Scribd
Upload
14 views5 pages

First Order Logic Notations Note

The document provides an overview of First-Order Logic (FOL), detailing its symbols, including logical operators, quantifiers, predicates, and functions. It explains key concepts such as resolution, common logical consequences like Modus Ponens and Modus Tollens, and methods of proof by refutation. Additionally, it includes examples to illustrate the application of these concepts in logical reasoning.

Uploaded by

minmattral
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
14 views5 pages

First Order Logic Notations Note

The document provides an overview of First-Order Logic (FOL), detailing its symbols, including logical operators, quantifiers, predicates, and functions. It explains key concepts such as resolution, common logical consequences like Modus Ponens and Modus Tollens, and methods of proof by refutation. Additionally, it includes examples to illustrate the application of these concepts in logical reasoning.

Uploaded by

minmattral
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 5

Understanding First-Order Logic (FOL)

Notations
Mattral
March 21, 2025

1 Introduction
First-Order Logic (FOL), also known as Predicate Logic, is a formal system
used in **mathematics, artificial intelligence, and logic programming (e.g., Pro-
log).** It extends Propositional Logic by introducing variables, quantifiers, and
predicates.
This document covers all **important symbols** in FOL, their meanings,
and examples.

2 Logical Symbols in First-Order Logic


2.1 1. Logical Operators (Connectives)
These symbols connect different logical statements:

• Negation (NOT, ¬): Inverts a statement.

¬P (Not P)

Example: ¬Rain (It is not raining)

• Conjunction (AND, ∧): Both statements must be true.

P ∧Q

Example: Sunny ∧ Warm (It is both sunny and warm)

• Disjunction (OR, ∨): At least one statement is true.

P ∨Q

Example: Weekend ∨ Holiday (Either it’s a weekend or a holiday)

1
• Implication (IF-THEN, →): If the first statement is true, the second
must also be true.
P →Q
Example: Rain → Wet (If it rains, then the ground is wet)
• Biconditional (IF AND ONLY IF, ↔): Both statements are equiva-
lent.
P ↔Q
Example: Triangle ↔ Three Sides (A shape is a triangle if and only if it
has three sides)

2.2 2. Quantifiers
Quantifiers define whether a statement applies to all elements or just some.

• Universal Quantifier (FOR ALL, ∀)

∀x P (x)

Meaning: For every x, the statement P (x) is true.


Example:
∀x (Cat(x) → Animal(x))
(All cats are animals)
• Existential Quantifier (THERE EXISTS, ∃)

∃x P (x)

Meaning: There is at least one x for which P (x) is true.


Example:
∃x Dog(x)
(There exists at least one dog)

2.3 2.3 Objects


• Objects: These are things like people, animals, or numbers.
Example:
Jack, Alice, 5, Tree

2
2.4 3. Predicates and Functions
• Predicate: A property or relation applied to objects.
Loves(x, y)
Meaning: x loves y.
Example:
Loves(Romeo, Juliet)

• Functions: A function returns an object based on input.


f (x)
Example:
Father(John) = David
(John’s father is David)

2.5 4. Equality and Inequality


• Equality (=)
x=y
Meaning: x and y are the same.
Example:
Father(Anna) = John
(Anna’s father is John)
• Inequality (̸=)
x ̸= y
Meaning: x and y are different.
Example:
Alice ̸= Bob
(Alice is not Bob)

2.6 5. Resolution and Clause Notation (Used in Proofs)


• **Clausal Form** (Disjunction of literals)
P (x) ∨ ¬Q(x)
Meaning: Either P (x) is true, or Q(x) is false.
• **Resolution Rule** (Used in automated theorem proving)
A ∨ C, ¬A ∨ B ⇒ B∨C
Meaning: If A is true in one clause and false in another, they resolve into
B ∨ C.

3
3 Common Logical Consequences
3.1 Modus Ponens (Direct Inference)
P → Q, P ⇒ Q
If P is true and P → Q is true, then Q must be true.

3.2 Modus Tollens (Contrapositive Reasoning)


P → Q, ¬Q ⇒ ¬P
If P → Q is true and Q is false, then P must be false.

3.3 De Morgan’s Laws


¬(P ∧ Q) ≡ ¬P ∨ ¬Q
¬(P ∨ Q) ≡ ¬P ∧ ¬Q

3.4 Contradiction and Proof by Refutation


Contradiction is a situation where we derive a statement and its negation at
the same time, meaning both P and ¬P hold, which is impossible. If assuming
¬P leads to a contradiction, then P must be true. This method is called Proof
by Refutation (or Reductio ad Absurdum).

3.4.1 Definition
To prove a statement P , we assume the opposite (i.e., ¬P ). If this assumption
leads to an inconsistency or contradiction, then ¬P must be false, meaning P
must be true.

If ¬P ⇒ Contradiction, then P must be true.


√
3.4.2 Example 1: Proof that 2 is irrational
√
We want to prove that 2 is irrational using contradiction.
Step 1: √Assume the opposite (Negation of the statement)
Suppose 2 is rational. Then it can be written as a fraction:
√ a
2=
b
where a and b are integers with no common factors (in simplest form).
Step 2: Square both sides

a2
2=
b2
Multiplying both sides by b2 :

4
2b2 = a2
This means that a2 is even, which implies that a must also be even (because
the square of an odd number is always odd). So we can write:

a = 2k for some integer k.


Step 3: Substituting a = 2k into the equation

2b2 = (2k)2 = 4k 2
Dividing both sides by 2:

b2 = 2k 2
This shows that b2 is also even, meaning b is even. But if both a and b are
even, they have a common factor of 2, which contradicts our initial assumption
that they have no common factors.
Step 4: Conclusion
√
Since assuming
√ 2 is rational leads to a contradiction, our assumption must
be false. Hence, 2 is irrational.

3.4.3 Example 2: Proof that there is no smallest positive rational


number
We will prove by contradiction that there is no smallest positive rational number.
Step 1: Assume there exists a smallest positive rational number,
call it r.
Step 2: Consider the number 2r .
Since r is positive, 2r is also positive, and clearly 2r is smaller than r. This
contradicts our assumption that r was the smallest positive rational number.
Step 3: Conclusion
Since the assumption led to a contradiction, there cannot be a smallest
positive rational number.

3.5 General Form of Proof by Refutation


Proof by refutation generally follows these steps:

1. Assume ¬P (the opposite of what you want to prove).


2. Deduce logical consequences from ¬P .
3. Arrive at a contradiction (something that is impossible or false).
4. Conclude that ¬P is false, which means P must be true.

This method is widely used in mathematics, logic, and computer science for
proving theorems and solving logical problems.

You might also like