PART B

1. Give the Truth table for ~ (p v (q Λ r) ↔ ((p v q) Λ (p → r)).

Solution:

p Q r qΛr p v( q Λ r) ~a pVq p→r (pVq) Λ ~a

≡a (p → r) ↔
≡b b
T T T T T F T T T F
T T F F T F T F F T
T F T F T F T T T F
T F F F T F T F F T
F T T T T F T T T F
F T F F F T T T T T
F F T F F T F T F F
F F F F F T F T F F
2. Show that ~ ((~p Λ q) v (~p Λ ~q)) v (p Λ q) ≡ p by proving the equivalences of the
results.
Solution:
L.H.S ≡ ~ ((~p Λ q) v (~p Λ ~q)) v (p Λ q)
≡ ~ ((~p Λ (q v ~q))) v (p Λ q)
≡ ~ ((~p ΛT)) v (p Λ q)
≡ ~ (~p) v (p Λ q)
≡ p v (p Λ q)
≡p by absorption law.
3. Without constructing the truth tables, find the principal disjunctive normal form for (~p
→ q) Λ (q ↔ p)
Solution:
(~p → q) Λ (q ↔ p) ≡ (p v q) Λ ((q Λ p) v (~q Λ ~p))
≡ (p v q) Λ ((p Λ q) v ~ (p V q))
≡ (p v q) Λ (p Λ q) v ((p v q) Λ ~ (p v q))
≡ ((p v q) Λ (p Λ q)) v F
≡ ((p Λ (p Λ q)) V ((q Λ (p Λ q))
≡ (p Λ q) V (p Λ q)
≡ (p Λ q)
4. Without constructing the truth tables, find the principal conjunctive normal form for
(p Λ q) V (~p Λ q Λ r).
Solution:
 (p Λ q) V (~p Λ q Λ r)
≡ ((p Λ q) V ~p) Λ ((p Λ q) V q) Λ ((p Λ q) V r)
≡ (p V ~p) Λ (q V ~p) Λ (p V q) Λ (q V q) Λ (p V r) Λ (q V r)
≡ T Λ (~p V q) Λ (p V q) Λ q Λ (p V r) Λ (q V r)
≡ ((~p V q) V (r Λ ~r)) Λ ((p V q) V (r Λ ~r)) Λ q V (p Λ ~p) Λ (p V r) V
(q Λ ~q) Λ (q V r) V (p Λ ~p)
≡ (~p V q V r) Λ (~p V q V ~r) Λ (p V q V r) Λ (p V q V ~r) Λ (q V p) Λ
(q V ~p) Λ (p V r V q) Λ (p V r V ~q) Λ (q V r V p) Λ (q V r V ~p)
≡ (~p V q V r) Λ (~p V q V ~r) Λ (p V q V r) Λ (p V q V ~r) Λ ((q V p) V
(r Λ ~r)) Λ ((q V ~p) V (r Λ ~r) (Omitting repetitions)
≡ (~p V q V r) Λ (~p V q V ~r) Λ (p V q V r) Λ (p V q V ~r) Λ
(p V ~q V r) (Deleting repetitions)
5. State the rules of Inference theory in predicate calculus.
Rule US:
Universal specification is the rule of inference which states that one can conclude that
P(a) is true, if ∀x P(x) is true, where a is an arbitrary member of the universe of
discourse.
Rule ES:
Existential Specification is the rule which allows us to conclude that P(a) is true, if
∃x P(x) is true, where a is an arbitrary member of the universe, but one for which P(a) is
true. Usually we will not know what a is, but know that it exists. Since it exists, we may
call it a.
Rule UG:
Universal Generalization is the rule which stated that ∀x P(x) is true, if P(a) is true,
where a is an arbitrary member of the universe of discourse.
Rule EG:
Existential Generalization is the rule that is used to conclude that ∃ x P(x) is true when
P(a) is true, where a is a particular member of the universe of discourse.
6. Prove the following famous Socrates argument using inference theory.
All men are mortal.
Socrates is a man.
Therefore Socrates is a mortal.
Solution:
Let us use the notations
 H(x): x is a man
M(x): x is a mortal.
s: Socrates.
With these symbolic notations the problem becomes
∀x (H(x) → M(x)) Λ H(s) => M(s)
The derivation of the proof is as follows

Step No. Statement Reason

1. ∀x (H(x) → M(x)) P
2. H(s) → M(s) US, 2
3. H(s) P
4. M(s) T, 2, 3

7. Show that b can be derived from the premises a → b, c → b, d → (a V c), d, by the

indirect method.
Solution: Let us include ~b as an additional premise and prove a contradiction.
Step No. Statement Reason
1. a→b P
2. c→b P
3. (a V c) → b T, 1, 2
4. d → (a V c) P
5. d→b T, 3, 4
6. d P
7. b T, 5, 6
8. ~b P
9. b Λ ~b T, 7, 8
10. F T, 9
8. Prove the implication
∀x ( P(x) → Q(x)), ∀x (R(x) → ~ Q(x)) => ∀x( R(x) → ~P(x))
Solution:
Step No. Statement Reason
1. ∀x (P(x) → Q(x)) P
2. P(a) → Q(a) US, 1
3. ∀x (R(x) → ~ Q(x)) P
4. R(a) → ~Q(a) US, 2
5. Q(a) → ~R(a) T, 4
 6. P(a) → ~R(a) T, 2, 5
7. R(a) → ~P(a) T, 6
8. ∀x (R(x) → ~P(x)) UG and 7
9. Show that the following set of premises is inconsistent.
If Rama gets his degree, he will go for a job.
If he goes for a job, he will get married soon.
If he goes for higher study, he will not get married.
Rama gets his degree and goes for higher study.
Solution:
Let the statements be symbolized as follows
p: Rama gets his degree.
q: He will go for a job.
r: He will get married soon.
s: He goes for higher study.
Then we have to prove that
p → q, q → r, s → ~r, p Λ s are inconsistent.
Step No. Statement Reason
1. p→q P
2. q→r P
3. p→r T, 1, 2
4. pΛs P
5. p T, 4
6. s T, 4
7. s → ~r P
8. ~r T, 6, 7
9. r T 3, 5
10. r Λ ~r T, 8 , 9
11. F T, 10
Hence the set of given premises is inconsistent.
10. Show that ¬¿ ¿ P( a , b) follows logically from ( x )( y ) ( P( x , y )→W ( x , y ) ) and
¬¿ ¿ W(a , b)

Solution:
Step No. Statement Reason
1. ( x )( y ) ( P( x , y )→W ( x , y ) ) Rule P
2. ( y ) ( P(a , y )→W (a , y )) Rule US, 1
3. P(a , b )→W (a , b) Rule US, 2
4. ¬W (a, b) Rule P
 5. ¬¿ ¿ P(a,b) Rule T, 3 and 4

11 Show that
(p → q) Λ (r → s), (q → t) Λ (s → u), ~(t Λ u) and (p → r) => ~p.
Step No. Statement Reason
1. (p → q) Λ (r → s) P
2. p→q T, 1
3. r→s T, 1
4. (q → t) Λ (s → u) P
5. q→t T, 4
6. s→u T, 4
7. p→t T, 2, 5
8. r→u T, 3, 6
9. p→r P
10. p→u T, 8, 9
11. ~t → ~p T, 7
12. ~u → ~p T, 10
13. (~t V ~u) → ~p T, 11, 12
14. ~( t Λ u) → ~p T, 13
15. ~(t Λ u) P
16. ~p T, 14, 15
12Show that (a → b) Λ (a → c), ~(b Λ c), (d V a) => d.
Step No. Statement Reason
1. (a → b) Λ (a → c) P
2. a→b T, 1
3. a→c T, 1
4. ~b → ~a T, 2
5. ~c → ~a T, 3
6. ( ~b V ~c ) → ~a T, 4, 5
7. ~( b Λ c) → ~a T
8. ~ (b Λ c) P
9. ~a T, 7, 8
10. dVa P
11. (d V a) Λ ~a T, 9, 10
12. (d Λ ~a) V (a Λ ~a) T, 11
13. (d Λ ~a) V F T, 12
14. d Λ ~a T, 13
15. d T, 14
12. Prove that the premises a → (b → c), d → (b Λ ~c) and (a Λ d) are inconsistent.
Step No. Statement Reason
1. aΛd P
2. a T, 1
3. d T, 1
4. a → ( b → c) P
5. ( b → c) T, 2, 4
6. ~b v c T, 5
7. d → (b Λ ~c) P
8. ~(b Λ ~c) → ~d T, 7
9. ~b V c → ~d T, 8
10. ~d T, 6, 9
11. d Λ ~d T, 3, 10
12. F T, 11
13. Show that the premises “one student in this class knows how to write
programs in JAVA” and “Everyone who knows how to write programs in
JAVA can get a high paying job” imply the conclusion “Someone in this
class can get a high-paying job”.
Let C(x) represent “x is in this class”
J(x) represent “x knows JAVA programming” and
H(x) represent “x can get a high paying job”.
Then the given premises are ∃x (C(x) Λ J(x)) and ∀x (J(x) → H(x)). The conclusion
is ∃x (C(x) Λ H(x)).
Step No Statement Reason
1. ∃x (C(x) Λ J(x)) P
2. C(a) Λ J(a) ES, 1
3. C(a) T, 2
4. J(a) T, 2
5. ∀x (J(x) → H(x)) P
6. J(a) → H(a) US, 5
7. H(a) T, 4, 6
8. C(a) Λ H(a) T, 3 , 7
9. ∃x (C(x) Λ H(x)) EG, 8
14. Show that the conclusion ∀x (P(x) → ~Q(x)) follows from the premises.
∃x (P(x) Λ Q(X)) → ∀y (R(y) → S(y)) and ∃y (R(y) Λ ~S(y))
Step No Statement Reason
1. ∃y (R(y) Λ ~S(y)) P
2. R(a) Λ ~S(a) ES , 1
3. ~(R(a) → S(a)) T, 2
4. ∃y (~(R(y) → S(y)) EG, 3
5. ~∀y(R(y) → S(y)) T, 4
6. ∃x (P(x) Λ Q(x)) → ∀y (R(y) → S(y)) P
7. ~∃x(P(x) Λ Q(x)) T, 5, 6
8. ∀x ~(P(x) Λ Q(x)) T, 7
9. ~ (P(b) Λ Q(b)) US, 8
10. ~P(b) V ~Q(b) T, 9
11. P(b) → ~Q(b) T, 10
12. ∀x (P(x) → ~Q(x)) UG, 11
15. Prove that
x P(x) → x ((P(x) V Q(x)) → R(x)), x P(x), x Q(x) =>
x y (R(x) Λ R(y))
Step No. Statement Reason
1. x P(x) P
2. P(a) ES, 1
3. x Q(x) P
4. Q(b) ES, 3
5. x P(x) → x ((P(x) V Q(x)) → R(x)) P
6. P(a) → ((P(b) V Q(b))R(b)) ES, US, 5
7. (P(b) V Q(b)) → R(b) T, 2, 6
8. P(b) V Q(b) T, 4
9. R(b) T, 7, 8
10. x R(x) EG, 9
11. R(a) ES, 10
12. R(a) Λ R(b) T, 9, 11
13. y (R(a) Λ R(y)) EG, 12
14. x y (R(x) Λ R(y)) EG, 13
16. Use the indirect method to prove that the conclusion z Q(z) follows from
the premises x (P(x) → Q(x)) and y P(y).
Let us assume the additional premise ~(z Q(z)) and prove a contradiction.
Step No. Statement Reason
1. y P(y) P
2. P(a) ES, 1
3. ~(z Q(z)) P
4. z (~Q(z)) T, 3
5. ~ Q(a) US, 4
6. P(a) Λ ~Q(a) T, 2, 5
7. ~(~P(a) V Q(a)) T, 6
8. ~(P(a) → Q(a)) T, 7
9. x (P(x) → Q(x)) P
10. P(a) → Q(a) US, 9
11. (P(a) → Q(a)) Λ ~(P(a) → Q(a)) T, 8, 10
12. F T, 11