Use the two derived inference rules whose complete proofs were supplied in (d). The following logical derivation has no nested hypothetical subproofs:
1  P → Q                           premise
2  Q → R                           premise
3  P → (Q → R)                     → creation from 2
4  (P → Q) → (P → R)               → distribution from 3
5  P → R                           →-elim, 1 and 4
The creation instance takes and . The distribution instance takes . The metarules are justified in (d); this requested flat use does not secretly invoke implication introduction rule in one of its own lines.

Ancestors (11)

  1. 7
  2. Digital systems, linear algebra, introduction to formal proof
  3. 2019
  4. Past exam of the year 1 of the computer science course of the University of Oxford
  5. Year 1 of the computer science course of the University of Oxford
  6. Computer science course of the University of Oxford
  7. Undergraduate course of the University of Oxford
  8. Course of the University of Oxford
  9. University of Oxford
  10. List of universities
  11. Home

View article source

Discussion (0)

New discussion

There are no discussions about this article yet.

Articles by others on the same topic (0)

There are currently no matching articles.
See all articles in the same topic Create my own version