Nested Quantifiers

P r e s e n t e r ： Yu k u n Wa n g

C o m p u t e r s c i e n c e a n d Te c h n o l o g y
1 Understanding
Statements Involving
Nested Quantifiers
Understanding Statements Involving Nested Quantifiers
Introduction
• Nested quantifiers, one quantifier is within the scope of another, such as
x y(x + y = 0)，
note that everything within the scope of a quantifier can be thought of as a
propositional function.

•For example, x y(x + y = 0) is the same thing as xQ(x), where Q(x) is yP(x, y),
where P(x, y) is x + y = 0.
Understanding Statements Involving Nested Quantifiers
Nested Quantifiers
•To understand statements involving nested quantifiers, we need to unravel what
the quantifiers and predicates that appear mean. This is illustrated in Example 1.

Example 1:
•Assume that the domain for the variables x and y consists of all real numbers. The
statement x y(x + y = y + x) says that x + y = y + x for all real numbers x and y.
This is the commutative law for addition of real numbers.

•Likewise, the statement x y(x + y = 0) says that for every real number x there is
a real number y such that x + y = 0. This states that every real number has an
additive inverse.

•Similarly, the statement x y z(x + (y + z) = (x + y) + z) is the associative law for

addition of real numbers.
Thinking of Quantifiers as Loops

In working with quantifications of more than one variable, it is sometimes

helpful to think in terms of nested loops.

For example, to see whether x yP(x, y) is true, we loop through the values for x,
and for each x we loop through the values for y. If we find that for all values of x that
P(x, y) is true for all values of y, we have determined that x yP(x, y) is true. If we
ever hit a value x for which we hit a value y for which P(x, y) is false, we have
shown that x yP(x, y) is false.
2
The Order of Quantifiers
The Order of Quantifiers

It is important to note that the order of the quantifiers is important, unless all
the quantifiers are universal quantifiers or all are existential quantifiers.

These remarks are illustrated by Examples 2–4.

The Order of Quantifiers

Example 2: Let P(x, y) be the statement “x + y = y + x.” What are the truth values
of the quantifications x yP(x, y) and y xP(x, y), where the domain for all
variables consists of all real numbers?
Solution：
•The quantification x yP(x, y) denotes the proposition “For all real numbers x, for
all real numbers y, x + y = y + x.”
•P(x, y) is true for all real numbers x and y (the commutative law for addition), the
proposition x yP(x, y) is true.
•The statement y xP(x, y) says “For all real numbers y, for all real numbers x, x +
y = y + x.” This has the same meaning as the statement “For all real numbers x, for
all real numbers y, x + y = y + x.”
•The order of nested universal quantifiers in a statement without other quantifiers
can be changed without changing the meaning of the quantified statement.
The Order of Quantifiers

Example 3: Let Q(x, y) denote “x + y = 0.” What are the truth values of the
quantifications y xQ(x, y) and x yQ(x, y), where the domain for all variables
consists of all real numbers?

Solution：
• The quantification∃y∀xQ(x, y) denotes the proposition “There is a real number y such that for
every real number x, Q(x, y).”Because there is no real number y such that x + y = 0 for all real
numbers x, the statement ∃y∀xQ(x, y) is false.
•The quantification∀x∃yQ(x, y) denotes the proposition “For every real number x there is a real
number y such that Q(x, y).”Given a real number x, there is a real number y such that x + y = 0;
namely, y = −x. Hence, the statement ∀x∃yQ(x, y) is true.
•If ∃y∀xP(x, y) is true, then ∀x∃yP(x, y) must also be true. However, if ∀x∃yP(x, y) is true, it is not
necessary for ∃y∀xP(x, y) to be true.
•∀x∃yP(x, y) and ∃y∀xP(x, y) are different.
The Order of Quantifiers

Table 1. summarizes the meanings of the different possible quantifications

involving two variables.

TABLE 1 Quantifications of Two Variables.

Statement When True? When False?
∀x∀yP(x, y) P(x, y) is true for every pair x, y. There is a pair x, y for which P(x, y)
is false.
∀y∀xP(x, y)
∀x∃yP(x, y) For every x there is a y for which There is an x such that
P(x, y) is true. P(x, y) is false for every y.
∃x∀yP(x, y) There is an x for which P(x, y) is For every x there is a y for which
true for every y. P(x, y) is false.
∃x∃yP(x, y) There is a pair x, y for which P(x, y) P(x, y) is false for every pair x, y.
∃y∃xP(x, y) is true.
The Order of Quantifiers

Example 4: Let Q(x, y, z) be the statement “x + y = z.” What are the truth values
of the statements x y zQ(x, y, z) and z x yQ(x, y, z), where the domain of all
variables consists of all real numbers?

Solution：
• Suppose that x and y are assigned values. Then, there exists a real number z such
that x + y = z. Consequently, the quantification x y zQ(x, y, z),which is the
statement “For all real numbers x and for all real numbers y there is a real number z
such that x + y = z,”
3
Tr a n s l a t i n g S t a t e m e n t s I n v o l v i n g
Nested Quantifiers
Translating Statements involving Nested Quantifiers

Example 5:Translate the statement “The sum of two positive integers is always
positive” into a logical expression.

Solution:
•First rewrite it so that the implied quantifiers and a domain are shown: “For every
two integers, if these integers are both positive, then the sum of these integers is
positive.”
x y((x > 0) (y > 0) → (x + y > 0))
•Next, we introduce the variables x and y to obtain “For all positive integers x and
y, x + y is positive.”
x y(x + y > 0)
Translating from Nested Quantifiers into English

Expressions with nested quantifiers expressing statements in English can be

quite complicated.
The first step in translating such an expression is to write out what the
quantifiers and predicates in the expression mean. The next step is to express
this meaning in a simpler sentence.
This process is illustrated in Example 6.
Translating from Nested Quantifiers into English

Example 6:Translate the statement x(C(x) y(C(y) F(x, y)))

into English, where C(x) is “x has a computer,” F(x, y) is “x and y are friends,” and the
domain for both x and y consists of all students in your school.

Solution:
•The statement says that for every student x in your school, x has a computer or
there is a student y such that y has a computer and x and y are friends.
•In other words, every student in your school has a computer or has a friend who
has a computer.
Translating from Nested Quantifiers into English

Example 7:Translate the statement x y z((F(x, y) F(x, z) (y ≠ z)) → ¬F(y,

z)) into English, where F(a, b) means a and b are friends and the domain for x, y, and
z consists of all students in your school.

Solution:
•This expression says that if students x and y are friends, and students x and z are
friends, and furthermore,if y and z are not the same student, then y and z are not
friends.
• “There is a student x such that for all students y and all students z other than y, if x
and y are friends and x and z are friends, then y and z are not friends.”
•In other words, there is a student none of whose friends are also friends with each
other.
Translating English Sentences into Logical Expressions

In this section we show how to translate sentences into logical express-
ions using nested quantifiers.
Translating from Nested Quantifiers into English

Example 8: Express the statement “If a person is female and is a parent, then this
person is someone’s mother” as a logical expression involving predicates, quantifiers
with a domain consisting of all people, and logical connectives.

Solution:
• The statement can be expressed as “For every person x, if person x is female and
person x is a parent,then there exists a person y such that person x is the mother of
person y.”
•The propositional functions F(x) to represent “x is female,” P(x) to represent “x is a
parent,” and M(x, y) to represent “x is the mother of y.” The original statement can
be represented as x((F(x) P(x)) → yM(x, y)).
Translating from Nested Quantifiers into English

Solution:
•Using the null quantification rule, we can move y to the left so that it appears just
after x, because y does not appear in F(x) P(x). We obtain the logically
equivalent expression x y((F(x) P(x)) → M(x, y)).
Translating from Nested Quantifiers into English

Example 9: Use quantifiers to express the statement “There is a woman who has
taken a flight on every airline in the world.”

Solution:
•Let P(w, f) be “w has taken f ” and Q(f, a) be “f is a flight on a.” We can express
the statement as w a f(P(w, f) Q(f, a)), where the domains of discourse for w, f
, and a consist of all the women in the world, all airplane flights, and all airlines,
respectively.
3
Negating Nested Quantifiers
Negating Nested Quantifiers

Statements involving nested quantifiers can be negated by successively

applying the rules for Assessment negating statements involving a single
quantifier.
This is illustrated in Examples 10–11.
Negating Nested Quantifiers

Example 10: Express the negation of the statement x y(xy = 1) so that no

negation precedes a quantifier.

Solution:
•By successively applying De Morgan’s laws for quantifiers,we can move the
negation in ¬ x y(xy = 1) inside all the quantifiers.
•¬ x y(xy = 1) is equivalent to x¬ y(xy = 1), which is equivalent to x y¬(xy =
1).
•Because ¬(xy = 1) can be expressed more simply as xy ≠ 1, we conclude that our
negated statement can be expressed as x y(xy ≠ 1).
Negating Nested Quantifiers

Example 11: Use quantifiers to express the statement that “There does not exist a
woman who has taken a flight on every airline in the world.”
Solution:
• By Example 9, the statement can be expressed as ¬ w a f(P(w, f) Q( f, a)),
where P(w, f) is “w has taken f ” and Q( f, a) is “f is a flight on a.”
• By successively applying De Morgan’s laws for quantifiers to move the negation
inside successive quantifiers and by applying De Morgan’s law for negating a
conjunction in the last step,we have this sequence of statements:
Negating Nested Quantifiers

Solution:
• w¬ a f(P(w, f) Q( f, a)) ≡ w a¬ f(P(w, f) Q( f, a))
≡ w a f¬(P(w, f) Q( f, a))
≡ w a f(¬P(w, f) ¬Q( f, a)).
Exercise

Section 1.5 P57 T8，T24