# Natural Deduction - Introduction and Elimination

Introduction and Elimination

Now we discuss the "A true" judgment. Inference rules that introduce a logical connective in the conclusion are known as introduction rules. To introduce conjunctions, i.e., to conclude "A and B true" for propositions A and B, one requires evidence for "A true" and "B true". As an inference rule: $frac{Ahbox{ true} qquad Bhbox{ true}}{A wedge Bhbox{ true}} wedge_I$

It must be understood that in such rules the objects are propositions. That is, the above rule is really an abbreviation for: $frac{Ahbox{ prop} qquad Bhbox{ prop} qquad Ahbox{ true} qquad Bhbox{ true}}{A wedge Bhbox{ true}} wedge_I$

This can also be written: $frac{A wedge Bhbox{ prop} qquad Ahbox{ true} qquad Bhbox{ true}}{A wedge Bhbox{ true}} wedge_I$

In this form, the first premise can be satisfied by the formation rule, giving the first two premises of the previous form. In this article we shall elide the "prop" judgments where they are understood. In the nullary case, one can derive truth from no premises. $frac{ }{tophbox{ true}} top_I$

If the truth of a proposition can be established in more than one way, the corresponding connective has multiple introduction rules. $frac{Ahbox{ true}}{A vee Bhbox{ true}} vee_{I1} qquad frac{Bhbox{ true}}{A vee Bhbox{ true}} vee_{I2}$

Note that in the nullary case, i.e., for falsehood, there are no introduction rules. Thus one can never infer falsehood from simpler judgments.

Dual to introduction rules are elimination rules to describe how to de-construct information about a compound proposition into information about its constituents. Thus, from "A ∧ B true", we can conclude "A true" and "B true": $frac{A wedge Bhbox{ true}}{Ahbox{ true}} wedge_{E1} qquad frac{A wedge Bhbox{ true}}{Bhbox{ true}} wedge_{E2}$

As an example of the use of inference rules, consider commutativity of conjunction. If A ∧ B is true, then B ∧ A is true; This derivation can be drawn by composing inference rules in such a fashion that premises of a lower inference match the conclusion of the next higher inference. $cfrac{cfrac{A wedge Bhbox{ true}}{Bhbox{ true}} wedge_{E2} qquad cfrac{A wedge Bhbox{ true}}{Ahbox{ true}} wedge_{E1}} {B wedge Ahbox{ true}} wedge_I$

The inference figures we have seen so far are not sufficient to state the rules of implication introduction or disjunction elimination; for these, we need a more general notion of hypothetical derivation.