MATH1090 B Problem Set No1 September 2021
Department of EECS
MATH1090 B. Problem Set No1
Posted: Sept. 19, 2021
Due: Oct. 5, 2021, by 2:00pm; in eClass.
Q: How do I submit?
A:
(1) Submission must be ONLY ONE file
(2) Accepted File Types: PDF, RTF, MS WORD,
ZIP
(3) Deadline is strict, electronically limited.
(4) MAXIMUM file size = 10MB
It is worth remembering (from the course outline):
The homework must be each individual’s own work. While consultations
with the instructor, tutor, and among students, are part of the learning
process and are encouraged, nevertheless, at the end of all this consultation
each student will have to produce an individual report rather than a copy
(full or partial) of somebody else’s report.
The concept of “late assignments” does not exist in this course.
1. (3 MARKS) Prove that no wff can be λ.
Hint. Analyse formula-constructions, or use induction on formulas.
Page 1 G. Tourlakis
MATH1090 B Problem Set No1 September 2021
2. (3 MARKS) Prove that the complexity of a well-formed-formula equals
the number of its right brackets.
Hint. Analyse formula-constructions, or use induction on formulas.
3. (3 MARKS) Prove that (p) is not a wff.
Hint. One way is to analyse formula-constructions.
4. (1 MARK) Prove that ((¬(p → r)) ≡ (r → p)) is a wff.
5. (6 MARKS) Recall that a schema is a tautology iff all its instances are
tautologies.
Which of the following six schemata are tautologies? Show the whole
process that led to your answers, including truth tables or equivalent short
cuts, and words of explanation.
I note that in the six sub-questions below I am not using all the formally
necessary brackets.
Therefore be mindful of connective priorities and associativities!
• A → B → (A → ⊥) ∨ B
• A ≡ B → (A → ⊥) ∨ B
• (A ≡ B) → A ∧ B
• A → B → ¬B → ¬A
• (¬A) ∧ B ≡ A → B
• A ∨ B → A → B
6. (3 MARKS) Prove that if we have > |=taut A, then we also have B |=taut A
for any B.
7. (6 MARKS) By using truth tables, or using related shortcuts, examine
whether or not the following tautological implications are correct.
In order to show that a tautological implication that involves meta-variables
for formulas —i.e., it is a schema— is incorrect you must consider a special
case that is incorrect (since some other special cases might work).
Page 2 G. Tourlakis
MATH1090 B Problem Set No1 September 2021
Show the whole process that led to each of your answers.
• p ∧ ¬p |=taut ⊥
• p ∨ q ∧ r → r
00 |=taut >
• p |=taut p ∨ B
• A, A → B |=taut B
• A ≡ B |=taut A ∧ B
• A ∧ B |=taut A ≡ B
8. (6 MARKS) Write down the most simplified result of the following substitutions,
whenever the requested substitution makes sense. Whenever a
requested substitution does not make sense, explain exactly why it does
not.
Show the whole process that led to each of your answers in each case.
Remember the priorities of the various connectives as well as that of
the meta-expression “[p := . . .]”! The following formulas have not been
written with all the formally required brackets.
• (q → p)[q := r]
• (q → p)[r := r
00]
• p → >[p := ⊥]
• p → >[p := f]
• (⊥ → r → q)[⊥ := p]
• p ∨ (q ∧ r)[p := r]
Page 3 G. Tourlakis