+1-415-670-9189
info@expertsmind.com
Construct a truth table for each of the given arguments
Course:- Theory of Computation
Reference No.:- EM131103109




Assignment Help
Expertsmind Rated 4.9 / 5 based on 47215 reviews.
Review Site
Assignment Help >> Theory of Computation

Introductory Logic

Assignment 1

You may write these out by hand and scan them or take a picture with your phone and upload them.

I. Construct a truth table for each of the following claims. Example:
¬ (C v D)
F T T T
F T T F
F F T T
T F F F

1. (A & ¬B)
2. ¬(C v D)
3. ¬(A --> ¬B)
4. (P ≡ (Q --> R))
5. ¬(¬W & ¬P)

II. Determine whether each pair of sentences is logically equivalent. Justify your answer with a complete or partial truth table.

Example: (A v B), (B v A)

(A v B) (B v A)
T T T T T T
T T F T T F
F T T F T T
F F F F F F

These sentences are logically equivalent because their truth tables are identical.

1. A, ¬ A

2. A, (A v A)

3. (A → A), (A ≡ A)

4. (A v ¬ B), (A → B)

5. (A v ¬ A), (¬ B ≡ B)

6. ¬ (A & B), (¬ A v ¬ B)

7. ¬ (A → B), (¬ A → ¬ B)

8. (A → B), (¬ B → ¬ A)

9. [(A v B) v C], [A v (B v C)]

10. [(A v B) & C], [A v (B & C)]

III. Construct a truth table for each of the following arguments.

1. ((P --> Q) & P) /.: Q

2. (L --> ¬L) /.: ¬L

3. (M ≡ ¬N) ; ¬(N & ¬M) /.: (M --> N)

4. (A ≡ ¬B) /.: (B v A)

5. (H --> I) ; (J ≡ H) ; (¬I v H) /.: (J ≡ I)

Assignment 2

You may write these out by hand and scan them or take a picture with your phone and upload them.

I. Using your answers from Assignment 5, Part III, test each of the following arguments for validity using the long truth table method.Under each argument, write "valid" or "invalid." If an argument is invalid, say which row or rows show(s) that it is invalid. (2 pts. each)

1. ((P --> Q) & P) /.: Q

2. (L -->¬L) /.: ¬L

3. (M ≡ ¬N) ;¬(N &¬M) /.: (M --> N)

4. (A ≡ ¬B) /.: (B v A)

5. (H --> I) ; (J ≡ H) ; (¬I v H) /.: (J ≡ I)

II. Determine whether each argument is valid or invalid. Justify your answer with a complete or partial truth table.

1. (A → A) /.: A

2. (A v [A → (A ≡ A)]) /.: A

3. [A → (A v ¬ A)] /.: ¬ A

4. [A ≡ ¬ (B ≡ A)] /.: A

5. [A v (B → A)] /.: (¬ A → ¬ B)

6. (A → B); B /.: A

7. (A v B); (B v C); ¬ A /.: (B & C)

8. (A v B); (B v C); ¬ A /.: (A & C)

9. [(B & A) → C]; [(C & A) → B] /.: [(C & B) → A]

10. (A ≡ B); (B ≡ C) /.: (A ≡ C)

III. Test each of the following arguments for validity using the short truth table method. Show your work here and write "valid" or "invalid." (2 pts. each)

1. (P v ¬Q) ; (R -->¬Q) /.: (¬P --> R)

2. (A v B) ; (A --> B) /.: (B -->¬A)

3. (¬(Y & O) v W) /.: (Y --> W)

4. (Y ≡ Z) ; (¬Y v ¬W) ; W /.: Z

5. (E v F) ; (E --> F) ; (C & D) /.: (F -->¬C).




Put your comment
 
Minimize


Ask Question & Get Answers from Experts
Browse some more (Theory of Computation) Materials
Write down which of the following Turing nuchines is suitable for this task. For each machine which is unsuitable, explain why it is unsuitable this explanation can take the
Consider the context-free grammar:- Give a leftmost derivation for the string.- Give a rightmost derivation for the string.- Is the grammar ambiguous or unambiguous? Justify y
Construct a DFA that recognizes each of the following languages. Unless otherwise noted we are assuming that ω ∈ {0,1}*. (A drawing of a state diagram is sufficient.)
Let L = {(M): M has an even number of states}. Is L decidable? Give a brief explanation for your answer. Let L = {(M): L(M) has an even number of elements}. Is L decidable? Gi
Consider a logic function with three outputs,  A ,  B , and  C , and three inputs,  D ,  E , and  F . The function is defined as follows:  A  is true if at least
Prove that the subsequent languages are not regular using the pumping lemma. Use 'N' as the pumping lemma constant, to differentiate from the lowercase n used in parts a and
If the interest rates drop then the housing market will improve. Either the federal discount rate will drop or construction will decrease. Interest rates will drop and utili
Write a program would read two numbers and then print all numbers between the first and the second, inclusive. Design unambiguous grammar to parse expressions