CSC102 - Discrete Structures

(Discrete Mathematics)
Lecture # 9
 Lecture Outline
• Ch. 1.6 Rules of Inference

– Rules of inference
– Proof using rules of Inference
– Fallacy
– Rules of inference with quantifiers
 Summary: Rules of Inference
Rules of Inference Tautology Name
p (p ∧ (p → q)) → q Modus ponens
p→q
∴q
￢q ( ￢ q ∧ (p → q))→ Modus tollens
p→q ￢p
∴ ￢p
p→q ((p → q) ∧ (q → r)) Hypothetical
q→r → (p → r) syllogism
∴p→r
p∨q ((p ∨ q)∧ ￢ p) → q Disjunctive
￢p syllogism
∴q
 Summary: Rules of Inference
Rules of Inference Tautology Name
p p → (p ∨ q) Addition
∴p∨q
p∧q (p ∧ q) → p Simplification
∴p
p ((p) ∧ (q)) → (p ∧ q) Conjunction
q
∴p∧q

p∨q ((p ∨ q) ∧ ( ￢ p ∨ Resolution

￢p∨r r)) → (q ∨ r)
∴q∨r
 Exercise-Validity of
Argument
Find the argument form for the following argument and
determine whether it is valid. Can we conclude that the
conclusion is true if the premises are true?
If George does not have eight legs, then he is not
a spider. George is a spider. Therefore George
has eight legs.
 Exercise
What rule of inference is used in each of these arguments?
a) Kangaroos live in Australia and are marsupials.
Therefore, kangaroos are marsupials.

b) It is either hotter than 100 degrees today or the

pollution is dangerous. It is less than 100 degrees
outside today. Therefore, the pollution is dangerous.

c) Linda is an excellent swimmer. If Linda is an excellent

swimmer, then she can work as a lifeguard. Therefore,
Linda can work as a lifeguard.
 Exercise

d) Steve will work at a computer company this summer.

Therefore, this summer Steve will work at a computer
company or he will be a beach bum.

e) If I work all night on this homework, then I can answer

all the exercises. If I answer all the exercises, I will
understand the material. Therefore, if I work all night on
this homework, then I will understand the material.
 Steps for Proof

1. Identify the atomic propositions and

represent using propositional variable.
2. Make the argument from
3. Proof using rules of inference
 Example -1 Proof
Argument:

It is not sunny this afternoon and it is colder

than yesterday; We will go swimming only if it is
sunny this afternoon. If we do not go swimming,
then we will take a canoe trip. If we take a
canoe trip, then we will be home by sunset.
Therefore we will be home by sunset.

Step1: Identify the atomic propositions and

represent using propositional variable.
 Example-1 Proof
Step1: Identify the atomic propositions and represent using
propositional variable.

We have four hypotheses:

H1: “It is not sunny this afternoon and it is colder than
yesterday”
H2: “We will go swimming only if it is sunny this afternoon”
H3: “If we do not go swimming, then we will take a canoe trip”
H4: “If we take a canoe trip, then we will be home by sunset”

Conclusion: “we will be home by sunset”

s = “It is sunny this afternoon”

c = “it is colder than yesterday”
m = “We will go swimming”
t = “we will take a canoe trip”
h = “we will be home by sunset”
 Example-1 Proof
Step2: Make the argument from
– H1: “It is not sunny this afternoon and it is colder than yesterday”
– H2: “We will go swimming only if it is sunny this afternoon”
– H3: “If we do not go swimming, then we will take a canoe trip”
– H4: “If we take a canoe trip, then we will be home by sunset”

H1: s  c
H2: ms
H3: m  t
H4 t h
C:  h
(( s  c)  (m  s)  ( m  t)  (t  h))  h ???
 Example-1 of Proof H1: s  c
H2: ms
Step3: Proof using rules of inference H3: m  t
H4 th
1. ¬s  c H1 C:  h
2. ¬s Simplification using step 1
3. m  s H2
4. ¬m Modus tollens using steps 2 & 3
5. ¬m  t H3
6. t Modus ponens using steps 4 & 5
7. t  h H4
8. h Modus ponens using steps 6 & 7
Hence we get conclusion, h
 Example-2 Proof
• “If it does not rain or it is not foggy, then the sailing race will be
held and the lifesaving demonstration will go on”
( r   f)  (s  d)

• “If the sailing race is held, then the trophy will be awarded”
st

H1: (¬𝑟∨¬𝑓)→(𝑠∧𝑑)
• “The trophy was not awarded”
t

• Can you conclude: “It rained”?

Example-2 of Proof H1: (r  f )  ( s  d )
H2: s  t
H3: t
C: r
1. ¬t 3rd hypothesis
2. s→t 2nd hypothesis
3. ¬s Modus tollens using steps 1 & 2
4. (¬r¬f)→(sd) 1st hypothesis
5. ¬(sd)→¬(¬r¬f) Contrapositive of step 4
6. (¬s¬d)→(rf) De Morgan’s and double negation law
7. ¬s¬d Addition from step 3
8. rf Modus ponens using steps 6 & 7
9. r Simplification using step 8
 Fallacies

• Rule of inference: are valid argument form

that can be used to demonstrate that
arguments are valid.

• Fallacy: An invalid argument form often used

incorrectly as a rule of inference (or
sometimes, more generally, an incorrect
argument)
 Fallacies
•
 Example - Fallacies
• If you do the every problem in this book, then you
will learn discrete mathematics. You learned discrete
mathematics
Therefore
You did every problem in this book
Let p = “you do the every problem in this book”
q = “you learned discrete mathematics”

pq
q
p
 Example-3 Proof
• We have hypotheses
“If you send me an e-mail message, then I will finish writing the
program,”
“If you do not send me an e-mail message, then I will go to sleep early,”
“If I go to sleep early, then I will wake up feeling refreshed”
The conclusion “If I do not finish writing the program, then I will wake up
feeling refreshed.”

H1: p  q
• Let p = “You send me an e-mail message,”
• q = “I will finish writing the program,” H2: p  r
• r = “I will go to sleep early,” H3: rs
• s = “I will wake up feeling refreshed.”
C: q  s
 Example-3 Proof H1: p  q
H2: p  r
H3: rs
1. p→q 1st Hypothesis C: q  s
2. ￢q→￢p Contrapositive of 1

3. ￢p→r 2nd Hypothesis

4. ￢q→r Hypothetical syllogism using 2 and 3

5. r→s 3rd Hypothesis

6. ￢q→s Hypothetical syllogism using 4 and 5

 Rules of Inference for
Quantified Statements
Rule of Inference Name

∀xP(x) Universal instantiation

∴ P(c)

P(c) for an arbitrary c Universal generalization

∴ ∀xP(x)

∃xP(x) Existential instantiation

∴ P(c) for some element c
P(c) for some element c Existential generalization
∴ ∃xP(x)
 Rules of Inference for the Universal
Quantifier
• Assume that we know that x P(x) is true, Then we can
conclude that P(c) is true
– Here c is particular value in domain
– This is called “universal instantiation”
– Example: All women are wise therefore Lisa is wise.

• Assume that we know that P(c) is true for all value of c in

domain
– Then we can conclude that x P(x) is true
– This is called “universal generalization”
– Example: Student s has taken calculus therefore All students
has taken calculus.
 Example x ( D ( x )  C ( x ))
D ( Ali )
 C ( Ali )
• Given the hypothesis:
“Everyone in this discrete mathematics class has taken a
course in computer science” and “Ali is in this discrete
mathematics class” imply the conclusion “Ali has taken a
course in computer science.”

• Let D(x) = “x is in this discrete mathematics class,”

• Let C(x) = “x has taken a course in computer science.”

• The hypothesis are ∀x(D(x) → C(x)) and D(Ali).

• The conclusion is C(Ali).
 Example x( D( x)  C ( x))
D ( Ali )
 C ( Ali )
• The following steps can be used to establish the conclusion from
the hypothesis.

• Step Reason
1. ∀x(D(x) → C(x)) Hypothesis
2. D(Ali)→C(Ali) Universal instantiation from 1
3. D(Ali) Hypothesis
4. C(Ali) Modus ponens from 2 and 3
 Rules of Inference for the Existential
Quantifier
• Assume that we know that x P(x) is true then we can
conclude that P(c) is true for some value of c
– This is called “existential instantiation”.
– Example: There is a fish in a pool therefore Some fish a is in
pool.

• Assume that 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”.
– Example: Ali is in the store therefore There is a person in store.
 Example x(C ( x)  B ( x))
x (C ( x )  P ( x ))
x ( P ( x )  B ( x ))
• Given the hypothesis
“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.”

• Let C(x) = “x is student in this class,”

• Let B(x) = “x has read the book,”
• Let P(x) = “x passed the first exam.”

• The hypothesis are ∃x(C(x)∧ ￢ B(x)) and ∀x(C(x) → P(x)).

• The conclusion is ∃x(P(x)∧ ￢ B(x)).
 Example Proof x(C ( x)  B( x))
x(C ( x)  P ( x))
x( P( x)  B( x))
1. ∃x(C(x)∧ ￢ B(x)) Hypothesis
2. C(a)∧ ￢ B(a) Existential instantiation from 1
3. C(a) Simplification from 2
4. ∀x(C(x) → P(x)) Hypothesis
5. C(a) → P(a) Universal instantiation from 4
6. P(a) Modus ponens from 3 and 5
7. ￢ B(a) Simplification from 2
8. P(a)∧ ￢ B(a) Conjunction from 6 and 7
9. ∃x(P(x)∧ ￢ B(x)) Existential generalization from 8
 Combination of Rules of Inference and
Quantified Statement
Universal Modus Ponens

• Universal Instantiation + Modus Ponens

• 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.

x(P(x) Q(x))
P(a), where a is a particular element in the domain

 Q(a)
 Combination of Rules of Inference and
Quantified Statement
Universal Modus Tollens

• Universal Instantiation + Modus Tollens

• If x(P(x) Q(x)) is true, and if Q(a) is false (or ¬Q(a) is true) for
a particular element ‘a’ in the domain of the universal quantifier,
then P(a) must also be false.

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

 ¬P(a)
 Example of Proof

• Given the hypotheses:

– “Maria is a student in this class, owns a red convertible.”
– “Everybody who owns a red convertible has gotten a
speeding ticket”
• Can you conclude: “Somebody in this class has gotten a
speeding ticket”?
• Let C(x) = “x is student in this class”.
• Let R(x) = “x has owns a red convertible”.
• Let T(x) = “x has gotten speeding ticket”.

• The hypothesis are x (R(x)→T(x)), C(Maria) and R(Maria).

• The conclusion is x (C(x)T(x)).
 Example of Proof

1. x (R(x)→T(x)) Hypothesis
2. R(Maria) → T(Maria) Universal instantiation using
1
3. R(Maria) Hypothesis
4. T(Maria) Modes ponens using 2 and 3
5. C(Maria) Hypothesis
6. C(Maria)  T(Maria) Conjunction using 5 and 4
7. x (C(x)T(x)) Existential generalization
using 6
 Chapter Reading

• Chapter 1, Kenneth H. Rosen, Discrete

Mathematics and Its Applications, Section 1.6
 Exercise Questions

Exercise 1.6: Q 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6,13-b,13-d, 23,

24.