CSC510

DISCRETE STRUCTURES

Logic Equivalences and Soundness

Lecture 3: Logical Equivalences and Equality
SECTION SUMMARY

o Tautologies, Contradictions, and Contingencies.

o Logical Equivalence
o Important Logical Equivalences
o Showing Logical Equivalence
o Logic Equivalences (Laws)
o Normal Forms
o Disjunctive Normal Form
o Conjunctive Normal Form
Tautologies, Contradictions, and
Contingencies
A tautology is a proposition which is always true.
Example: p ∨¬p
A contradiction is a proposition which is always false.
Example: p ∧¬p
A contingency is a proposition which is neither a tautology nor
a contradiction, such as p

P ¬p p ∨¬p p ∧¬p
T F T F
F T T F
 Logically Equivalent

o Two compound propositions p and q are equivalent if and only if

the columns in a truth table giving their truth values agree.

o This truth table show ¬p ∨ q is equivalent to p → q.

p q ¬p ¬p ∨ q p→ q
T T F T T
T F F F F
F T T T T
F F T T T
 Logically Equivalent

Another 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.
 De Morgan’s Laws

Augustus De Morgan

1806-1871

This truth table shows that De Morgan’s Second Law holds.

p q ¬p ¬q (p∨q) ¬(p∨q) ¬p∧¬q

T T F F T F F
T F F T T F F
F T T F T F F
F F T T F T T
Key Logical Equivalences
Key Logical Equivalences
Using logical equivalences: Proofs

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

Two ways to solve this!

Using logical equivalences: Proofs
1. 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: Proofs

2. Using logical equivalences:

Therefore, proven
Using logical equivalences: Proofs

Example 2: Show that (p → q) ≡ (¬q → ¬p) using Logical Laws:

(p → q) ≡ ¬p ∨ q) Useful / Remove implication

≡ q ∨ ¬p Commutative Law
≡ ¬q → ¬p Definition of Implication

Therefore, proven (p → q) ≡ (¬q → ¬p)

Exercise (Proof)

1. Show that is a tautology using Logical Equivalence L

Exercise (Proof)

2. Show that (p  q) ∨ (p  r) are logically equivalent to p  (q ∨ r) by using series of

logical equivalence rules.
Exercise (Proof)

3. Show that (p  q) ∨ (p  r) are logically equivalent to p  (q ∨ r) by using series of

logical equivalence rules.
Exercise (Proof)

4. Show that (¬q ∧ (p → q)) → ¬ p is a tautology by using series of logical equivalence

rules.
Normal Forms
o 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 – disjunction of conjunction

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

conjunction of disjunctions of literals – conjunction of disjunction

o Example

o DNF : (p ∧q) ∨ (p ∧ ¬q)

o CNF : p ∧ (q ∨ r)
How to obtain DNF?
Using Logical Laws

o Three steps to obtain a DNF through algebraic manipulations:

o Remove all → and ⇔
o 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
o Once an expression with no negated compound subexpression is found, use the following
two laws to reduce the scope of the ^.

o A ∧ (B ∨ C) ≡ (A ∧ B) ∨ (A ∧ C) Rule I
o (A ∨ B ) ∧ C ≡ (A ∧ C) ∨ (B ∧ C) Rule II
DNF: Using Logical Laws
Example: Convert the following expression into DNF

(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
 DNF: Using Truth Table
P Q R Output 1. Identify the rows with T value from the
1 T T T T table
2 T T F T
3 T F T F 2. Identify the truth value for P,Q and R for
4 T F F F each row and write in disjunctive form (put
negation sign if the truth value is F)
5 F T T T
6 F T F T
Row 1: P ∧ Q ∧ R
7
F F T F
Row 2: P ∧ Q ∧ ¬R
8
F F F T
Row 5: ¬ P ∧ Q ∧ R
3. DNF = [ (P ∧ Q ∧ R) v (P ∧ Q ∧ ¬R) v (¬ P ∧ Q ∧ R) v Row 6: ¬P ∧ Q ∧ ¬ R
(¬P ∧ Q ∧ ¬ R) v ( ¬P ∧ ¬ Q ∧ ¬ R)] Row 8: ¬P ∧ ¬ Q ∧ ¬ R
How to obtain CNF?

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
CNF: Using Logical Laws
Example: Convert the following expression into CNF

¬((P ∨ ¬Q) ∧ ¬R)

¬((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) Distributive Law
conjunction of disjunction
 CNF: Using Truth Table
P Q R Output 1. Identify the rows with F value
1 T T T T from the table
2 T T F T
3 T F T F 2. Identify the truth value for P,Q and R for
4 T F F F each row and write in disjunctive form (put
negation sign if the truth value is F)
5 F T T T
6 F T F T Row 3: P ∧ ¬Q ∧ R
7
F F T F
Row 4: P ∧ ¬Q ∧ ¬R
F F F T
8 Row 7: ¬P ∧ ¬Q ∧ R

3. Write in disjunctive normal form

Input = [(P ∧ ¬Q ∧ R) ∨ (P ∧ ¬Q ∧ ¬R) ∨ (¬P ∧ ¬Q ∧ R)]

4. Complement the whole expressions

Input = (¬P ∨ Q ∨ ¬R) ∧ (¬P ∨ Q ∨ R) ∧ (P ∨ Q ∨ ¬R)
CNF = (¬P ∨ Q ∨ ¬R) ∧ (¬P ∨ Q ∨ R) ∧ (P ∨ Q ∨ ¬R)
Exercise (DNF)
1. Find the DNF of (p ∧ q)→¬r

p q r (p ∧ q) ¬r (p ∧ q)→¬r

T T T
T T F
T F T
T F F
F T T
F T F
F F T
F F F
Exercise (DNF)
2 With the aid of a truth table, convert the expression (¬p  q) ∧ (¬q ∨ r) into
Disjunction Normal Form (DNF)

p q r ¬p ¬q ¬p → q ¬qvr f

1 1 1
1 1 0
1 0 1
1 0 0
0 1 1
0 1 0
0 0 1
0 0 0