1 CS1502 Formal Methods in Computer Science Notes 15 Problem Sessions.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
CS1502 Formal Methods in Computer Science Lecture Notes 3 Consequence Rules Boolean Connectives.
Advertisements

Introduction to Proofs
PROOF BY CONTRADICTION
1 CS1502 Formal Methods in Computer Science Lecture Notes 4 Tautologies and Logical Truth.
1 CS 1502 Formal Methods in Computer Science Lecture Notes 14 Translations Mixed Quantifiers.
CS128 – Discrete Mathematics for Computer Science
Logic 3 Tautological Implications and Tautological Equivalences
Logic: Connectives AND OR NOT P Q (P ^ Q) T F P Q (P v Q) T F P ~P T F
So far we have learned about:
1 Indirect Argument: Contradiction and Contraposition.
Proofs, Recursion and Analysis of Algorithms Mathematical Structures for Computer Science Chapter 2.1 Copyright © 2006 W.H. Freeman & Co.MSCS SlidesProofs,
Proof by Deduction. Deductions and Formal Proofs A deduction is a sequence of logic statements, each of which is known or assumed to be true A formal.
Introduction to Proofs Goals 1.Introduce notion of proof & basic proof methods. 2.Distinguish between correct & incorrect arguments 3.Understand & construct.
Adapted from Discrete Math
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.
1 CS 1502 Formal Methods in Computer Science Lecture Notes 12 Variables and Quantifiers.
CS 1502 Formal Methods in Computer Science
Methods of Proof & Proof Strategies
CSci 2011 Discrete Mathematics Lecture 3 CSci 2011.
Propositions and Truth Tables
Section 1.5 Implications. Implication Statements If Cara has a piano lesson, then it is Friday. If it is raining, then I need to remember my umbrella.
CSCI 115 Chapter 2 Logic. CSCI 115 §2.1 Propositions and Logical Operations.
Introduction to Proofs
MATH 224 – Discrete Mathematics
CSE 311: Foundations of Computing Fall 2013 Lecture 8: More Proofs.
CS1502 Formal Methods in Computer Science Lecture Notes 16 Review for Exam2 continued Theory of Computation Introduction.
March 3, 2015Applied Discrete Mathematics Week 5: Mathematical Reasoning 1Arguments Just like a rule of inference, an argument consists of one or more.
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.
1 Math/CSE 1019C: Discrete Mathematics for Computer Science Fall 2011 Suprakash Datta Office: CSEB 3043 Phone: ext
Methods of Proof Lecture 3: Sep 9. This Lecture Now we have learnt the basics in logic. We are going to apply the logical rules in proving mathematical.
Advanced Topics in Propositional Logic Chapter 17 Language, Proof and Logic.
First Order Logic Lecture 2: Sep 9. This Lecture Last time we talked about propositional logic, a logic on simple statements. This time we will talk about.
CSNB143 – Discrete Structure LOGIC. Learning Outcomes Student should be able to know what is it means by statement. Students should be able to identify.
Chapter 1, Part II: Predicate Logic With Question/Answer Animations.
Propositional Calculus – Methods of Proof Predicate Calculus Math Foundations of Computer Science.
Hazırlayan DISCRETE COMPUTATIONAL STRUCTURES Propositional Logic PROF. DR. YUSUF OYSAL.
Predicates and Quantified Statements
Ch 1.4: Basic Proof Methods I A theorem is a proposition, often of special interest. A proof is a logically valid deduction of a theorem, using axioms,
4.1 Proofs and Counterexamples. Even Odd Numbers Find a property that describes each of the following sets E={…, -4, -2, 0, 2, 4, 6, …} O={…, -3, -1,
Automated reasoning with propositional and predicate logics Spring 2007, Juris Vīksna.
CSNB143 – Discrete Structure Topic 4 – Logic. Learning Outcomes Students should be able to define statement. Students should be able to identify connectives.
First Order Logic Lecture 3: Sep 13 (chapter 2 of the book)
Lecture 1.4: Rules of Inference, and Proof Techniques* CS 250, Discrete Structures, Fall 2011 Nitesh Saxena *Adopted from previous lectures by Cinda Heeren.
CS104:Discrete Structures Chapter 2: Proof Techniques.
Week 4 - Friday.  What did we talk about last time?  Floor and ceiling  Proof by contradiction.
Introduction to Proofs
1 Introduction to Abstract Mathematics Proof Methods , , ~, ,  Instructor: Hayk Melikya Purpose of Section:Most theorems in mathematics.
Section 1.4. Propositional Functions Propositional functions become propositions (and have truth values) when their variables are each replaced by a value.
Section 1.5. Section Summary Nested Quantifiers Order of Quantifiers Translating from Nested Quantifiers into English Translating Mathematical Statements.
The Logic of Conditionals Chapter 8 Language, Proof and Logic.
Discrete Mathematical Structures: Theory and Applications 1 Logic: Learning Objectives  Learn about statements (propositions)  Learn how to use logical.
1 Section 7.1 First-Order Predicate Calculus Predicate calculus studies the internal structure of sentences where subjects are applied to predicates existentially.
Chapter 1 Logic and proofs
Introduction to Proofs Goals 1.Introduce notion of proof & basic proof methods. 2.Distinguish between correct & incorrect arguments 3.Understand & construct.
Chapter 1 Logic and Proof.
CSE 311: Foundations of Computing
Proof Techniques.
CS201: Data Structures and Discrete Mathematics I
CS 1502 Formal Methods in Computer Science
CSE 311 Foundations of Computing I
CS1502 Formal Methods in Computer Science
Mathematical Reasoning
Nested Quantifiers Nested quantifiers are often necessary to express the meaning of sentences in English as well as important concepts in computer science.
CS 220: Discrete Structures and their Applications
Propositional Logic.
Dr. Halimah Alshehri MATH 151 Dr. Halimah Alshehri Dr. Halimah Alshehri.
CS201: Data Structures and Discrete Mathematics I
Introduction to Proofs
Presentation transcript:

1 CS1502 Formal Methods in Computer Science Notes 15 Problem Sessions

2 Preliminaries 3 proofs we will be able replace with Taut Con 1 proof we will be able to replace with FO Con First 4 proofs in Why? –Review –Illustrate that you don’t *need* any of the con rules

3 6 Fitch Proofs We’ll do them in Fitch in lecture Next 6 proofs in Problems 1-3: use only Intro/Elim rules Problem 4: may use Taut Con on at most two support sentences Problems 5-6: May use FO Con on at most one support sentence, and Taut Con for the resolution step

4 Problem 7 Prove the argument below is valid using a Fitch- style proof. Some teachers are scholars. No scholar has time for either football or basketball.  Some teachers do not have time for basketball.

5 Informal Proof Prove that if the square of an integer is even, then so is that integer. Proving the contrapositive is easier: If an integer is not even, then its square isn’t even either. Let n be an integer. Assume ~Even(n), i.e., Odd(n). Then we can express n as 2m + 1 for some m. But we see that n*n = 2(2m*m + 2m) + 1, showing that n*n is odd. Thus, we have shown ~Even(n)  ~Even(n*n)

6 Review Questions around 10.13, 10.17; (see next slide) Recall the circles from lecture: 1. inner – tautological consequence 2. middle – FO but not tautological cons 3. Outer – logical but not FO cons 4. Outside the circle – not a logical cons Here are answers:10.10: 2; 10.13: 1; 10.14: 3; 10.15: 2; 10.16: 1; 10.17: 3; Varations: in lecture

7 Necessary S is always true PossibleSatisfiable S could be true Equivalence S and S’ always have the same truth values Consequence Whenever P1…Pn are true, Q is also true Tautological Translate sentences into propositional logic using TFF algorithm S is a tautology S is Tautologically possible S and S’ are Tautologically equivalent Q is a tautological consequence of P1…Pn First Order (FO) Replace predicates with nonsense names S is an FO validity S is FO possible (FO satisfiable) S and S’ are FO equivalent Q is a FO consequence of P1…Pn Logical S is logically necessary (a logical truth) (logically valid) S is logically possible (satisfiable) S and S’ are logically equivalent Q is a logical consequence of P1…Pn

8 Problem 8 Does  x  y P(x, y) follow from  x  y P(x, y)?  x  y P(x, y)? Hint: does  x  y SameRow(x, y) follow from  x  y SameRow(x, y)?

9 Problem 9  Does  x  y [P(x, y)  Q(x)] follow from  x [  y P(x, y)  Q(x)]?  Hint: does  x  y [LeftOf(x,y)  Large(x)] follow from  x [  y LeftOf(x,y)  Large(x)]?

10 Problem 10 all x (P(x)  Q(x)) all x (Q(x)  P(x)) All x (P(x)  Q(x))