CSE115/ENGR160 Discrete Mathematics 01/26/12 Ming-Hsuan Yang UC Merced 1.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Artificial Intelligence
Advertisements

Rules of Inference Rosen 1.5.
Discrete Mathematics University of Jazeera College of Information Technology & Design Khulood Ghazal Mathematical Reasoning Methods of Proof.
Announcements Grading policy No Quiz next week Midterm next week (Th. May 13). The correct answer to the quiz.
Rules of Inferences Section 1.5. Definitions Argument: is a sequence of propositions (premises) that end with a proposition called conclusion. Valid Argument:
1 Section 1.5 Rules of Inference. 2 Definitions Theorem: a statement that can be shown to be true Proof: demonstration of truth of theorem –consists of.
The Foundations: Logic and Proofs
February 26, 2015Applied Discrete Mathematics Week 5: Mathematical Reasoning 1 Addition of Integers Example: Add a = (1110) 2 and b = (1011) 2. a 0 + b.
1 Introduction to Abstract Mathematics Valid AND Invalid Arguments 2.3 Instructor: Hayk Melikya
1 Valid and Invalid Arguments CS 202 Epp Section 1.3 Aaron Bloomfield.
Chapter 3. Mathematical Reasoning 3.1 Methods of proof A theorem is a statement that can be shown to be true. A proof is to demonstrate that a theorem.
Muhammad Arief download dari
Valid Arguments An argument is a sequence of propositions. All but the final proposition are called premises. The last statement is the conclusion. The.
Chapter 1 The Logic of Compound Statements. Section 1.3 Valid & Invalid Arguments.
CS128 – Discrete Mathematics for Computer Science
Logic 3 Tautological Implications and Tautological Equivalences
1 Discrete Structures CS Johnnie Baker Comments on Early Term Test.
CSE115/ENGR160 Discrete Mathematics 01/20/11 Ming-Hsuan Yang UC Merced 1.
Fall 2002CMSC Discrete Structures1 Let’s proceed to… Mathematical Reasoning.
1.5 Rules of Inference.
CSCI 115 Chapter 2 Logic. CSCI 115 §2.1 Propositions and Logical Operations.
Discrete Mathematics and Its Applications Sixth Edition By Kenneth Rosen Chapter 1 The Foundations: Logic and Proofs 歐亞書局.
1 Georgia Tech, IIC, GVU, 2006 MAGIC Lab Rossignac Lecture 03: PROOFS Section 1.5 Jarek Rossignac CS1050: Understanding.
Propositional Proofs 2.
MATH 224 – Discrete Mathematics
CS 103 Discrete Structures Lecture 07b
March 3, 2015Applied Discrete Mathematics Week 5: Mathematical Reasoning 1Arguments Just like a rule of inference, an argument consists of one or more.
Proofs1 Elementary Discrete Mathematics Jim Skon.
Discrete Mathematics CS 2610 August 24, Agenda Last class Introduction to predicates and quantifiers This class Nested quantifiers Proofs.
10/17/2015 Prepared by Dr.Saad Alabbad1 CS100 : Discrete Structures Proof Techniques(1) Dr.Saad Alabbad Department of Computer Science
Section 1.5. Section Summary Nested Quantifiers Order of Quantifiers Translating from Nested Quantifiers into English Translating Mathematical Statements.
1 Sections 1.5 & 3.1 Methods of Proof / Proof Strategy.
Discrete Structures (DS)
Fallacies The proposition [(p  q)  q]  p is not a tautology, because it is false when p is false and q is true. This type of incorrect reasoning is.
Discrete Mathematics. Predicates - the universal quantifier 11/28/2015 Suppose P(x) is a predicate on some universe of discourse. Ex. B(x) = “x is carrying.
CompSci 102 Discrete Math for Computer Science January 24, 2012 Prof. Rodger Slides modified from Rosen.
Thinking Mathematically Arguments and Truth Tables.
CSE 321 Discrete Structures Winter 2008 Lecture 5 Rules of Inference.
Rules of Inference Section 1.6. Arguments in Propositional Logic A argument in propositional logic is a sequence of propositions. All but the final proposition.
Module #1 - Logic Based on Rosen, Discrete Mathematics & Its Applications. Prepared by (c) , Michael P. Frank. Modified By Mingwu Chen 1 Module.
Fall 2008/2009 I. Arwa Linjawi & I. Asma’a Ashenkity 11 The Foundations: Logic and Proofs Rules of inference.
CSci 2011 Discrete Mathematics Lecture 4 CSci 2011.
Foundations of Discrete Mathematics Chapter 1 By Dr. Dalia M. Gil, Ph.D.
CT214 – Logical Foundations of Computing Darren Doherty Rm. 311 Dept. of Information Technology NUI Galway
Chapter 1, Part III: Proofs With Question/Answer Animations Copyright © McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without.
Uniqueness Quantifier ROI for Quantified Statement.
Chapter 1 Logic and proofs
2. The Logic of Compound Statements Summary
CSE15 Discrete Mathematics 01/30/17
Discrete Mathematics Logic.
Discrete Mathematics.
Proof Techniques.
Rules of Inference Section 1.6.
Module #10: Proof Strategies
CS100: Discrete structures
CS201: Data Structures and Discrete Mathematics I
Mathematical Reasoning
Methods of Proof. Methods of Proof Definitions A theorem is a valid logical assertion which can be proved using Axioms: statements which are given.
CS 220: Discrete Structures and their Applications
Applied Discrete Mathematics Week 1: Logic
First Order Logic Rosen Lecture 3: Sept 11, 12.
CSE 321 Discrete Structures
Discrete Mathematics Logic.
Information Technology Department SKN-SITS,Lonavala.
Module #10: Proof Strategies
Foundations of Discrete Mathematics
Valid and Invalid Arguments
Mathematical Reasoning
CS201: Data Structures and Discrete Mathematics I
The Foundations: Logic and Proofs
Presentation transcript:

CSE115/ENGR160 Discrete Mathematics 01/26/12 Ming-Hsuan Yang UC Merced 1

1.6 Rules of Inference Proof: valid arguments that establish the truth of a mathematical statement Argument: a sequence of statements that end with a conclusion Valid: the conclusion or final statement of the argument must follow the truth of proceeding statements or premise of the argument 2

Argument and inference An argument is valid if and only if it is impossible for all the premises to be true and the conclusion to be false Rules of inference: use them to deduce (construct) new statements from statements that we already have Basic tools for establishing the truth of statements 3

Valid arguments in propositional logic Consider the following arguments involving propositions “If you have a correct password, then you can log onto the network” “You have a correct password” therefore, “You can log onto the network” 4 premises conclusion

Valid arguments is tautology When ((p→q)˄p) is true, both p →q and p are ture, and thus q must be also be true This form of argument is true because when the premises are true, the conclusion must be true 5

Example p: “You have access to the network” q: “You can change your grade” p →q: “If you have access to the network, then you can change your grade” “If you have access to the network, then you can change your grade” (p →q) “You have access to the network” (p) so “You can change your grade” (q) 6

Example “If you have access to the network, then you can change your grade” (p →q) “You have access to the network” (p) so “You can change your grade” (q) Valid arguments But the conclusion is not true Argument form: a sequence of compound propositions involving propositional variables 7

Rules of inference for propositional logic Can always use truth table to show an argument form is valid For an argument form with 10 propositional variables, the truth table requires 2 10 rows The tautology is the rule of inference called modus ponens (mode that affirms), or the law of detachment 8

Example If both statements “If it snows today, then we will go skiing” and “It is snowing today” are true. By modus ponens, it follows the conclusion “We will go skiing” is true 9

Example The premises of the argument are p →q and p, and q is the conclusion This argument is valid by using modus ponens But one of the premises is false, consequently we cannot conclude the conclusion is true Furthermore, the conclusion is not true 10

11

Example – “It is not sunny this afternoon and it is colder than yesterday” – “We will go swimming only if it is sunny” – “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” Can we conclude “We will be home by sunset”? 12

Example – “If you send me an message, then I will finish my program” – “If you do not send me an message, then I will go to sleep early” – “If I go to sleep early, then I will wake up feeling refreshed” – “If I do not finish writing the program, then I will wake up feeling refreshed” 13

Resolution Based on the tautology Resolvent: Let q=r, we have Let r=F, we have Important in logic programming, AI, etc. 14

Example “Jasmine is skiing or it is not snowing” “It is snowing or Bart is playing hockey” imply “Jasmine is skiing or Bart is playing hockey” 15

Example To construct proofs using resolution as the only rule of inference, the hypotheses and the conclusion must be expressed as clauses Clause: a disjunction of variables or negations of these variables 16

Fallacies Inaccurate arguments is not a tautology as it is false when p is false and q is true If you do every problem in this book, then you will learn discrete mathematics. You learned discrete mathematics Therefore you did every problem in this book 17

Example is it correct to conclude ┐q? Fallacy: the incorrect argument is of the form as ┐p does not imply ┐q 18

Inference with quantified statements 19 Instantiation: c is one particular member of the domain Generalization: for an arbitrary member c

Example “Everyone in this discrete mathematics has taken a course in computer science” and “Marla is a student in this class” imply “Marla has taken a course in computer science” 20

Example “A student in this class has not read the book”, and “Everyone in this class passed the first exam” imply “Someone who passed the first exam has not read the book” 21

Universal modus ponens Use universal instantiation and modus ponens to derive new rule Assume “For all positive integers n, if n is greater than 4, then n 2 is less than 2 n ” is true. Show <

Universal modus tollens Combine universal modus tollens and universal instantiation 23