Results 1 to 10 of 10

Math Help - constructing truth tables for 3 valued logic help

  1. #1
    Newbie
    Joined
    Jun 2012
    From
    spokane
    Posts
    5

    Exclamation constructing truth tables for 3 valued logic help

    i have a homework assignment that deals with 3 valued logic, ie, true = 1, false = 0, unknown = 1/2. I dont really understand 3 valued logic all that well, and would like to get some help on the following problems.

    making truth tables for these problems, and determine if the propositional forms are a tautology, a contradiction, or neither. If someone could do maybe one or two, I can probably figure out the rest. or do all that would be awesome


    a) [(p-> q) -> p] -> p

    b) p <-> [p ^ (pVq)]

    c) (p -> q) <-> (p ^~q)

    d) ~(p V q) <-> (~p ^ ~q)

    e) (p <-> q) <-> ~(~p V q) V (~p^q)
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  2. #2
    MHF Contributor
    Joined
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    5,517
    Thanks
    771

    Re: constructing truth tables for 3 valued logic help

    Do you know how to construct truth tables for 2-valued logic? What exactly do you not understand concerning truth tables for 3-valued logic?
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  3. #3
    Newbie
    Joined
    Jun 2012
    From
    spokane
    Posts
    5

    Re: constructing truth tables for 3 valued logic help

    like here is what i have for a, i just dont really understand the unknown and how to make a table with that involved. is this right?


    T(p) T(q) p->q p (p->q)->p [(p->q)->p]->p
    1 1 1 1 1 1
    1 0 0 1 1 1
    1 1
    0 1 0 0 1 0
    0 0 1 0 0 1
    0 0
    1
    0


    sorry for the alignment
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  4. #4
    MHF Contributor

    Joined
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    15,412
    Thanks
    1328

    Re: constructing truth tables for 3 valued logic help

    For 2-valued logic there are 2^2= 4 cases you have to consider: TT, TF, FT, and FF (or 11, 10, 01, and 00). In three valued logic you must consider 3^2= 9 cases with 2 basic formulae: 11, 1(1/2), 10, (1/2)1, (1/2)(1/2), (1/2)0, 01, 0(1/2), and 00.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  5. #5
    Newbie
    Joined
    Jun 2012
    From
    spokane
    Posts
    5

    Re: constructing truth tables for 3 valued logic help

    i just dont know if my truth table is correct for a). someone confirm it and whether im right if it is a tautology, contradiction, or neither. i just get confused with the 1/2. or unknown.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  6. #6
    MHF Contributor
    Joined
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    5,517
    Thanks
    771

    Re: constructing truth tables for 3 valued logic help

    You can use the [code]...[/code] tag to preserve alignment.

    Code:
    T(p) T(q) p->q p (p->q)->p [(p->q)->p]->p
     1    1    1   1     1           1
     1    0    0   1     1           1
     1           1                
     0    1    0*  0     1*          0*
     0    0    1   0     0           1
     0           0                
         1                       
         0                       
                                
    Check the values followed by *.

    The important thing is that there are many, in fact, 3^{3^2}, ways to define each binary connective, such as implication. More than one of these ways is reasonable or suitable for a particular application. Since three-valued logics are less common than the regular two-valued logic, these definitions are not standard and are usually given in each source. One cannot proceed without such definitions. My guess concerning the reason for your confusion is that you don't have the definitions of connectives. In your truth table, implication equals if either of the arguments is . It is a possible convention; however, I would expect that -> 0 would be 0, for example.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  7. #7
    Newbie
    Joined
    Jun 2012
    From
    spokane
    Posts
    5

    Re: constructing truth tables for 3 valued logic help

    im confused now lol is the * wrong? why would that be wrong?

    these are my definitions maybe they re wrong


    T(p) T(q) T(~p) T(~q) T(pVq) T(p^q) T(p->q) T(p<->q)
    1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1
    1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0
    1 0 1
    0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0
    0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1
    0 1 0
    1 0 1
    0 1 0
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  8. #8
    MHF Contributor
    Joined
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    5,517
    Thanks
    771

    Re: constructing truth tables for 3 valued logic help

    Hmm, you definitely have non-standard definition because 0 -> 1 = 0. In this case, check the value of (p->q)->p for p = 1 and q = 0. Except that line, the truth table in post #3 seems OK.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  9. #9
    Newbie
    Joined
    Jun 2012
    From
    spokane
    Posts
    5

    Re: constructing truth tables for 3 valued logic help

    Ok i found my mistake. im going to post all the truth tables for a- e, if you could just check to make sure i didnt make any errors, that would be awesome! trying to get 100% on this. here they are:

    a) i found this proposition was a contradiction. see above ^^ since i made a mistake pointed out once fixed it made it all 1/2 or 1. which i believe is a contradiction.

    Code:
    T(p)    T(q)    pVq    P^(pVq)    p    p <-> [p ^ (pVq)]
    1    1    1    1    1    1
    1    0    1    1    1    1
    1        1    1    1    1
    0    1    1    0    0    1
    0    0    0    0    0    1
    0            0    0    1
        1    1            1
        0                1
                        1
    p <-> [p ^ (pVq)]
    b is a tautology

    Code:
    T(p)    T(q)    ~q    P ^ ~q    P -> q    (p -> q) <-> (p ^~q)
    1    1    0    0    1    0
    1    0    1    1    0    0
    1                    1
    0    1    0    0    0    1
    0    0    1    0    1    0
    0            0        
        1    0    0        
        0    1            1
                        1
    (p -> q) <-> (p ^~q)
    c is neither ***check this one*****

    Code:
    T(p)    T(q)    ~p    ~q    ~p ^ ~q    pVq    ~(pVq)    ~(p V q) <-> (~p ^ ~q)
    1    1    0    0    0    1    0    1
    1    0    0    1    0    1    0    1
    1        0        0    1    0    1
    0    1    1    0    0    1    0    1
    0    0    1    1    1    0    1    1
    0        1                    1
        1        0    0    1    0    1
        0        1                1
                                1
    ~(p V q) <-> (~p ^ ~q)
    d is a tautology

    Code:
    T(p)    T(q)    P ⇔ q    ~p    q    ~p^q    ~pVq    ~(~pVq)    ~(~pVq)V(~p^q)    P ⇔ q    (p <-> q) <-> ~(~p V q) V (~p^q)
    1    1    1    0    1    0    1    0    0    1    0
    1    0    0    0    0    0    0    1    1    0    0
    1            0        0                    
    0    1    0    1    1    1    1    0    1    0    0
    0    0    1    1    0    0    1    0    0    1    0
    0            1            1    0            
        1            1        1    0            
        0            0    0                    
                                            
    (p <-> q) <-> ~(~p V q) V (~p^q)
    e is a contradiction ***check this one*****
    Last edited by samaha34; June 7th 2012 at 06:15 PM.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  10. #10
    Super Member

    Joined
    May 2006
    From
    Lexington, MA (USA)
    Posts
    11,686
    Thanks
    617

    Re: constructing truth tables for 3 valued logic help

    Hello, samaha34!

    I've modified the code somewhat . . .


    I have a homework assignment that deals with 3-valued logic:
    . . true = T, false = F, unknown = 0.
    I don't really understand 3-valued logic all that well.

    I would construct the basic truth tables,
    . . using common sense or baby-talk.

    . . \begin{array}{|c||c|} p & \sim p \\ \hline T & F \\ 0 & 0 \\ F & T \\ \hline\end{array}


    . . \begin{array}{|c|c||c|c|c|c|} p & q & p \wedge q & p \vee q & p \to q & p \leftrightarrow q \\ \hline T&T & T&T&T&T \\ T&0 & 0&T&0&0 \\ T&F & F&T&F&F \\ 0&T & 0&T&T&0 \\ 0&0 & 0&0&0&0 \\ 0&F& F&0&0&0 \\ F&T & F&T&T&F \\ F&0 & F&0&T&0 \\ F&F & F&F&T&T \\ \hline \end{array}


    Then apply these to your problems.

    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

Similar Math Help Forum Discussions

  1. Constructing truth tables?
    Posted in the Discrete Math Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: April 6th 2011, 07:56 AM
  2. Truth tables Propositional Logic.
    Posted in the Discrete Math Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: February 23rd 2011, 02:51 AM
  3. Prepositional logic, truth tables and Venn diagrams
    Posted in the Discrete Math Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: March 28th 2009, 09:44 AM
  4. truth tables
    Posted in the Math Topics Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: October 18th 2008, 07:17 PM
  5. Logic - Truth Tables
    Posted in the Discrete Math Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: February 21st 2008, 08:24 PM

Search Tags


/mathhelpforum @mathhelpforum