Download presentation

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Published byAugust Standring Modified over 3 years ago

1
Discrete Mathematics University of Jazeera College of Information Technology & Design Khulood Ghazal Mathematical Reasoning Methods of Proof

2
Nature & Importance of Proofs In mathematics, a proof is:In mathematics, a proof is: –A sequence of statements that form an argument. –Must be correct (well-reasoned, logically valid) and complete (clear, detailed) that establishes the truth of a mathematical statement. Why must the argument be correct & complete?Why must the argument be correct & complete? –Correctness prevents us from fooling ourselves. –Completeness allows anyone to verify the result.

3
Rules of Inference Rules of inference are patterns of logically valid deductions from hypotheses to conclusions.Rules of inference are patterns of logically valid deductions from hypotheses to conclusions. We will review “inference rules” (i.e., correct & fallacious), and “proof methods”.We will review “inference rules” (i.e., correct & fallacious), and “proof methods”.

4
Inference Rules - General Form Inference Rule –Inference Rule – –Pattern establishing that if we know that a set of hypotheses are all true, then a certain related conclusion statement is true. Hypothesis 1 Hypothesis 2 … conclusion “ ” means “therefore” Hypothesis 1 Hypothesis 2 … conclusion “ ” means “therefore”

5
Inference Rules & Implications Each logical inference rule corresponds to an implication that is a tautology.Each logical inference rule corresponds to an implication that is a tautology. Hypothesis 1 Inference rule Hypothesis 2 … conclusion Hypothesis 1 Inference rule Hypothesis 2 … conclusion Corresponding tautology:Corresponding tautology: ((Hypoth. 1) (Hypoth. 2) …) conclusion

6
Some Inference Rules p Rule of Addition p q p p q p Rule of Addition p q p p q “It is below freezing now. Therefore, it is either below freezing or raining now.” “It is below freezing now. Therefore, it is either below freezing or raining now.” p q Rule of Simplification p p ^ q p p q Rule of Simplification p p ^ q p “It is below freezing and raining now. Therefore, it is below freezing now. “It is below freezing and raining now. Therefore, it is below freezing now.

7
p q p q Rule of Conjunction q p q Rule of Conjunction (p) ^ (q) (p ^q ) (p) ^ (q) (p ^q ) “It is below freezing.“It is below freezing. It is raining now.It is raining now. Therefore, it is below freezing and it is raining now.Therefore, it is below freezing and it is raining now. Some Inference Rules

8
pRule of modus ponens p q (p^(p q ) q ) q “If it is snowing today, then we will go skiing” and pRule of modus ponens p q (p^(p q ) q ) q “If it is snowing today, then we will go skiing” and “It is snowing today” imply “We will go skiing” q p q Rule of modus tollens p ( q ^(p q ) p) q p q Rule of modus tollens p ( q ^(p q ) p) Modus Ponens & Tollens

9
Syllogism Inference Rules p qRule of hypothetical q rsyllogism ((p q) ^ (q r ) (p r) ) p r p qRule of hypothetical q rsyllogism ((p q) ^ (q r ) (p r) ) p r p qRule of disjunctive psyllogism ((p q)^ p q) qp qRule of disjunctive psyllogism ((p q)^ p q) q

10
Formal Proofs A formal proof of a conclusion C, given premises p 1, p 2,…,p n consists of a sequence of steps, each of which applies some inference rule to premises or to previously- proven statements (as hypotheses) to yield a new true statement (the conclusion).A formal proof of a conclusion C, given premises p 1, p 2,…,p n consists of a sequence of steps, each of which applies some inference rule to premises or to previously- proven statements (as hypotheses) to yield a new true statement (the conclusion). A proof demonstrates that if the premises are true, then the conclusion is true (i.e., valid argument).A proof demonstrates that if the premises are true, then the conclusion is true (i.e., valid argument).

11
Formal Proof - Example Suppose we have the following premises: “It is not sunny and it is cold.” “if it is not sunny, we will not swim” “If we do not swim, then we will canoe.” “If we canoe, then we will be home early.”Suppose we have the following premises: “It is not sunny and it is cold.” “if it is not sunny, we will not swim” “If we do not swim, then we will canoe.” “If we canoe, then we will be home early.” Given these premises, prove the theorem “We will be home early” using inference rules.Given these premises, prove the theorem “We will be home early” using inference rules.

12
Proof Example cont. Let us adopt the following abbreviations:Let us adopt the following abbreviations: sunny = “It is sunny”; cold = “It is cold”; swim = “We will swim”; canoe = “We will canoe”; early = “We will be home early”. sunny = “It is sunny”; cold = “It is cold”; swim = “We will swim”; canoe = “We will canoe”; early = “We will be home early”. Then, the premises can be written as: (1) sunny coldThen, the premises can be written as: (1) sunny cold (2) sunny swim (3) swim canoe (2) sunny swim (3) swim canoe (4) canoe early (4) canoe early

13
Proof Example cont. StepProved by 1. sunny cold Premise #1. 2. sunnySimplification of 1. 3. sunny swimPremise #2. 4. swimModus tollens on 2,3. 5. swim canoe Premise #3. 6. canoeModus ponens on 4,5. 7. canoe earlyPremise #4. 8. earlyModus ponens on 6,7.

14
Proof Methods Proving p qProving p q –Direct proof: Assume p is true, and prove q. –Indirect proof: Assume q, and prove p. –Trivial proof: Prove q true. Proving pProving p –Proof by contradiction: Prove p (r r) (r r is a contradiction); therefore p must be false. Prove (a b) pProve (a b) p –Proof by cases: prove (a p) and (b p).

15
Direct Proof Example Definition: An integer n is called odd iff n=2k+1 for some integer k; n is even iff n=2k for some k.Definition: An integer n is called odd iff n=2k+1 for some integer k; n is even iff n=2k for some k. Theorem: (For all numbers n) If n is an odd integer, then n 2 is an odd integer.Theorem: (For all numbers n) If n is an odd integer, then n 2 is an odd integer. Proof: If n is odd, then n = 2k+1 for some integer k.Proof: If n is odd, then n = 2k+1 for some integer k. Thus, n 2 = (2k+1) 2 = 4k 2 + 4k + 1 = 2(2k 2 + 2k) + 1. Therefore n 2 is of the form 2j + 1 (with j the integer 2k 2 + 2k), thus n 2 is odd. Thus, n 2 = (2k+1) 2 = 4k 2 + 4k + 1 = 2(2k 2 + 2k) + 1. Therefore n 2 is of the form 2j + 1 (with j the integer 2k 2 + 2k), thus n 2 is odd.

16
Indirect Proof Proving p qProving p q –Indirect proof: Assume q, and prove p.

17
Indirect Proof Example Theorem: (For all integers n) If 3n+2 is odd, then n is odd.Theorem: (For all integers n) If 3n+2 is odd, then n is odd. Proof: Suppose that the conclusion is false, i.e., that n is even. Then n=2k for some integer k. Then 3n+2 = 3(2k)+2 = 6k+2 = 2(3k+1). Thus 3n+2 is even, because it equals 2j for integer j = 3k+1. So 3n+2 is not odd. We have shown that ¬(n is odd)→¬(3n+2 is odd), thus its contra- positive (3n+2 is odd) → (n is odd) is also true.Proof: Suppose that the conclusion is false, i.e., that n is even. Then n=2k for some integer k. Then 3n+2 = 3(2k)+2 = 6k+2 = 2(3k+1). Thus 3n+2 is even, because it equals 2j for integer j = 3k+1. So 3n+2 is not odd. We have shown that ¬(n is odd)→¬(3n+2 is odd), thus its contra- positive (3n+2 is odd) → (n is odd) is also true.

18
Trivial Proof Proving p qProving p q –Trivial proof: Prove q true.

19
Trivial Proof Example Theorem: (For integers n) If n is the sum of two prime numbers, then either n is odd or n is even.Theorem: (For integers n) If n is the sum of two prime numbers, then either n is odd or n is even. Proof: Any integer n is either odd or even. So the conclusion of the implication is true regardless of the truth of the hypothesis. Thus the implication is true trivially.Proof: Any integer n is either odd or even. So the conclusion of the implication is true regardless of the truth of the hypothesis. Thus the implication is true trivially.

20
Proof by Contradiction Proving pProving p –Assume p, and prove that p (r r) –(r r) is a trivial contradiction, equal to F –Thus p F is true only if p=F

21
Proof by Cases To prove we need to prove

Similar presentations

OK

1 Valid and Invalid Arguments CS 202 Epp Section 1.3 Aaron Bloomfield.

1 Valid and Invalid Arguments CS 202 Epp Section 1.3 Aaron Bloomfield.

© 2018 SlidePlayer.com Inc.

All rights reserved.

To ensure the functioning of the site, we use **cookies**. We share information about your activities on the site with our partners and Google partners: social networks and companies engaged in advertising and web analytics. For more information, see the Privacy Policy and Google Privacy & Terms.
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.

Ads by Google

Ppt on object oriented programming in java Ppt on op amp circuits Ppt on companies act 2013 vs companies act 1956 Ppt on question tags sentence Ppt on mobile phone technology Ppt on earth movements and major landforms in texas Download ppt on acid bases and salts for class 10 Ppt on business marketing management Ppt on condition based maintenance cbm Ppt on water our lifeline phone