Scribd
Upload
10 views2 pages

CSE 311 Quiz Solutions: Logic Problems

This document summarizes solutions to a CSE 311 quiz with questions on logic problems involving knights and knaves on an island, expressing implication statements in the form "if p, then q", and verifying a logical equivalence using a truth table. It includes 4 logic problems where the task is to determine if two people, A and B, are knights or knaves based on their statements. It also expresses 6 implication statements in English and explains why the direction of implication matters for one statement. Finally, it lists the distributive law p ∧ (q ∨ r) ≡ (p ∧ q) ∨ (p ∧ r) and indicates it can be verified using a truth table.

Uploaded by

Asterisk Souls
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
10 views2 pages

CSE 311 Quiz Solutions: Logic Problems

This document summarizes solutions to a CSE 311 quiz with questions on logic problems involving knights and knaves on an island, expressing implication statements in the form "if p, then q", and verifying a logical equivalence using a truth table. It includes 4 logic problems where the task is to determine if two people, A and B, are knights or knaves based on their statements. It also expresses 6 implication statements in English and explains why the direction of implication matters for one statement. Finally, it lists the distributive law p ∧ (q ∨ r) ≡ (p ∧ q) ∨ (p ∧ r) and indicates it can be verified using a truth table.

Uploaded by

Asterisk Souls
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

CSE 311 Quiz Section: April 4, 2013 (Solutions)

1. A Logic Problem: Knights and Knaves


You are on an island of knights and knaves. Knights always tell the truth and knaves
always lie. You encounter two people, A and B. Determine, if possible, what the two
people are in each of the problems below.
**Note: Each problem below is separate from the others, don’t put them all together and
try to solve or it will get way too complicated!

(1) A says, “At least one of us is a knave” and B says nothing.


Solution: A is a knight and B is a knave.
(2) A says, “The two of us are both knights” and B says, “A is a knave.”
Solution: A is a knave and B is a knight.
(3) A says, “I am a knave or B is a knight” and B says nothing.
Solution: Both are knights.
(4) Both A and B say “I am a knight.”
Solution: Undeterminable.

2. Implication Statements
Express each of these statements in the form “if p, then q” in English.

(1) It snows whenever the wind blows from the northeast.


Solution: If the wind blows from the northeast, then it snows.
(2) The apple trees will bloom if it stays warm for a week.
Solution: If it stays warm for a week, then the apple trees will bloom.
(3) That the Clippers win the championship implies that they beat the Lakers.
Solution: If the Clippers win the championship, then they must have beat
the Lakers.
(4) It is necessary to walk 8 miles to get to the top of Long’s Peak.
Solution: If you are at the top of Long’s Peak, then you must have walked 8
miles.
(5) To get tenure as a professor, it is sufficient to be world-famous.
Solution: If you are world-famous, then you can get tenure as a professor.
(6) Your guarantee is good only if you bought your CD player less than 90 days ago.
Solution: If your guarantee is good, then you must have bought your CD
player less than 90 days ago.

1
2

For the last one:


Some students thought the implication goes the opposite way. Any easy way to
see why that is not the case is the following: Suppose that for your guarantee to
be good, you must fulfill a set of conditions. One of them is the 90 days condition.
For the sake of the argument, suppose that the other one is that you must be at
least 25 years old. Then notice that the fact that you bought your CD player less
than 90 days ago does not suffice for your guarantee to be good. On the other
hand, if your guar-
antee is good the it must mean that you bought the CD player at most 90 days ago.

3. Verifying Logical Equivalences


Use a truth table to verify the distributive law: p ∧ (q ∨ r) ≡ (p ∧ q) ∨ (p ∧ r).
Solution:

Common questions

Powered by AI

Both A and B must be knights. If A were a knave, then his statement must be entirely false, implying he isn't a knave and B isn't a knight, which is contradictory. Therefore, A must be a knight, confirming B's knight status, aligning truthfully with A's statement .

The logical structure of the implication is "If the wind blows from the northeast, then it snows." This form logically represents the statement where the presence of a northeast wind is a sufficient condition for snow .

The correct implication form is "If you are world-famous, then you can get tenure as a professor." Some may misinterpret it to mean that simply being world-famous guarantees tenure under any condition, not recognizing that tenure may involve additional requirements. The original statement implies sufficiency, not necessity .

Both being knights or both being knaves would either make both statements true or false, respectively. Each possibility is consistent with their respective statements, creating ambiguity, as either scenario does not exclusively satisfy the truth requirements for only knights or only knaves .

A must be a knight, and B must be a knave. If A were a knave, the statement "At least one of us is a knave" would be false, contradicting A's nature as a knave who always lies. Thus, A is a knight, making B a knave by A's truthful statement .

A truth table compares the truth values for p ∧ (q ∨ r) and (p ∧ q) ∨ (p ∧ r) under all possible truth assignments of p, q, and r. Both expressions yield identical truth values across all rows, establishing their logical equivalence and thereby verifying the distributive law .

If your guarantee is good, then you must have bought the CD player less than 90 days ago. However, satisfying the time condition alone does not guarantee a good warranty, as other conditions might also be necessary; this signifies understanding that antecedent conditions are required rather than sufficient .

The implication is "If the Clippers win the championship, then they must have beat the Lakers." This is intuitive when assuming a competition structure where beating opposing teams, like the Lakers, is necessary for championship victory .

The implication form is "If you are at the top of Long’s Peak, then you must have walked 8 miles." Here, walking 8 miles is a prerequisite to reach the summit, highlighting the condition's necessity rather than sufficiency for being at the peak .

A is a knave, and B is a knight. If A were a knight, his statement would be true, contradicting B's statement since B must then be a knave (but knights cannot lie). Therefore, A is a knave, making his statement false. Thus, B, correctly stating A's nature, must be a knight .

You might also like