OCMEBilingual mathematics & derivations繁體中文

Explore related knowledge and questions →

Question 3582: Domain Eligibility and Predicate Failure

On this page
  1. Original question and givens
  2. Definition and scope
  3. Step-by-step derivation
  4. Reverse checks
  5. Result
  6. This question review and source binding

Return to catalogue page 18

← Question derivation index · Original question batch

R0006-03582 · q-20261003-advance-20261004-r02-counterexample-0007

Original question and givens

Using classical truth semantics, the explicit finite integer domain is U={-6, -5, -4} and P(x) means x=-5. For the claim ∀x∈U P(x), is c=-2 a valid counterexample?

  • G001 — Using classical truth semantics, the explicit finite integer domain is U={-6, -5, -4} and P(x) means x=-5. For the claim ∀x∈U P(x), is c=-2 a valid counterexample?

Definition and scope

Use the original question domain, assumptions and cited MKO definitions. This item has second-context mathematical and bilingual review, with the model, answer and every arithmetic step independently recomputed from the original parameters; the source question remains a candidate.

Step-by-step derivation

S001 · implies

Before

U={-6, -5, -4};predicate=eq -5

After

a counterexample requires c∈U and P(c)=False

Conditions: none

A counterexample needs both domain membership and predicate failure;an outside integer does not refute this restricted universal statement even if its formula is false.

Step identifiers and dependencies

Rule: finite_counterexample_domain · Uses: G001

S002 · implies

Before

x=-2;predicate=eq -5

After

P(-2)=No

Conditions: none

Substitute this integer into the declared condition;the formula's truth value does not change its domain eligibility.

Step identifiers and dependencies

Rule: explicit_predicate_value · Uses: G001, S001

S003 · implies

Before

c=-2;c∈U=No;P(c)=No

After

original valid witness=No

Conditions: none

Use conjunction,not just predicate failure or domain membership alone.

Step identifiers and dependencies

Rule: membership_and_predicate_failure · Uses: G001, S002

S004 · implies

Before

the explicitly declared finite exercise

After

no inference about an unspecified infinite domain

Conditions: none

Complete enumeration decides this finite universal statement,but finite success or absence of counterexamples is not a universal proof over an infinite domain.

Step identifiers and dependencies

Rule: finite_logic_scope · Uses: G001, S003

Reverse checks

  • S004 · premise_and_result_audit — Check against the original data and this step's premises; a one-way implication is not an equivalence.
  • S003 · premise_and_result_audit — Check against the original data and this step's premises; a one-way implication is not an equivalence.
  • S002 · premise_and_result_audit — Check against the original data and this step's premises; a one-way implication is not an equivalence.
  • S001 · premise_and_result_audit — Check against the original data and this step's premises; a one-way implication is not an equivalence.

Result

No

The full substitutions and premise checks give the original answer; source identity,format and status are unchanged.

This question review and source binding

Review date: 2026-10-26

Original questions, answers, step expressions, numeric ASTs and historical records are retained. Source candidate labels remain historical and are not overwritten as formal proof.

Source hashes and review receipts
  • input commit: 0f7be61e2c22317a4075561dc822c87d881a50db
  • original question SHA-256: 6e575e29c7980be5b017128a33e0f88fadc7e985dffdbcd9918a35db11c29227
  • candidate record SHA-256: f5240223cd47b637301160e65b7326ce24497514950ec1d6d8a5cf765d12fd08
  • semantic review receipt SHA-256: 568eefd71709ac3dc16a0d5b3b4ad3e83376a8ef300c9e5493eee0721500b29d
  • question-first witness SHA-256: d964b91bedb9d4918bbc055f567762a09f5a58af6c876268e719d5100332d855
  • Lean: NOT_RUN · human review: NOT_PERFORMED
Same-source full JSON