![]() |
Mathbox for Wolf Lammen |
< Previous
Next >
Nearby theorems |
|
Mirrors > Home > MPE Home > Th. List > Mathboxes > wl-df3maxtru1 | Structured version Visualization version GIF version |
Description: Assuming
"(n+1)-maxtru1" ↔ ¬
"(n+1)-mintru-2", we can deduce from
the recursion formula given in wl-df-3mintru2 37450, that a similiar one
"(n+1)-maxtru1" ↔ if-(𝜑,-. "n-mintru-1" , "n-maxtru1" ) is valid for expressing 'at most one input is true'. This can also be rephrased as a mutual exclusivity of propositional expressions (no two of a sequence of inputs can simultaneously be true). Of course, this suggests that all inputs depend on variables 𝜂, 𝜁... Whatever wellformed expression we plugin for these variables, it will render at most one of the inputs true. The here introduced mutual exclusivity is possibly useful for case studies, where we want the cases be sort of 'disjoint'. One can further imagine that a complete case scenario demands that the 'at most' is sharpened to 'exactly one'. This does not impose any difficulty here, as one of the inputs will then be the negation of all others be or'ed. As one input is determined, 'at most one' is sufficient to describe the general form here. Since cadd is an alias for 'at least 2 out of three are true', its negation is under focus here. (Contributed by Wolf Lammen, 23-Jun-2024.) |
Ref | Expression |
---|---|
wl-df3maxtru1 | ⊢ (¬ cadd(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) ↔ if-(𝜑, (𝜓 ⊽ 𝜒), (𝜓 ⊼ 𝜒))) |
Step | Hyp | Ref | Expression |
---|---|---|---|
1 | cadnot 1612 | . 2 ⊢ (¬ cadd(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) ↔ cadd(¬ 𝜑, ¬ 𝜓, ¬ 𝜒)) | |
2 | wl-df-3mintru2 37450 | . 2 ⊢ (cadd(¬ 𝜑, ¬ 𝜓, ¬ 𝜒) ↔ if-(¬ 𝜑, (¬ 𝜓 ∨ ¬ 𝜒), (¬ 𝜓 ∧ ¬ 𝜒))) | |
3 | ifpn 1074 | . . 3 ⊢ (if-(𝜑, (𝜓 ⊽ 𝜒), (𝜓 ⊼ 𝜒)) ↔ if-(¬ 𝜑, (𝜓 ⊼ 𝜒), (𝜓 ⊽ 𝜒))) | |
4 | nanor 1492 | . . . . . 6 ⊢ ((𝜓 ⊼ 𝜒) ↔ (¬ 𝜓 ∨ ¬ 𝜒)) | |
5 | 4 | a1i 11 | . . . . 5 ⊢ (⊤ → ((𝜓 ⊼ 𝜒) ↔ (¬ 𝜓 ∨ ¬ 𝜒))) |
6 | df-nor 1526 | . . . . . . 7 ⊢ ((𝜓 ⊽ 𝜒) ↔ ¬ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒)) | |
7 | ioran 984 | . . . . . . 7 ⊢ (¬ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒) ↔ (¬ 𝜓 ∧ ¬ 𝜒)) | |
8 | 6, 7 | bitri 275 | . . . . . 6 ⊢ ((𝜓 ⊽ 𝜒) ↔ (¬ 𝜓 ∧ ¬ 𝜒)) |
9 | 8 | a1i 11 | . . . . 5 ⊢ (⊤ → ((𝜓 ⊽ 𝜒) ↔ (¬ 𝜓 ∧ ¬ 𝜒))) |
10 | 5, 9 | ifpbi23d 1080 | . . . 4 ⊢ (⊤ → (if-(¬ 𝜑, (𝜓 ⊼ 𝜒), (𝜓 ⊽ 𝜒)) ↔ if-(¬ 𝜑, (¬ 𝜓 ∨ ¬ 𝜒), (¬ 𝜓 ∧ ¬ 𝜒)))) |
11 | 10 | mptru 1544 | . . 3 ⊢ (if-(¬ 𝜑, (𝜓 ⊼ 𝜒), (𝜓 ⊽ 𝜒)) ↔ if-(¬ 𝜑, (¬ 𝜓 ∨ ¬ 𝜒), (¬ 𝜓 ∧ ¬ 𝜒))) |
12 | 3, 11 | bitr2i 276 | . 2 ⊢ (if-(¬ 𝜑, (¬ 𝜓 ∨ ¬ 𝜒), (¬ 𝜓 ∧ ¬ 𝜒)) ↔ if-(𝜑, (𝜓 ⊽ 𝜒), (𝜓 ⊼ 𝜒))) |
13 | 1, 2, 12 | 3bitri 297 | 1 ⊢ (¬ cadd(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) ↔ if-(𝜑, (𝜓 ⊽ 𝜒), (𝜓 ⊼ 𝜒))) |
Colors of variables: wff setvar class |
Syntax hints: ¬ wn 3 ↔ wb 206 ∧ wa 395 ∨ wo 846 if-wif 1063 ⊼ wnan 1488 ⊽ wnor 1525 ⊤wtru 1538 caddwcad 1603 |
This theorem was proved from axioms: ax-mp 5 ax-1 6 ax-2 7 ax-3 8 |
This theorem depends on definitions: df-bi 207 df-an 396 df-or 847 df-ifp 1064 df-3or 1088 df-3an 1089 df-nan 1489 df-xor 1509 df-nor 1526 df-tru 1540 df-cad 1604 |
This theorem is referenced by: (None) |
Copyright terms: Public domain | W3C validator |