Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In propositional logic, disjunction elimination [1] [2] (sometimes named proof by cases, case analysis, or or elimination) is the valid argument form and rule of inference that allows one to eliminate a disjunctive statement from a logical proof.
The name "disjunctive syllogism" derives from its being a syllogism, a three-step argument, and the use of a logical disjunction (any "or" statement.) For example, "P or Q" is a disjunction, where P and Q are called the statement's disjuncts. The rule makes it possible to eliminate a disjunction from a logical proof. It is the rule that
Conjunction introduction / elimination; Disjunction introduction ... Rules of inference are syntactical transform rules which one can use to infer a conclusion from a ...
Disjunction introduction / elimination; ... a rule of inference, inference rule or transformation rule is a logical form consisting of a function which takes premises
In propositional logic, tautology is either of two commonly used rules of replacement. [1] [2] [3] The rules are used to eliminate redundancy in disjunctions and conjunctions when they occur in logical proofs. They are: The principle of idempotency of disjunction:
In propositional logic, conjunction elimination (also called and elimination, ∧ elimination, [1] or simplification) [2] [3] [4] is a valid immediate inference, argument form and rule of inference which makes the inference that, if the conjunction A and B is true, then A is true, and B is true.
De Morgan's laws represented with Venn diagrams.In each case, the resultant set is the set of all points in any shade of blue. In propositional logic and Boolean algebra, De Morgan's laws, [1] [2] [3] also known as De Morgan's theorem, [4] are a pair of transformation rules that are both valid rules of inference.
In propositional logic, material implication [1] [2] is a valid rule of replacement that allows a conditional statement to be replaced by a disjunction in which the antecedent is negated. The rule states that P implies Q is logically equivalent to not-or and that either form can replace the other in logical proofs.