CSC102:Discrete

Structure

Instructor: Khurram Iqbal

Department of Computer Science

COMSATS University, Islamabad
 Recap

Lecture No 3

Department of Computer Science 2

How to determine truth value of implication

 A conditional statement denoted as p  q

is defined as: It is false when p is true and
q is false; otherwise it is true.

p q pq
T T T
T F F
F T T
F F T

Department of Computer Science 3

 Conclusion

Implication: pq
Inverse: ~p  ~q
Converse: qp
Contrapositive: ~q  ~p
NOTE
1. An implication is logically equivalent to it’s contrapositive.
2. The converse and inverse of an implication are logically
equivalent.
3. An implication is not equivalent to it’s converse.

Department of Computer Science 4

 Truth Table of Bi-conditional Statement

p q p q

T T T

T F F

F T F

F F T

Department of Computer Science 5

 Lecture No 4

Department of Computer Science 6

 Today Covered

1. How to prove LOGICAL

EQUIVALENCE using:
• Truth Table
• Laws of Logic
2. What is consistent statements and
how to determine whether a set of
statements is consistent?
3. How to deduce conclusion from
given statement?
Department of Computer Science 7
 Logical Equivalence

 The statements:
 “6 is greater than 2”
 “2 is less than 6”
 are two different ways of saying the same
thing.
 Compound propositions that have the
same truth values in all possible cases are
called logically equivalent.
 The logical equivalence of statement
forms P and Q is denoted by writing P 
Q.
Department of Computer Science 8
Testing Whether Two Statement Forms P and Q Are Logically Equivalent

 We can prove logical equivalence by

using :
 Truth Table
 Laws of Logic

Department of Computer Science 9

Testing Logically Equivalence using Truth Table

Department of Computer Science 10

Logical Equivalence involving implication

Use truth table to show pq  ~q  ~p

p q ~q ~p pq ~q  ~p
T T F F T T
T F T F F F
F T F T T T
F F T T T T

same truth
Department of Computer Science values 11
 Your Turn
Are the statements (p  q)  r and p  (q  r) logically
equivalent?
p q r pq qr (p  q)  r p (q  r)
T T T T T T T
T T F T F F F
T F T F F F F
T F F F F F F
F T T F T F F
F T F F F F F
F F T F F F F
F F F F F F F

Same truth
values
Department of Computer Science 12
Testing Logically Equivalence using Laws

Department of Computer Science 13

Testing Logically Equivalence using Laws

Department of Computer Science 14

Testing Logically Equivalence using Laws

Department of Computer Science 15

 Applying Laws of Logic
Rewrite the statement forms without using the symbols  or 
1. p~qr 2. (pr)(q r)
SOLUTION
1. p~qr  (p~q)r order of operations
~(p~q)  r implication law

2. (pr)(q r)  (~p  r)(~q  r) implication law

 [(~p  r) (~q  r)]  [(~q  r) (~p  r)]
equivalence of
biconditional
 [~(~p  r)  (~q  r)]  [~(~q  r)  (~p  r)]
Department of Computer Science implication law
16
 Your Turn

Rewrite the statement form ~p  q  r  ~q to a logically

equivalent form that uses only ~ and 
SOLUTION
STATEMENT REASON
~p  q  r  ~q Given statement form
 (~p  q)  (r  ~q) Order of operations
 ~[(~p  q)  ~ (r  ~q)] Implication law pq  ~(p~ q)
 ~[~(p  ~q)  (~r  q)] De Morgan’s law

Department of Computer Science 17

 Argument

 Consider the following sequence of

propositions.
 The bug is either in module 17 or in module
81.
 The bug is a numerical error.
 Module 81 has no numerical error.
 Assuming that these statements are true
 It is reasonable to conclude
 The bug is in module 17
 This process of drawing a conclusion from
a sequence of propositions is called
deductive reasoning.
Department of Computer Science 18
 Argument

 The given propositions are called

hypotheses or premises, and the
proposition that follows from the
hypotheses is called the conclusion.

Department of Computer Science 19

 ARGUMENT
An argument is a list of statements called premises (or assumptions
or hypotheses) followed by a statement called the conclusion.
P1 Premise

P2 Premise

P3 Premise

. . . . .. . . . .
Pn Premise

______________
C Conclusion
NOTE The symbol  read “therefore,” is normally placed
just before the conclusion.

Department of Computer Science 20

 VALID AND INVALID ARGUMENT
An argument is valid if the conclusion is true when all the
premises are true.
Alternatively, an argument is valid if conjunction of its
premises imply conclusion.
That is (P1 P2  P3  . . .  Pn)  C is a tautology.

An argument is invalid if the conclusion is false when all

the premises are true.
Alternatively, an argument is invalid if conjunction of its
premises does not imply conclusion.

Department of Computer Science 21

 An interesting teacher keeps me awake. I stay awake in
Discrete Structure class. Therefore, my Discrete Structure
teacher is interesting.
Is the above argument valid?

Department of Computer Science 22

How to show/prove validity of an argument

 We can always use a truth table to

show that an argument form is valid.
 We do this by showing that
whenever the premises are true, the
conclusion must also be true.
 Identify the premises and conclusion of the
argument form.
 Construct a truth table showing the truth values
of all the premises and the conclusion.
 Identify a critical row (a row of the truth table in
which all the premises are true).
 if the conclusion in every critical row is true,
Department then the
of Computer argument form is valid.
Science 23
 Example

If I got an Eid bonus, I’ll buy an iPhone.

If I sell my motorcycle, I’ll buy an iPhone.
If I get an Eid bonus or I sell my motorcycle, then I’ll buy an
iPhone.
SOLUTION:
Let e = I got an Eid bonus
i = I’ll buy an iPhone
m = I sell my motorcycle
The argument is
ei
mi
 emi
Department of Computer Science 24
 premises conclusion

e i m e i m i em em i
T T T T T T T
T T F T T T T
T F T F F T F
T F F F T T F critical
rows
F T T T T T T
F T F T T F T
F F T T F T F
F F F T T F T
The argument is
Department of Computer Science 25
valid
How to show/prove validity of an argument

 Proving that an argument is valid

using truth table can be a tedious
approach.
 We can use rules of
inference(relatively simple
argument forms) to prove validity of
complex argument.

Department of Computer Science 26

How to show/prove validity of an argument

Department of Computer Science 27

How to show/prove validity of an argument

 Proving that an argument is valid

using truth table can be a tedious
approach.
 We can use rules of
inference(relatively simple
argument forms) to prove validity of
complex argument.

Department of Computer Science 28

How to as questions related to Rule of Inference

 What rule of inference is used in

each of these arguments?
 For each of these sets of premises,
what relevant conclusion or
conclusions can be drawn? Explain
the rules of inference used to obtain
each conclusion from the premises.

Department of Computer Science 29