First-order logic, MFCS -20 10, Mihaiela Lupea

Logical equivalences in predicate logic

1. Expansion laws.
(Vx)A(x) = (Vx)A(x) n A(t) --the universal quantifier
(=x)A(x)

is an

ini-inirary conjunction

(1x)A(x) v A(t) -- the existential quantifier is a infinitary disjunction

laws --(Y x)

2. DeMorgan infinitary

--(3x) A(x) = (Vx)-,4(x)

A(x) = (fx)--l(x)

3. Quantifiers interchanging laws

(=x)(1y)A(x, y) = (3y)(!x)A(x, y)
Remark: (lxXVy)B (x, y) + (VyX:x) B(x, y)
(V

x)(V y) A(x, y) = (Vy)(Vr) A(x,

y)

4.

The extraction of quantifiers in front of the formula

Av (-x)B(r) = (=x)(A v B(x))

A ,x (1x)B(") = (=x)(A n B(x))
where

Av (Yx)B(") = (vx)(A v B(x)) A n (Yx) B(r) = (Vx)(An B(x))

(Yx)A(x)v B = (Yx)(A(x) v B) (Yx)A(x) n B : (Yx)( A(x) n B)

does not contain

as a free variable.

(1x) A(x) v B = (=x)(A(x) v B)

(lx),a(x) n B =(lx)(l(x) n B)

where B does not contain x as a free variable.

5. Distributive laws (=x)(A(x) v B(x)) = (1x)A(x) v (lx)B(x) Aistributivity of I over v

(Yx)(A(x) n B(-,r)) = (Yx)A(x) n (Vx) B(r) distributivity of
!! The distribution of

over n

over n and the distribution of V over v , do not provide valid

distributive laws, but we have semidistributive laws as follows: Semidistributivity of

over n:

l- (=x)(A(x) n B(x)) -> (1x)A(") ^ (:x)B(x)

but the formula (=x)A(x) n

(lx)B(x) -+ (!x)(l(r)

r..

B(x)) is not valid

SernidistributivitY of V over
l= (Vx),4(x) v

v:

(Vx)B(r) -+ (Vx)(l(x) v B(x))

(Vx)(A(x) v B(x)) -> (Vx)A(x) v (Vx)B(x)) is not valid

but the formula

Fr

rsi-t'r'r-,*,' 1c;;.i1.

n,1

pi, 1i -.z0 r ri. M iiia ie la i,r.icea

ijeililciist|ibi;ii
1-=

i,

it:., {-,ir

rxs1:

--'

111.x)zt(x)

(l;r)B(x)) -+ (lx)(z(x)

+ B(r))
+ (!r)B(x)) is nor valid

but the

forirula (lx)(A(x) -+ B(x)) -+ (()x)A(x)

Serridistribr"rtivity
l=

of V over -+

(Vx)(l(x) -+ B(r)) -> ((Vx)A(x) + (Vx)B(x))

but the formula

((vx)l(x) -+ (vr)B(x)) -+ (vr)( A(x) -> B(x)) is r.rot valid V and

The above laws are pairs of dual equivalences.

are dual qualtifiers.

Example 6.
Prove that the lbnnLrla 2t = (.1x)A(x) n (lx)B(") -+ (:.r)(l(x) n B(x)) is not valid.
L,et consider the interpretation

1:(D,rn>, where:
to a plan p.

- the set of ali straight lines belonging

I'et d e P , be a constant object (line) frorn the dornain of interpretation.

l, nt(A)(x) '. " x L d "; nr(B);D -+ {T,F }, m(B)(x) : " x ll d ";

m(A): {T,F

D+

,'

@:

,t ((3x)A(x) n (lx)B(x)

)-'

u/

((1x)(A(x) n B(x)))
)

u1

(1x)A(x)

),^' ut (

(lx)B(x)

,, ( (:x)(l(x) n B(.r))) :
@

: (*)reD g L d)n(})xeD @ll d)+(*)xeD :TnT+F:T+F-F'.

U is evaluated as false under the interpretation

L d n xll d):

I, I is an anti-model of U.

We conclude that U is not

valid formula.

Normal forms in first-order logic

The normal forms for predicate formulas are used as input dates in proof rnethods as: resolution and Herbrand-based procedure.

Definition 7:

l.

A predicate formula U is in prenex normol form it it has the form: r,vhere g,,r:1,...,n are quantifiers, and

(Qt*l ).'.(Q,x,)M,

M is

free

of quantifiers. The sequence

(Qtxt)...(Qnx")is called
formulaU.

the prefix of formula

U, and M is called the mutrix of

prenex normal

2. A predicate formula rs tn conjunctive prenex normol form if it is in

fonn and the rnatrix is in CNF.

First-order logic, MFCS -2A10, Mihaiela

L,Lrpea

Theorem 1: A predicate formula adrnits a logical equivalent conjunctive prenex normal form.
The prenex normal

form is obtained by applying transfonnations rvhich

presen'e the

logical equivalence, according to the following algorithm: Step 1: The connectives -+ and +> are replaced using the connectives -,A.V Step 2: T'he bound variables are renamed such that they u'ill be distinct. Step 3: Application of infinitary DeMorgan laws. Step 4: The extraction of quantifiers in front of the forrnula laws are applied. !!! The order of quantifiers extraction is arbitrary. Step 5: The matrix is transformed into CNF'using DeMorgan laws and the distributive
Iaws.

Remarks:

. c

After the step 4 we obtain the prenex normal form which is not unique. If the formula obtained after the second step contains n distinct and independent bound variables, the there are n! prenex normal forrns, logically equivalent with the initial formula.

A conjunctive prenex normal form is obtained after step 5.

Definition 8:

Let U be a first-order fonnula, and

normal form. To U obtained as follows:

(J

1'

:(Qtxt)...(Qnx, ) M be one of its conjunctive

denoted

prenex

it corresponds a formula in Skolem normol form,

9,.

by US

For each existential quantifier

from the prefix we apply the transformation:

(l) If Q,.is
prefix.

the leftmost universal quantifier in the prefix, then we introduce a new constant

a, and we replace in M all the occurrences of

x,

by a. (.Qrxr) is deleted frorn the

(2)It QsI,...,Q r*, 1 ( sl 9,, then we introduce a new m-place function symbol, f, and we replace in M
occurrences

all

of r,. by f(xr1 ,...,xs*t).(Qrx,,) is deleted frorn the prefix. To U it corresponds a formula in Skolem normal -form without quantifiers(clausal normal

form),

denoted

by rySa, which is obtained by deleting

the universal quantifiers from

[/S

l0

t.

'

F-!i'si-,;rc!er iogic. f,4FCS -2010. lrriiitaiela r-itnca

'fi:e eonstailts and functions

Skolem constants
and,

useci to rcplaee the irarialrles existen'l-ial cluantitieci are caiied

Skolem fi.tn.ctions. The prefix of the

fonnula US contains only universal

quantifiers, and the rnatrix is in conjunctive normal form.

Remarks:
The transfclrmations used in the Skolemization process do not preserve the logical equivalence but preserwe the inconsistenc,v according to the follorving theorem:

Theorem 2: Let IJ],U2,..,fJn, Z be first-order formulas.

1.

Zzs inconsistent iffZp is inconsistent

iff Z'is

incor-rsistent

iff

Vs'tis inconsistent.

2. {UI,U2,..,Un} is inconsistent iff {Ultr,(J2'tq,..,(Jnsqy is inconsistent.

Exemplu 7: Transform into prenex normal form and Skolern normal fonn the fonlula: .A:-((VxXp(") -+ q(x)) -+ ((Vx)p(r) -+ (Vx)q(r)))
Step I : replace the

inner -+ connectives A='-((VxX-'p(") v q(x)) -+ (-,(Vx) p(x)v (Vx)q(x)))

Stepl: replace

+ connective
will be distinct q("))) v (--(Yy) p(y) (V z)q(z))

A:
A

--(--((Vr)(--p(r) v q(x))) v (--(Vx)p(x) v (Vx) q(x))

.-(--((Vx)(--p(x)

Step2: rename the bound variables such that they

"

Step3: apply DeMorgan laws

d = (Vx)(-p(x) v q(x)) n --(-(Vy) p(y) v

Step3: apply DeMorgan laws

(V

z)q(z))

4= (Vx)(.-p(x)v q(x)) n(Vy)p(y) nQz)--q(z))

Step4: extract the quantifiers in fiont of the formula

A:

(32)(Vx)(Vy)((--p(x) v q(x)) n p(y) n --q(z)):

At: A{

d = (Vx)(! z)(Vy)((-p(x) v q(x)) n p(y) n -q(z))-

,tp Az: A;

d= (Vr)(Vy)(=z)((--p(x)v
Because the forrnula

q(x)) n

p(y) n'.q(z))-

/lP A:: 11.

J

A1 , A,, A.are three prenex forms of the initial formula A.

contains 3 distinct bound variables. there are

3!:6

prenex normal

forms logically equivalent with A.

We remark that the matrix is in CNF, and we will not apply step 5.

Al

,li , Al' are prenex normal forms

After the Skolemization process, applied to the formulas A(

A! , A{

we obtain:

iI

First-order logic, MFCS

-20 10, Mihaiela Lupea

Al

(Vx)(Vy)((-p(x) v q(x)) n p(y) n -q(a)),

l'

4- af , a : Skolem constant

Al:(Yx)(VyX(-p(x) v q(x)) n p(y) n-q(f (x))), lz <*: f (x))' 1f: Skoiem function l3s:(vrxVy)((-p(x)vq(")) ^p(y)n-q(g(x,y))),lz<-g(x,v)l,g:binarySkolemfunction
quantifiers.
A,''r
Asr't

The Skolem nonnal forms without quantifiers are obtained by eliminating the universal
-.q( a)

- 1--p(x)v q(x)) r' p(y),^'

: (--p(x) v q(x)) n p(y) r, "-q(f (x)) Al't : (--p(x) v q(x)) n p(y) n--q(g(x, y))

the formula: Example g: Transform into prenex normal form and Skolem normal form y = (lx)(Vy)P(x, y)v (=z)(-QQ) v (Vu)(f r)R(z,u't))
LI

: (:x)(vy)( 1z)(v tt)(1 t)(P (x, v) v -- QQ) v R(2, u, t))

-.Q(f ODv R(f (v),It,8(!,zz))),
Skolem R("f where:
Skolen-r functions

[-Is = (Vy)(Va)(.P(a,y)v

fx <- af,lz <(JS'' =

f (y)l,lt <- g(y,u)f , a:

constant,/g:

P(a,y)v -Q(f QD"

(y),u,9(v,u))

Theorem 3 (Church 1936): but is semi-decidable. If a The problem of valiclity of a first-orcler formula is uncleciduble, the following situations: procedure p is used to check the validity of a formula we have . if a formula A is valid, then P ends with the corresponding answer' . if the formula A is not valid, then P ends lvith the corresponding answer or P may never
stop.

theorern proving' Theorem of deduction: if Xu {A} | - B then xl - (A+B), is used in Refutation theorem: if Xu { -A} is inconsistent then xl-A.
method. This theorem is used in proof methods such as: resolution, semantic tableaux called refutation proof metltods '

Theorem

soundness and completness states the equivalence between the "logical concept. consequence,' concept and "syntactic consequence" Let r be a set of first-order formulas and y a first-order formula'

of

. .

completness'. soundness:

if rl:7

then

rl-Y'
l:1'

if I l- r

then r

t2

First-order logic, MFCS -20 i 0, Mihaiela Lupea

A particular ease of this theorem. is the foilowing result: 'nA formula is a tautorogy if and onry if it is a theorem in first-order logic.,,

Example 7: using the theorem of ded'ction prove that

(Yx)(A(x) -+ B(x)) -+ ((yx)A(") _+ (yx)B(x)

the

forrnula

) is a rheorem.

We apply the reverse of the theorem of deduction:

l- (Vx)(.a(x) -+ B(*)) -+ ((vx)A(") + (Vx)B(x)) ::) (Yx)(A(x) -+ B(x)) | ((vx)A(") _+ (yx)B(x)) ::>

(Vx)(A(x)

B(x)),(Vx)A(x)

l_ (Vx)

B(*)

we prove that (vx)( A(x) -+ B(')),(Yx)A(x)l (vx)B(x) using rhe defi'irion of a deduction building the sequence (f1 , n,..., fg) of predicate
formulas:

fl: (vx)(A(x) -+ B(x))

f2: (Vx)(A(x) -+ B(x)) -+

fI,n l- *oR:
fa: (Vx)A(x) f5: (Vx)A(") -+
f4, f5
|

(A(y) -+ B(y))__-_ axiom 44,

x_>y_tenn

A(y)_+B(y)
---- axiom A4, x),y_!s1111

A(y)

- *of6: A(y) f3, f6 l- ,npfl:B(y) f, l- sunfS : (Vx) B(*)____ axiorn .A5

(f1,...' f8) is the deduction (Yx)A(x) .

of (vx)B(x)

from the hypothesis (yx)(A(")_+

B(x))

and

using this deduction and applying fwice the theorern of deduction we obtain:

(Vx)(A(x) -+ B(x)),(vx)A(x)i- (Vx)B(r) ::> (vx)(A(x) -+ B(x))l- (Vx)A(x) -+ (vx)B(x) ::)

l-

(vx)(A(x) -+ B(x)) -+ ((Vx)A(x)

_+

(vx)B(x))

Thus we have proved that the initiar fonnura is a theorem.

1a I-)