definition 26. If the value of P(C1, C2, … , Cn) is true for every possible choice of the
individual symbols C1, C2, … , Cn
Selected from U, then P is said to be valid in the universe 𝓤.

Definition 27. P is satisfiable in the universe U if the value of every possible choice of
individual symbols C1, C2, … , Cn which made P(C1, C2, … , Cn) true are said to satisfy P.
Example:
R(x, y, z): 3xy – z3 < 0
Definition 28. If P is not satisfiable in the universe 𝓤, then P is unsatisfiable in 𝓤.
Example:
P(x): x2 < 0

Definition 29. To change a propositional function into a proposition, each individual

variable of the propositional function must be found. Binding of a variable can be done
in two ways:
1. By assigning a value to it. This process is called instantiation.

Example:
a. P(x): x3 – 1 ≥ 0
P(1): 13 -1 ≥ 0 since 0=0
b. R(x, y ,z): 3xy – z3 < 0
R(-1, 1, 1): -4 <0
2. By quantification
If P(x) is a propositional function with the individual variable X as an argument,
then this can be qualified universally or existentially.
Example:
There exist real no such that R(x, y, z) there exist x ∃x ∃y ∃z, R(x, y, z)

Ways of quantifying a propositional function

1. Universal quantification – is the assertion “for all x, P(x)” denoted by ∀x for all x
P(x)
Example:
𝓤 = z+
P(x): √x ≥ 0
: ∀x P(x) is true
Interpolation:
a. For all x P(x) is true
b. ∀x P(x) is true ⇔ P is valid in U.
c. Let c ∈ 𝓤: ∀x P(x) ⇒ P(c) is true
d. Let 𝓤 = {a1, a2, … , an}

∀x P(x) ⇔ P(a1) ^ P(a2)^ … ^ P(an)

Other ways of expressing universal quantification:
for all for each
for any for arbitrary
for every given any x P(x)

2. Existential quantification – is the assertion “for some x, P(x) denoted by ∃x for

some P(x)”
Example:
𝓤=R
P(x): 2x – 3 ≤ 0
∃x P(x) is true
Interpretation:
a. For some x, P(x) is true
b. ∃x P(x) is true ⇔ P(x) is satisfiable in 𝓤.
c. Let C ∈ 𝓤 = {a1,a2, … , an}
 ∃x P(x) is equivalent to ⇔ P(a1) ∨ P(a2) ∨ … ∨ P(an)

OTHER WAYS OF EXPRESSING EXISTENSIAL QUANTIFICATION

There exists
There is at least one 𝓧 P(𝓧)

Four types of Subject – Predicate Propositions of Traditional Logic

1. Universal Affirmative:
∀x [P(x) ⇒ Q(x)]
2.Universal Negative:
∀x[P(x) ⇒ ¬Q(x) ]
3.Particular Affirmative:
∃x[P(x) ∧ Q(x)]
4. Particular Negative:
there exist ∃x [P(x) ∧ ¬Q(x) ]
Example:
1. All Filipinos are hospitable.
1.) F(x) = Fil
H(x) = hospitable
∀x[F(x) ⇒ H(x)]

2. All Filipinos are not hospitable.

2.) ∀x [F(x) ⇒ ¬H(x)]
3. Some Filipinos are hospitable
3.)∃x [F(x) ∧ H(x)]
4.Some Filipinos are not hospitable.
4.) ∃x [F(x) ∧ ¬H(x)]

Example:
Translate the following statements:
Let R(x)=room
A(x) = Aircon
1. All rooms are either aircon or not.
∀x[R(x) ⇒ (A(x) ∨¬A(x) ) ]
2. Some senators are either disloyal or misguided.
∃x[S(x) ∧(D(x) ∨M(x))]
3. Guavas and bananas are nourishing.
∀x[(G(x) v B(x)) ⇒ N(x)]
4. Every real number is rational or irrational
∀x[R(x) ⇒ Q(x) ∨ ¬Q(x)]
5. Apples and Oranges are delicious and nutritious
∀x [(A(x) ∨ O(x)) ⇒ (D(x) ∧ N (x)]

Definition 30. A well-formed formula of predicate calculus is obtained by using the ff.
rules.
1. If P is an n-ary propositional function and 𝓤1, 𝓤2, … , 𝓤n are individual symbols
(i.e either individual constants or variables) then P (𝓤1, 𝓤2, … , 𝓤n)
2. If A is a wff, then A is a wff.
3. If A & B are wff’s then A∧B, A∨B, A⇒B and A ⇔ B are also wff’s.
4. If A is a wff and x is any variable, then ∀x and ∃x A are wff.
5. Only those obtained by using formulas (1) to (4) are wff.

The scope of a quantifier occurring in a formula is the quantifier together

with the smallest wff immediately following quantifier.
An occurrence of a variable in a formula is bound iff this occurrence is
within the scope of a quantifier using this variable. An occurrence of a variable is
free iff this occurrence is not bound.

Some Logical Relationship Involving Quantifiers

1. ∀x P(x) ⇒ P(y) where y is an arbitrary element of the universe 𝓤.
2. P(y) ⇒ there exist ∃x P(x) where y is an arbitrary element of 𝓤.
3. ¬∃x P(x) ⇔ ∀x ¬P(x)
4. ¬∀x P(x) ⇔∃x ¬P(x)
5. ¬∃x [P(x) ∧ Q(x)] ⇔∀x[P(x) ⇒ ¬Q(x) ]
 6. ¬∀x [P(x) ⇒ Q(x) ] ⇔∃x[P(x) ∧ ¬Q(x)]
Quantification Rules:
Let A(x) be a wff with a free occurrence of x s. t. no free occurrence of x in
A(x) is within the scope of ∀y or ∃y.
1. Universal Instantiation U.I.

∀ yA ( x )
∴ A( y)
2. Existential Instantiation E.I.

∃ yA ( x )
∴ A( y)

3. Existential Generalization E.G.

A(x)
∴∃ y A ( y )

4. Universal Generalization U.G.

A(x)
∴ ∀ yA ( y )

Construction of Formal Proof for Quantification

Example:
Construct a formal proof of the following arguments.
A. 1. ∀ x [A(x) ⇒¬(B(x) ∨ C(x))]/.:A(b) ⇒¬B(b)
2.A(b) Assumption
3.A(b) ⇒¬[(B(b) ∨ C(b)] 1 U.I.
4. ¬[B(b) ∨ C(b)] 3,2 MP
5. ¬B(b) ∧ ¬C(b) 4 D.M
6. ¬B(b) 5 Simp.
7.A(b) ⇒¬B(b) 2,6 C.P.

B.
1. ∀ x [H(x) ⇒¬P(x)]
2. ∀ x [T(x) ⇒ H(x)]/∴ ∀ x [T ( x ) ⇒ ¬ P(x)]
3. H(y) ⇒¬P(y) 1 U.I.
4. T(y) ⇒H(y) 2 U.I.
 5. T(y) ⇒¬P(y) 4,3 H.S.
6. ∀ x [T(x) ⇒¬P(x)] 5 U.G

C.
1. ∀ x [T(x) ⇒ {R(x) ∧ D(x)}]
2. ∃ x [T(x) ∧ B(x) ]/∴ ∃ x [D(x) ∧ B (x)]
3. T(y) ⇒ [R(y) ∧ D(y) ] 1 U.I.
4.T(y) ∧ B(y) 2 E.I.
5. T(y) 4, Simp.
6. R(y) ∧ D(y) 3,5 M.P.
7. D(y) 6 Comm, Simp.
8. B(y) 4, Comm, Simp.
9. D(y) ∧ B(y) 7,8 Conj.
10. ∃ x [D(x) ∧ B(x)] 9 E.G.
D. 1.∃ x [A(x) ∧ B(x)] ⇒ [R ⇒ S]
2. ∀ x [C(x) ∧ R]
3. ¬S ∨ ¬∃ x C(x)/∴ ¬∃ x [A(x) ∧ B(X)]
4. C(y) ∧ R 2 U.I
5. ¬S ∨ ¬C(y) 3 E.I.
6. C(y) 4, Simp.
7. ¬S 5,6 D.S
8. R 4 Simp.
9. R ∧ ¬S 8,7 Conj.
10. ¬(¬R∨ S) 9 D.M.
11. ¬(R⇒ S) 10 Impl.
12. ¬∃ x [A(x) ∧ ¬B(x)] 1,11 M.T.
E. 1. ∀ x [F(x) ⇒ H(x)]
2. H(y) ⇒ q
3. F(y)/∴ q
4.F(y) ⇒ H(y) 1 U.I
5.F(y) ⇒ q 4,2 HS
6. q 5,3, MP

F. 1. ∃ x [F(x) ∧ G(x) ∧ H(x)]

2. ∀ x [F(x) ∧ G(x) ⇒ ¬I(x)]/∴ ∃ x [H(x) ∧ ¬I(x)]
3. F(y) ∧ G(y) ∧ H(y) 1 E.I.
4. F(y) ∧ G(y) ⇒ ¬I(y) 2, U.I.
5. F(y) ∧ G(y) 3, Simp
6. ¬I(y) 4,5 M.P.
7. H(y) 3 Comm, Simp.
8. H(y) ∧ ¬I(y) 7,6 Conj.
9. ∃ x [H(x) ∧ ¬I(x) ] 8 E.G

Construct a proof of validity for the ff.

1. All dancers are graceful.
2. Mary is a student.
3. Mary is a dancer.
4. Therefore, some students are graceful.

D(x), G(x), S(x), u=Mary

1. ∀ x [D(x) ⇒ G(x)]
2. S(u)
3. D(u)/∴ ∃ x [S(x) ∧ G(x)]
4. D(u) ⇒ G(u ¿ 1, U.I.
 5. G(u) 4,3 M . P .
6. S(u) ∧ G(u) 2, 5 Conj.
7. ∃ x [S(x) ∧ G(x)] 6, E.G.

1. Hotels are expensive and depressing

2. Some Hotels are shabby
3. Therefore, some expensive things are shabby

1. ∀ x [H(x) ⇒ (E(x) ∧ D(x))]

2. ∃ x [H(x) ∧ S(x)]/ ∴ ∃ x [E(x) ∧ S(x)]

3. H(y) ⇒ (E(y) ∧ D(y)) 1 U.I.

4. H(y) ∧ S(y) 2 E.I.

5. H(y) 4 Simp

6 E(y) ∧ D(y) 3,5 M.P.

7.E(y) 6 Simp

8. S(y) 4 Comm, Simp

9. E(y) ∧ S(y) 9 Conj

10. ∃ x [E(x) ∧ S(x)] 9 E.G