Mathematical Induction Chapter 16 Language, Proof and Logic.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Copyright © Cengage Learning. All rights reserved. CHAPTER 5 SEQUENCES, MATHEMATICAL INDUCTION, AND RECURSION SEQUENCES, MATHEMATICAL INDUCTION, AND RECURSION.
Advertisements

Elementary Number Theory and Methods of Proof
– Alfred North Whitehead,
First-order Set Theory Chapter 15 Language, Proof and Logic.
Induction and recursion
CSE115/ENGR160 Discrete Mathematics 04/03/12 Ming-Hsuan Yang UC Merced 1.
Induction Sections 41. and 4.2 of Rosen Fall 2008 CSCE 235 Introduction to Discrete Structures Course web-page: cse.unl.edu/~cse235 Questions:
Induction Sections 4.1 and 4.2 of Rosen Fall 2010
1 Intro to Induction Supplementary Notes Prepared by Raymond Wong Presented by Raymond Wong.
Discrete Structures Chapter 2 Part B Mathematical Induction
CSE115/ENGR160 Discrete Mathematics 03/22/12 Ming-Hsuan Yang UC Merced 1.
CSE115/ENGR160 Discrete Mathematics 03/31/11
Discrete Structures Chapter 5: Sequences, Mathematical Induction, and Recursion 5.2 Mathematical Induction I [Mathematical induction is] the standard proof.
CSE115/ENGR160 Discrete Mathematics 03/29/11 Ming-Hsuan Yang UC Merced 1.
1 Strong Mathematical Induction. Principle of Strong Mathematical Induction Let P(n) be a predicate defined for integers n; a and b be fixed integers.
1 Number Theory and Methods of Proof Content: Properties of integer, rational and real numbers. Underlying theme: Methods of mathematical proofs.
1 Mathematical Induction. 2 Mathematical Induction: Example  Show that any postage of ≥ 8¢ can be obtained using 3¢ and 5¢ stamps.  First check for.
First Order Logic. This Lecture Last time we talked about propositional logic, a logic on simple statements. This time we will talk about first order.
Methods of Proof & Proof Strategies
Mathematical Maxims and Minims, 1988
Induction and recursion
Chapter 6 Mathematical Induction
Discrete Mathematics, 1st Edition Kevin Ferland
Introduction to Proofs
CSE 311: Foundations of Computing Fall 2013 Lecture 8: More Proofs.
DECIDABILITY OF PRESBURGER ARITHMETIC USING FINITE AUTOMATA Presented by : Shubha Jain Reference : Paper by Alexandre Boudet and Hubert Comon.
CSE 311 Foundations of Computing I Lecture 16 Recursively Defined Sets and Structural Induction Spring
Section 5.3. Section Summary Recursively Defined Functions Recursively Defined Sets and Structures Structural Induction.
Mathematical Preliminaries (Hein 1.1 and 1.2) Sets are collections in which order of elements and duplication of elements do not matter. – {1,a,1,1} =
Introduction to Quantification Chapter 9 Language, Proof and Logic.
Induction Proof. Well-ordering A set S is well ordered if every subset has a least element. [0, 1] is not well ordered since (0,1] has no least element.
Copyright © Zeph Grunschlag, Induction Zeph Grunschlag.
1 Introduction to Abstract Mathematics Chapter 2: The Logic of Quantified Statements. Predicate Calculus Instructor: Hayk Melikya 2.3.
Naïve Set Theory. Basic Definitions Naïve set theory is the non-axiomatic treatment of set theory. In the axiomatic treatment, which we will only allude.
1 Introduction to Abstract Mathematics Sets Section 2.1 Basic Notions of Sets Section 2.2 Operations with sets Section 2.3 Indexed Sets Instructor: Hayk.
Section 3.3: Mathematical Induction Mathematical induction is a proof technique that can be used to prove theorems of the form:  n  Z +,P(n) We have.
ICS 253: Discrete Structures I Induction and Recursion King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals Information & Computer Science Department.
Mathematical Preliminaries
Methods of Proof Dr. Yasir Ali. Proof A (logical) proof of a statement is a finite sequence of statements (called the steps of the proof) leading from.
Chapter 2 Logic 2.1 Statements 2.2 The Negation of a Statement 2.3 The Disjunction and Conjunction of Statements 2.4 The Implication 2.5 More on Implications.
0 Propositional logic versus first-order (predicate) logic The universe of discourse Constants, variables, terms and valuations Predicates as generalized.
1 Introduction to Abstract Mathematics Predicate Logic Instructor: Hayk Melikya Purpose of Section: To introduce predicate logic (or.
CS 103 Discrete Structures Lecture 13 Induction and Recursion (1)
CS 285- Discrete Mathematics Lecture 4. Section 1.3 Predicate logic Predicate logic is an extension of propositional logic that permits concisely reasoning.
Foundations of Discrete Mathematics Chapters 5 By Dr. Dalia M. Gil, Ph.D.
First Order Logic Lecture 3: Sep 13 (chapter 2 of the book)
Method of proofs.  Consider the statements: “Humans have two eyes”  It implies the “universal quantification”  If a is a Human then a has two eyes.
Classifications LanguageGrammarAutomaton Regular, right- linear Right-linear, left-linear DFA, NFA Context-free PDA Context- sensitive LBA Recursively.
Copyright © Zeph Grunschlag, Induction Zeph Grunschlag.
CS104:Discrete Structures Chapter 2: Proof Techniques.
CSE 311: Foundations of Computing Fall 2013 Lecture 8: Proofs and Set theory.
Propositional Logic Rather than jumping right into FOL, we begin with propositional logic A logic involves: §Language (with a syntax) §Semantics §Proof.
CompSci 102 Discrete Math for Computer Science March 13, 2012 Prof. Rodger Slides modified from Rosen.
Chapter 5. Section 5.1 Climbing an Infinite Ladder Suppose we have an infinite ladder: 1.We can reach the first rung of the ladder. 2.If we can reach.
Process Algebra (2IF45) Basic Process Algebra Dr. Suzana Andova.
1 Discrete Mathematical Mathematical Induction ( الاستقراء الرياضي )
1 Section 4.4 Inductive Proof What do we believe about nonempty subsets of N? Since  N, <  is well-founded, and in fact it is linear, it follows that.
3.3 Mathematical Induction 1 Follow me for a walk through...
Formal Proofs and Quantifiers
Chapter 2 Sets and Functions.
CSE15 Discrete Mathematics 03/22/17
Advanced Algorithms Analysis and Design
Induction and recursion
Mathematical Induction Recursion
Induction and recursion
MA/CSSE 474 More Math Review Theory of Computation
Induction (Section 3.3).
Follow me for a walk through...
Follow me for a walk through...
Agenda Proofs (Konsep Pembuktian) Direct Proofs & Counterexamples
Presentation transcript:

Mathematical Induction Chapter 16 Language, Proof and Logic

If Person #1 knows the secret For all n, if person # n knows the secret, then so does person # n Then For all n, person # n knows the secret 16.0 P(1)  x ( P(x)  P(x+1) )  x P(x) Induction – a powerful method of proof

Inductive definitions and inductive proofs 16.1.a Example of an inductive definition: wff 1. Every atomic wff is a wff 2. If P is a wff, so is  P 3. If P 1,…,P n are wffs, so are (P 1  …  P n ) and (P 1  …  P n ) 4. If P and Q are wffs, so are (P  Q) and (P  Q) 5. If P is a wff and x is a variable,  xP and  xP are wffs; 6. Nothing is a wff unless it is generated by repeated applications of 1-5. REMEMBER An inductive definition of a set consists of: a base clause, which specifies the basic elements of the defined set, one or more inductive clauses, which tell us how to generate additional elements, and a final clause, which tells us that all the elements are either basic or generated by the inductive clauses.

Inductive definitions and inductive proofs 16.1.b Example of an inductive definition: pal 1. Each letter in the alphabet (a,b,...,z) is a pal. 2. If a string  is a pal, so is the result of putting any letter of the alphabet both in front and in back of  (e.g. a  a, b  b, etc.) 3. Nothing is a pal unless it is generated by repeated applications of 1-2. REMEMBER An inductive definition of a set consists of: a base clause, which specifies the basic elements of the defined set, one or more inductive clauses, which tell us how to generate additional elements, and a final clause, which tells us that all the elements are either basic or generated by the inductive clauses.

Inductive definitions and inductive proofs 16.1.c Example of an inductive definition: pal 1. Each letter in the alphabet (a,b,...,z) is a pal. 2. If a string  is a pal, so is the result of putting any letter of the alphabet both in front and in back of  (e.g. a  a, b  b, etc.) 3. Nothing is a pal unless it is generated by repeated applications of 1-2. REMEMBER Given an inductive definition of a set S, an inductive proof of the fact that a certain property holds of all elements of S requires: a basis step, which shows that the property holds of the basic elements, and an inductive step, which shows that if the property holds of some elements, then it holds of any elements generated from them by the inductive clauses. The assumption that begins the inductive step is called the inductive hypothesis.

Inductive definitions and inductive proofs 16.1.d Example of an inductive definition: pal 1. Each letter in the alphabet (a,b,...,z) is a pal. 2. If a string  is a pal, so is the result of putting any letter of the alphabet both in front and in back of  (e.g. a  a, b  b, etc.) 3. Nothing is a pal unless it is generated by repeated applications of 1-2. By induction, prove that: a) Every pal has an odd length b) Every pal is a palindrome

Inductive definitions in set theory 16.2 Making the final clause of an inductive definition more precise: The set P of pals is the smallest set --- i.e. the intersection of all sets --- such that: 1. Each letter in the alphabet (a,b,...,z) is in P. 2. If a string  is in P, so is the result of putting any letter of the alphabet both in front and in back of  (e.g. a  a, b  b, etc.)

Induction on the natural numbers 16.3.a The inductive definition of natural numbers: 1. 0 is a natural number. 2. If n is a natural number, then n+1 is a natural number. 3. Nothing is a natural number except in virtue of repeated applications of (1) and (2). OR: The set N of natural numbers is the smallest set satisfying: 1. 0  N 2. If n  N, then n+1  N. To prove by induction that P(x) is true of all natural numbers: 1.Prove P(0) (basis step) 2.Prove  x[P(x)  P(x+1)] (inductive step)

Induction on the natural numbers 16.3.b Proposition 4. For every natural number n, the sum of the first n natural numbers is n(n-1)/2. Proof. Basis: The sum of the first 0 natural numbers is indeed 0. Inductive step: Assume the sum of the first k natural numbers is k(k-1)/2 (inductive hypothesis). We want to show that then the same is true for k+1 instead of k, that is, the sum of the first k+1 natural numbers is (k+1)((k+1)-1)/2, i.e. it is k(k+1)/2. But indeed, the sum of the first k+1 natural numbers is X+k, where X is the sum of the fist k natural numbers. By the inductive hypothesis, X= k(k-1)/2. Thus, the sought X+k is k(k-1)/2+k = (k(k-1)+2k)/2 = k(k-1+2)/2 = k(k+1)/2, as desired.

Axiomatizing the natural numbers 16.4.a Peano Arithmetic PA Language: =, 0, s, +,  (s(a) means a+1) Axioms: 1.  x(s(x)  0) 2.  x  y (s(x)=s(y)  x=y) 3.  x (x+0 = x) 4.  x  y [x+s(y) = s(x+y)] 5.  x (x  0 = 0) 6.  x  y [x  s(y) = (x  y)+x] 7. [ Q(0)   x ( Q(x)  Q(s(x)) )]   xQ(x) Axiom 7 is a scheme, for every Q. If Q contains additional variables z 1,...,z n, then the whole thing should be prefixed with  z 1...  z n This axiom is called the induction scheme Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem: These axioms are not sufficient to prove every true arithmetical sentence. Nor would any bigger set of axioms be sufficient.

Informal proof of  x(s(x)=s(0)+x) 16.4.b What we need: Axiom 3:  x (x+0 = x) Axiom 4:  x  y [x+s(y) = s(x+y)] Axiom 7: [ Q(0)   x ( Q(x)  Q(s(x)) )]   xQ(x) with s(x)=s(0)+x in the role of Q(x) Basis: Q(0), i.e. s(0)=s(0)+0. Follows from Axiom 3. Inductive step: Assume (induction hypothesis) Q(n), i.e. s(n)=s(0)+n We want to show that then Q(s(n)), i.e. s(s(n))=s(0)+s(n) But indeed: s(s(n)) = s(s(0)+n) by induction hypothesis. = s(0)+s(n) by Axiom 4.

Induction in Fitch 16.5 P(0) n P(n) … P(s(n))  xP(x) Peano Induction: Where n does not occur outside the subproof where it is introduced

Ordering the Natural Numbers 16.6 A binary relation R is said to be a total strict ordering iff it is: 1. Irreflexive: 2. Transitive: 3. Trichotomous:  x  y (xRy  x=y  yRx) The ordinary relation < on natural numbers is a total strict ordering. In PA, “x<y” can be treated as an abbreviation of “  z(x+s(z)=y)”. An alternative approach, taken in Fitch, is to treat < as a legitimate symbol of the language, defined by the (additional Peano) axiom  x  y[x<y   z(x+s(z)=y)]

Strong Induction 16.7 Strong induction (other names: complete induction; course of values induction) in Fitch takes the following form: n  x[x<n  P(x)] … P(n)  xP(x) Where n does not occur outside the subproof where it is introduced This principle does not allow us to prove anything new because it is equivalent to ordinary induction (either one follows from the other --- see the textbook). However, it can often offer greater convenience. Example: Using strong induction, prove the so called Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic, according to which every natural number greater than 1 is either prime or the product of some primes.