![]() |
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 36365, 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 simultaniously 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 1617 | . 2 ⊢ (¬ cadd(𝜑, 𝜓, 𝜒) ↔ cadd(¬ 𝜑, ¬ 𝜓, ¬ 𝜒)) | |
2 | wl-df-3mintru2 36365 | . 2 ⊢ (cadd(¬ 𝜑, ¬ 𝜓, ¬ 𝜒) ↔ if-(¬ 𝜑, (¬ 𝜓 ∨ ¬ 𝜒), (¬ 𝜓 ∧ ¬ 𝜒))) | |
3 | ifpn 1073 | . . 3 ⊢ (if-(𝜑, (𝜓 ⊽ 𝜒), (𝜓 ⊼ 𝜒)) ↔ if-(¬ 𝜑, (𝜓 ⊼ 𝜒), (𝜓 ⊽ 𝜒))) | |
4 | nanor 1494 | . . . . . 6 ⊢ ((𝜓 ⊼ 𝜒) ↔ (¬ 𝜓 ∨ ¬ 𝜒)) | |
5 | 4 | a1i 11 | . . . . 5 ⊢ (⊤ → ((𝜓 ⊼ 𝜒) ↔ (¬ 𝜓 ∨ ¬ 𝜒))) |
6 | df-nor 1530 | . . . . . . 7 ⊢ ((𝜓 ⊽ 𝜒) ↔ ¬ (𝜓 ∨ 𝜒)) | |
7 | ioran 983 | . . . . . . 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 1081 | . . . 4 ⊢ (⊤ → (if-(¬ 𝜑, (𝜓 ⊼ 𝜒), (𝜓 ⊽ 𝜒)) ↔ if-(¬ 𝜑, (¬ 𝜓 ∨ ¬ 𝜒), (¬ 𝜓 ∧ ¬ 𝜒)))) |
11 | 10 | mptru 1549 | . . 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 205 ∧ wa 397 ∨ wo 846 if-wif 1062 ⊼ wnan 1490 ⊽ wnor 1529 ⊤wtru 1543 caddwcad 1608 |
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 206 df-an 398 df-or 847 df-ifp 1063 df-3or 1089 df-3an 1090 df-nan 1491 df-xor 1511 df-nor 1530 df-tru 1545 df-cad 1609 |
This theorem is referenced by: (None) |
Copyright terms: Public domain | W3C validator |