Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd
Upload
47 views

Objective Current Lab Learning Outcomes (LLO)

This lab covers propositional equivalences. Students will work in groups to solve examples showing that logical statements are tautologies, contradictions, or equivalent using rules of propositional logic. Examples include showing that ¬(p ∨ ¬(p ∧ q)) is a contradiction, [(p ∨ q) ∧ (p → r) ∧ (q → r)] → r is a tautology, and that ¬(p∨(¬p∧q)) and (¬p ∧ ¬q) are equivalent. Students are allowed to use their lecture notes and will discuss their answers with the instructor.

Uploaded by

aoora6
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
47 views

Objective Current Lab Learning Outcomes (LLO)

This lab covers propositional equivalences. Students will work in groups to solve examples showing that logical statements are tautologies, contradictions, or equivalent using rules of propositional logic. Examples include showing that ¬(p ∨ ¬(p ∧ q)) is a contradiction, [(p ∨ q) ∧ (p → r) ∧ (q → r)] → r is a tautology, and that ¬(p∨(¬p∧q)) and (¬p ∧ ¬q) are equivalent. Students are allowed to use their lecture notes and will discuss their answers with the instructor.

Uploaded by

aoora6
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

Lab 03 Propositional Equivalences

Objective
Solving exercises from the textbook in chapter 1.3

Current Lab Learning Outcomes (LLO)


By completion of the lab, the students should be able to:
1. Understand propositional equivalences and .
2. prove the propositional equivalences using rules

Lab Requirements
Students allowed using their lecture notes in the lab in order to solve the exercises.

Lab Assessment
1- Divide students to groups and let them to solve the given example.
2- Discuss the answers with the groups and write on board the optimal solution.
Lab Description

1. Show that ￢(p ∨ ￢(p ∧ q)) is contradiction using rules.

2. show that [(p ∨ q) ∧ (p → r) ∧ (q → r)] → r is a tautology using rules

3. Show that [p ^ (p → q)] → q is a tautology using rules


4. Show that [¬p ∧ (p ∨ q)] → q is a tautology using rules.

5. Show that ¬ p→ (q → r) and q →( p v r) are logically equivalent using rules.

6. Show that ¬p ↔ q and p ↔ ¬q are logically equivalent using rules


¬p ↔ q ⇔ (¬p→q) ∧ (q→¬p) Biconditional
= (¬¬p∨q) ∧ (¬q∨¬p) Implication
= (p∨q) ∧ (¬q∨¬p) Double Negation
= (q∨p) ∧ (¬p∨¬q) Commutative
= (¬¬q∨p) ∧ (¬p∨¬q) Double Negation
= (¬q→p) ∧ (p→¬q) Implication
= (p→¬q) ∧ (¬q→p) Commutative
= p ↔ ¬q Biconditional

7. Determine whether¬(p∨(¬p∧q)) and (¬p ∧ ¬q) equivalent using rules?


¬(p∨(¬p∧q)) =¬p ∧ ¬(¬p∧q) DeMorgan
=¬p ∧ (¬¬p∨¬q) DeMorgan
=¬p ∧ (p∨¬q) Double Negation
=(¬p∧p)∨(¬p ∧¬q) Distribution
=(p∧¬p)∨(¬p ∧¬q) Commutative
=F ∨(¬p ∧¬q) Negation
= (¬p ∧¬q) ∨ F Commutative
= (¬p ∧¬q) Identity
¬(p∨(¬p∧q)) and (¬p ∧ ¬q) equivalent

You might also like