RULES OF INFERENCE FOR

QUANTIFIED STATEMENTS

Lecture # 17

1
 INTRODUCTION
 We have discussed rules of inference for propositions.
We will now describe some important rules of inference
for statements involving quantifiers, which are given
below:

 Universal Instantiation
 Universal Generalization
 Existential Instantiation
 Existential Generalization

2
 UNIVERSAL INSTANTIATION
 Assume that we know that x P(x) is true:
 Then we can conclude that P(c) is true
 Here c stands for some specific constant from the domain.
 This is called “universal instantiation”
 Given the premise x P(x).

 Example:

We have a statement “All woman are wise.”

We can conclude that “Lisa is wise”
Where Lisa is member of the domain.

3
 UNIVERSAL GENERALIZATION
 Assume that we know that P(c) is true for any value of c
 Then we can conclude that x P(x) is true.
 This is called “universal generalization”

4
 EXISTENTIAL INSTANTIATION
 Assume that we know that x P(x) is true
 Then we can conclude that P(c) is true for some value of c
 Here c stands for some specific constant from the
domain.
 This is called “existential instantiation”
 Given the premise x P(x).

5
 EXISTENTIAL GENERALIZATION
 Assume we know that P(c) is true for some value of c
 Then we can conclude that x P(x) is true
 This is called “existential generalization”

6
7
 EXAMPLE
 Show that the premises:
“Everyone in this discrete mathematics class has taken a
course in computer science” and
“Ramdeen is a student in this class” imply the
conclusion “Ramdeen has taken a course in computer
science.”

 Solution:
D(x) = x is in discrete mathematics class.
C(x) = x has taken a course in computer science.

8
 Then the premises are:
x (D(x) → C(x))
D(Ramdeen)
C(Ramdeen)
Rule of inference Tautology

The following steps can be used p q

p [ p  ( p  q)

to establish conclusion: q
q
p q [ q  ( p  q )
 p

1. x (D(x) → C(x)) Premise p q

q r [( p  q )  ( q  r )]

2. D(Ramdeen) → C(Ramdeen) Universal p r

pq

Instantiation p
q
(( p  q )  p

3. D(Ramdeen) Premise p
pq
p  (p

4. C(Ramdeen) Modus Ponens pq

p
( p  q) 

p
q (( p )  ( q ))  (
pq
pq
p  r [( p  q )  (p  r )
q  r
 EXAMPLE
 Show that the premises:
“A student in this class has not read the book.” and
“Everyone in this class passed the first exam” imply the
conclusion “Someone who passed the first exam has not
read the book.”

 Solution:
C(x) = x is in this class.
B(x) = x has read the book.
P(x) = x passed the first exam.

10
 Then the premises are:
 x (C(x)  ¬B(x))
x (C(x) → P(x))
  x (P(x)  ¬B(x))
 The following steps can be used
to establish conclusion:
1.  x (C(x)  ¬B(x)) Premise Rule of inference
pq
Tautology Name

2. C(a)  ¬B(a) Existential Instantiation [ p  ( p  q)]  q

p Modus ponens
q
q
3. C(a) Simplification pq [q  ( p  q)]  p Modus tollen

4. x (C(x) → P(x)) Premise  p

pq

5. C(a) → P(a) Universal Instantiation qr

pr
[( p  q)  (q  r )]  ( p  r ) Hypothetic al syllogism

6. P(a) Modus Ponens pq

p (( p  q )  p )  q Disjunctiv e syllogism

7. ¬B(a)  C(a) Commutative on (2) q

p
p  ( p  q)
8. ¬B(a) Simplification
Addition
pq
pq
( p  q)  p
9. P(a)  ¬B(a) Conjunction on (6) & (8) p p
Simplifica tion

10.  x (P(x)  ¬B(x)) Existential Generalization q (( p )  (q ))  ( p  q) Conjunctio n

pq
pq
p  r [( p  q)  (p  r )]  ( p  r ) Resolution
q  r
 COMBINING RULES OF INFERENCE FOR
PROPOSITIONS & QUANTIFIED STATEMENTS
 A rule of inference for quantified statements, and modus
ponens, a rule of inference for propositional logic.

 We will often need to use this combination of rules of

inference. Because universal instantiation and modus
ponens are used so often together.

 This combination of rules is sometimes called universal

modus ponens.

12
 UNIVERSAL MODUS PONENS
 This rule tells us that if x (P(x) → Q(x)) is true, and if
P(a) is true for a particular element a in the domain of
the universal quantifier, then Q(a) must also be true.

 To see this, note that by universal instantiation

P(a) → Q(a) is true.

x (P(x) → Q(x))
P(a), where a is a particular element in the domain.
Q(a)
13
 NOTE
 Universal modus ponens is commonly used in
mathematical arguments.

14
 EXAMPLE
 Assume that:
“For all positive integers n, if n is greater than 4, then n2 is
less then 2n” is true.
Use universal modus ponens to show that 1002 < 2100.

 Solution:
Let
P(n) = n > 4
Q(n) = n2 < 2n .
The statement can be represented by n(P(n) → Q(n))
Domain = all positive integers

15
 We are assuming that n (P(n) → Q(n)) is true.

P(100) is true. Because 100 > 4.

It follows by universal modus ponens that Q(100) is true,

namely 1002 < 2100 .

16
 UNIVERSAL MODUS TOLLENS
 Universal modus tollens combines universal instantiation
and modus tollens and can be expressed in the following
way:

x (P(x) → Q(x))
¬Q(a), where a is a particular element in the domain.
 ¬P(a)

17
 EXERCISE
 Use rules of inference to show that if
x (P(x) → (Q(x)  S(x))) and
x (P(x)  R(x))) are true
then x (R(x)  S(x)) is true

 Solution:

18
 The following steps can be used to
establish conclusion:
01. x (P(x)  R(x))) Premise
02. P(a)  R(a) Universal Instantiation
03. P(a) Simplification
04. x (P(x) → (Q(x)  S(x))) Premise
Rule of inference Tautology Name
pq
p [ p  ( p  q)]  q Modus ponens

05. Q(a)  S(a) Universal modus ponens q

q

06. S(a)  Q(a)

pq [q  ( p  q)]  p
Commutative
Modus tollen
 p
pq
07. S(a) Simplification qr [( p  q)  (q  r )]  ( p  r ) Hypothetic al syllogism
pr
08. R(a)  P(a) Commutative on (2) pq
p (( p  q )  p )  q Disjunctiv e syllogism

09. R(a) Simplification q

p
p  ( p  q) Addition
pq
10. R(a)  S(a) Conjunction (9) & (7) pq
p
( p  q)  p Simplifica tion

11. x (R(x)  S(x)) Universal generalization p

q (( p )  (q ))  ( p  q) Conjunctio n
pq
pq
p  r [( p  q)  (p  r )]  ( p  r ) Resolution
q  r
 EXAMPLE
 Use rules of inference to show that if

x (P(x)  Q(x)),
x (¬Q(x)  S(x)),
x (R(x) → ¬S(x)) and
x ¬P(x) are true
then
x ¬R(x) is true

20
Rule of inference Tautology Name
pq
p [ p  ( p  q )]  q Modus ponens
q
q
pq [q  ( p  q )]  p Modus tollen
 p
pq
qr [( p  q )  ( q  r )]  ( p  r ) Hypothetic al syllogism
pr
pq
p (( p  q )  p )  q Disjunctiv e syllogism
q
p
p  ( p  q) Addition
pq
pq
( p  q)  p Simplifica tion
p
p
q (( p )  ( q ))  ( p  q ) Conjunctio n
pq
pq
p  r [( p  q )  (p  r )]  ( p  r ) Resolution
q  r

21
 The following steps can be used to
establish conclusion:
01. x ¬P(x) Premise
02. ¬P(c) Existential Instantiation
03. x (P(x)  Q(x)) Premise Rule of inference Tautology
pq
04. P(c)  Q(c) Universal Instantiation p [ p  ( p  q )] 

05. Q(c) Disjunctive syllogism q

q

06. x (¬Q(x)  S(x)) Premise

pq [q  ( p  q )] 
 p

07. ¬Q(c)  S(c)

pq
Universal Instantiation qr [( p  q )  ( q  r )] 

08. S(c) Disjunctive syllogism pr

pq

09. x (R(x) → ¬S(x)) Premise p

q
(( p  q )  p ) 

10. R(c) → ¬S(c) Universal Instantiation

p
pq
p  ( p  q)

11. ¬R(c) Modus Tollens p

pq
( p  q)  p

12. x ¬P(x) Existential Generalization q

p
(( p )  ( q ))  ( p 
pq
pq
p  r [( p  q )  (p  r )] 
q  r