CSC510

Discrete Structures
Logic Equivalences and
Soundness
Lecture 3: Logical Equivalences and Equality
Tautology and Contradiction
Definitions:
• A compound proposition that is always true for all possible truth values of
the propositions is called a tautology.
• A compound proposition that is always false is called a contradiction.
• A proposition that is neither a tautology nor contradiction is called a
contingency.
🠶 Example: p ∨ ¬p
p ¬p p ∨ ¬p
1 0 1
0 1 1

p ∨ ¬p is tautology.
Tautology and Contradiction
Definitions:
• A compound proposition that is always true for all possible truth values of
the propositions is called a tautology.
• A compound proposition that is always false is called a contradiction.
• A proposition that is neither a tautology nor contradiction is called a
contingency.
🠶 Example: p ∧ ¬p
p ¬p p ∧ ¬p
1 0 0
0 1 0

p ∧ ¬p is contradiction.
 Equivalence
🠶 We have seen that some of the propositions are equivalent.
🠶 Their truth values in the truth table are the same.
🠶 • Example: p → q is equivalent to ¬q → ¬p (contrapositive)

p q ¬p ¬q p→q ¬q → ¬p
1 1 0 0 1 1
1 0 0 1 0 0
0 1 1 0 1 1
0 0 1 1 1 1

Equivalent statements are important for logical reasoning

since they can be substituted and can help us to make a
logical argument.
Logical equivalence

🠶 Definition: The propositions p and q are called logically equivalent if p ↔ q

is a tautology (alternately, if they have the same truth table). The notation
p ↔ q denotes p and q are logically equivalent.

• Example: p → q is equivalent to ¬q → ¬p (contrapositive)

🠶 We can show that these 2 expressions are logically equivalence by using
biconditional notation.
Equivalence
Example: p → q is equivalent to ¬q → ¬p (contrapositive)
🠶 We can show that these 2 expressions are logically equivalence by using
biconditional notation.
🠶 Can you notice that the last column (biconditional) produce
TAUTOLOGY?

p q ¬p ¬q p→q ¬q → ¬p (p → q) ↔
(¬q → ¬p)

1 1 1 0 1 1 1
1 0 1 0 0 0 1
0 1 0 1 1 1 1
0 0 0 1 1 1 1
Important logical equivalences

🠶 Proving: Using Truth Table or Logical Laws

🠶 Example
i. DeMorgan's Laws:
🠶 • 1) ¬( p ∨ q ) ↔ ¬p ∧ ¬q
🠶 • 2) ¬( p ∧ q ) ↔ ¬p ∨ ¬q

🠶 Example: Negate "The summer in Mexico is cold and sunny" with

DeMorgan's Laws
🠶 Solution: "The summer in Mexico is not cold or not sunny."
Important logical equivalences(cont.)

ii. Identity
🠶 –p∧T↔p
🠶 –p∨F ↔ p

iii. Domination
🠶 –p∨T↔T
🠶 –p∧F ↔ F

iv. Idempotent
🠶 –p∨p ↔p
🠶 –p∧p ↔p
Important logical equivalences(cont.)

v. Double negation
🠶 – ¬(¬p) ↔ p

vi. Commutative
🠶 –p∨q↔q∨p
🠶 –p∧q↔q∧p

vii. Associative
🠶 – (p ∨ q) ∨ r ↔ p ∨ (q ∨ r)
🠶 – (p ∧ q) ∧ r ↔ p ∧ (q ∧ r)
Important logical equivalences(cont.)

viii. Distributive
🠶 – p ∨ (q ∧ r) ↔ (p ∨ q) ∧ (p ∨ r)
🠶 – p ∧ (q ∨ r) ↔ (p ∧ q) ∨ (p ∧ r)

ix. Useful
🠶 – p ∨ ¬p ↔ T
🠶 – p ∧ ¬p ↔ F
🠶 – p → q ↔ (¬p ∨ q)
Using logical equivalences

🠶 Equivalences can be used in proofs. A proposition or its part can be

transformed using equivalences and some conclusion can be reached.

Example: Show that (p ∧ q) → p is a tautology.

• Proof: (we must show (p ∧ q) → p ↔ T)
(p ∧ q) → p ↔ ¬(p ∧ q) ∨ p Useful
↔ [¬p ∨ ¬q] ∨ p DeMorgan
↔ [¬q ∨ ¬p] ∨ p Commutative
↔ ¬q ∨ [ ¬p ∨ p ] Associative
↔ ¬q ∨ [ T ] Useful
↔ T Domination
Using logical equivalences(cont.)
🠶 Equivalences can be used in proofs. A proposition or its part can be
transformed using equivalences and some conclusion can be reached.

Example 1: Show (p ∧ q) → p is a tautology.

• Using Truth table:

p q p∧q (p ∧ q) → p

1 1 1 1
1 0 0 1
0 1 0 1
0 0 0 1
Using logical equivalences(cont.)

Example 2: Show (p → q) ↔ (¬q → ¬p)

• Using Logical Laws:
(p → q) ↔ (¬q → ¬p)
↔ ¬(¬q) ∨ (¬p) Useful
↔ q ∨ (¬p) Double negation
↔ ¬p ∨ q Commutative
↔ p→q Useful
End of proof
Normal Forms

🠶 Logical expression is said to be in disjunctive normal form (DNF) if it is written

as a disjunction, in which all terms are conjunctions of literals.

🠶 Logical expression is said to be in conjunctive normal form (CNF) if it is written

as a conjunction of disjunctions of literals.

Example

🠶 DNF : (p ∧q) ∨ (p ∧ ¬q)

🠶 CNF : p ∧ (q ∨ r)
Using Logical Laws

🠶 Three steps to obtain a CNF through algebraic manipulations:

🠶 Remove all → and ⇔
🠶 If the expression contains any negated compound subexpressions,
either remove the negation by using the double-negation law or use
De Morgan’s laws to reduce the scope of the negation
🠶 Once an expression with no negated compound subexpression is
found, use the following two laws to reduce the scope of the ∨.

🠶 A ∨ (B ∧ C) ≡ (A ∨ B) ∧ (A ∨ C) Rule I
🠶 (A ∧ B ) ∨ C ≡ (A ∨ C) ∧ (B ∨ C) Rule II
Using Logical Laws(cont.)

🠶 Example: Convert the following expression into CNF

🠶 ¬((P ∨ ¬Q) ∧ ¬R)

🠶 Solution:
🠶 ¬((P ∨ ¬Q) ∧ ¬R) ≡ ¬(P ∨ ¬Q) ∨ ¬¬R De Morgan
≡ ¬(P ∨ ¬Q) ∨ R Double negation
≡ (¬P ∧ ¬¬Q) ∨ R De Morgan
≡ (¬P ∧ Q) ∨ R Double negation
≡ (¬P ∨ R) ∧ (Q ∨ R) Rule II
Using Logical Laws(cont.)

🠶 Three steps to obtain a DNF through algebraic manipulations:

🠶 Remove all → and ⇔
🠶 If the expression contains any negated compound subexpressions, either
remove the negation by using the double-negation law or use De Morgan’s
laws to reduce the scope of the negation
🠶 Once an expression with no negated compound subexpression is found,
use the following two laws to reduce the scope of the ^.

🠶 A ∧ (B ∨ C) ≡ (A ∧ B) ∨ (A ∧ C) Rule I
🠶 (A ∨ B ) ∧ C ≡ (A ∧ C) ∨ (B ∧ C)Rule II
Using Logical Laws (cont.)

🠶 Example: Convert the following expression into DNF

🠶 (P → (Q ∧ R)) ∨ ¬(P ∨ ¬(R∨S))
🠶 Solution:
🠶 (P → (Q ∧ R)) ∨ ¬(P ∨ ¬(R∨S))

≡ (¬P ∨ (Q ∧ R)) ∨ ¬(P ∨ ¬(R∨S)) Useful

≡ (¬P ∨ (Q ∧ R)) ∨ (¬P ∧ ¬¬(R∨S)) De Morgan
≡ (¬P ∨ (Q ∧ R)) ∨ (¬P ∧ (R∨S)) Double negation
≡ (¬P ∨ (Q ∧ R)) ∨ ((¬P ∧ R) ∨(¬P ∧ S)) Rule I
Using truth table
Conjunctive Normal Form

1. Get the F value from the table

2. Read in disjunctive form of F value
3. Complement of every item in disjunctive expression.

P Q R Output

T T T T
T T F T
T F T F
T F F F
F T T T
F T F T
F F T F
F F F T
Using truth table(cont.)

Conjunctive Normal Form

🠶 Solution:
🠶 Get the F value from the table
🠶 Read in disjunctive form = (P ∧ ¬Q ∧ R) ∨ (P ∧ ¬Q ∧ ¬R) ∨ (¬P ∧ ¬Q ∧ R)
🠶 Complement the whole expressions
= (¬P ∨ Q ∨ ¬R) ∧ (¬P ∨ Q ∨ R) ∧ (P ∨ Q ∨ ¬R)

CNF : (¬P ∨ Q ∨ ¬R) ∧ (¬P ∨ Q ∨ R) ∧ (P ∨ Q ∨ ¬R)

Using truth table(cont.)
Disjunctive Normal Form

1. Get the T value from the table

2. Read in disjunctive form of T value

P Q R Output

T T T T
T T F F
T F T T
T F F F
F T T F
F T F F
F F T T
F F F F
Using truth table(cont.)

Disjunctive Normal Form

🠶 Solution:
🠶 Get the T value from the table
🠶 Read in disjunctive form = (P ∧ Q ∧ R) ∨ (P ∧ ¬Q ∧ R) ∨ (¬P ∧ ¬Q ∧ R)

DNF : (P ∧ Q ∧ R) ∨ (P ∧ ¬Q ∧ R) ∨ (¬P ∧ ¬Q ∧ R)