Agent-almanac evaluate-boolean-expression
git clone https://github.com/pjt222/agent-almanac
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/pjt222/agent-almanac "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -r "$T/i18n/wenyan/skills/evaluate-boolean-expression" ~/.claude/skills/pjt222-agent-almanac-evaluate-boolean-expression-f8fcad && rm -rf "$T"
i18n/wenyan/skills/evaluate-boolean-expression/SKILL.mdEvaluate Boolean Expression
Reduce a Boolean expression to its minimal form by parsing it into canonical notation, constructing a truth table, applying algebraic simplification laws, performing Karnaugh map minimization (up to six variables), and verifying that the simplified expression is logically equivalent to the original.
When to Use
- Simplifying a Boolean expression before mapping it to logic gates
- Verifying that two Boolean expressions are logically equivalent
- Generating a minimal sum-of-products (SOP) or product-of-sums (POS) form
- Teaching or reviewing Boolean algebra identities and reduction techniques
- Preparing input for the design-logic-circuit skill
Inputs
- Required: Boolean expression in any common notation (e.g.,
,A AND (B OR NOT C)
,A * (B + C')
)A & (B | ~C) - Required: Target form -- minimal SOP, minimal POS, or both
- Optional: Variable ordering preference for the Karnaugh map
- Optional: Don't-care conditions (minterms or maxterms that are unspecified)
- Optional: A second expression to check equivalence against
Procedure
Step 1: Parse and Normalize to Canonical Form
Convert the input expression into a standard internal representation:
- Tokenize: Identify variables (single letters or short names), operators (AND, OR, NOT, XOR, NAND, NOR), and grouping (parentheses).
- Establish operator notation: Adopt a consistent notation throughout --
for AND,*
for OR,+
for NOT (complement),'
for XOR.^ - Determine variable count: List all unique variables. Assign each a bit position (A = MSB, ... Z = LSB by default, or use the provided ordering).
- Expand to canonical SOP: Expand the expression into a sum of all minterms by introducing missing variables via the identity
.X = X*(Y + Y') - Expand to canonical POS: Alternatively, expand into a product of all maxterms via
.X = X + Y*Y'
## Normalized Expression - **Variables**: [A, B, C, ...] - **Variable count**: [n] - **Original expression**: [as given] - **Canonical SOP (minterms)**: Sigma m(i, j, k, ...) - **Canonical POS (maxterms)**: Pi M(i, j, k, ...) - **Don't-care set**: d(i, j, ...) [if any]
Expected: The expression is converted to canonical SOP and/or POS with all minterms/maxterms explicitly listed and don't-care conditions separated.
On failure: If the expression contains syntax errors or ambiguous operator precedence, request clarification. Standard precedence is: NOT (highest) > AND > XOR > OR (lowest). If the variable count exceeds 6, note that the K-map step will require the Quine-McCluskey algorithm instead.
Step 2: Construct Truth Table
Build the complete truth table to establish the function's behavior over all input combinations:
- Enumerate rows: Generate all 2^n input combinations in binary counting order (000, 001, 010, ...).
- Evaluate output: For each row, substitute values into the original expression and compute the output (0 or 1).
- Mark don't-cares: If don't-care conditions were provided, mark those rows with
instead of 0 or 1.X - Cross-check with minterms: Verify that the rows producing output 1 match the minterm list from Step 1.
## Truth Table | A | B | C | F | |---|---|---|---| | 0 | 0 | 0 | _ | | 0 | 0 | 1 | _ | | ... | ... | ... | ... |
Expected: A complete truth table with 2^n rows, outputs matching the canonical form, and don't-cares properly marked.
On failure: If the truth table disagrees with the canonical form, recheck the expansion in Step 1. A common error is misapplying De Morgan's law during the canonical expansion -- verify each expansion step individually.
Step 3: Apply Algebraic Simplification
Reduce the expression using Boolean algebra identities:
- Identity and null laws:
,A + 0 = A
,A * 1 = A
,A + 1 = 1
.A * 0 = 0 - Idempotent law:
,A + A = A
.A * A = A - Complement law:
,A + A' = 1
.A * A' = 0 - Absorption law:
,A + A*B = A
.A * (A + B) = A - De Morgan's theorems:
,(A * B)' = A' + B'
.(A + B)' = A' * B' - Distributive law:
,A * (B + C) = A*B + A*C
.A + B*C = (A + B) * (A + C) - Consensus theorem:
(the B*C term is redundant).A*B + A'*C + B*C = A*B + A'*C - XOR simplification: Recognize patterns like
.A*B' + A'*B = A ^ B - Document each step: Write out the expression after each law application, citing the law used.
## Algebraic Simplification Trace 1. Original: [expression] 2. Apply [law name]: [result] 3. Apply [law name]: [result] ... n. Final algebraic form: [simplified expression]
Expected: A step-by-step reduction with each law application cited, converging on a simpler expression. The trace provides a verifiable proof of equivalence.
On failure: If the expression does not simplify further but appears non-minimal, proceed to Step 4 (K-map). Algebraic methods are not guaranteed to find the global minimum -- they depend on the order in which laws are applied.
Step 4: Minimize via Karnaugh Map
Use a K-map to find the provably minimal SOP or POS form (for up to 6 variables):
- Draw the K-map: Arrange the map using Gray code ordering on axes.
- 2 variables: 2x2 grid
- 3 variables: 2x4 grid
- 4 variables: 4x4 grid
- 5 variables: two 4x4 grids (stacked)
- 6 variables: four 4x4 grids (stacked)
- Fill cells: Place 1s (minterms), 0s (maxterms), and Xs (don't-cares) in the corresponding cells.
- Group adjacent 1s: Form rectangular groups of 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, or 32 adjacent cells (powers of 2 only). Groups may wrap around edges. Include don't-cares in groups if they enlarge the group.
- Extract prime implicants: Each group yields a product term. Variables that are constant across the group appear in the term; variables that change are eliminated.
- Select essential prime implicants: Identify minterms covered by only one prime implicant -- those implicants are essential.
- Cover remaining minterms: Use the fewest additional prime implicants to cover any uncovered minterms (Petrick's method if needed).
- Write minimal expression: Combine selected prime implicants into the minimal SOP. For minimal POS, group the 0s instead.
## K-map Result - **Prime implicants**: [list with covered minterms] - **Essential prime implicants**: [list] - **Minimal SOP**: [expression] - **Minimal POS**: [expression, if requested] - **Literal count**: [number of literals in minimal form]
Expected: A minimal SOP (and/or POS) with the fewest literals possible, with all prime implicants and essential prime implicants documented.
On failure: If groupings are ambiguous (multiple minimal covers exist), list all equivalent minimal forms. If the variable count exceeds 6, switch to the Quine-McCluskey tabular method or Espresso heuristic and note the change in approach.
Step 5: Verify Simplified Expression Matches Original
Confirm logical equivalence between the simplified and original expressions:
- Truth table comparison: Evaluate the simplified expression for all 2^n input combinations and compare against the truth table from Step 2. Every non-don't-care row must match.
- Algebraic proof (optional): Derive the original from the simplified form (or vice versa) using the laws from Step 3.
- Spot-check critical cases: Verify the all-zeros input, all-ones input, and any input that was involved in a tricky simplification step.
- Document result: State whether equivalence holds and record the final minimal form.
## Equivalence Verification - **Method**: [truth table comparison / algebraic proof / both] - **Mismatched rows**: [none, or list row numbers] - **Verdict**: [Equivalent / Not equivalent] - **Final minimal expression**: [the verified result]
Expected: The simplified expression matches the original on all non-don't-care inputs. The final minimal form is stated clearly.
On failure: If any row mismatches, trace the error back through Steps 3-4. Common causes: incorrect K-map grouping (non-rectangular or non-power-of-2 group), forgetting wrap-around adjacency, or accidentally grouping a 0 cell.
Validation
- All variables in the original expression are accounted for
- Canonical SOP/POS lists the correct minterms/maxterms
- Truth table has exactly 2^n rows with correct outputs
- Don't-care conditions are handled correctly (included in groups but not in coverage requirements)
- Algebraic steps each cite a specific law and are individually verifiable
- K-map uses Gray code ordering on both axes
- All groups in the K-map are rectangular and have power-of-2 size
- Essential prime implicants are correctly identified
- Simplified expression matches the original on all non-don't-care inputs
- The final form has the minimum number of literals
Common Pitfalls
- Incorrect K-map adjacency: Forgetting that the leftmost and rightmost columns (and top and bottom rows) are adjacent in a K-map. This wrap-around is essential for finding the largest possible groups.
- Non-power-of-2 groups: Grouping 3 or 5 cells together. Every K-map group must contain exactly 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, or 32 cells. An irregular group does not correspond to a valid product term.
- Ignoring don't-cares: Treating don't-care conditions as 0s instead of using them to enlarge groups. Don't-cares should be included in groups when doing so reduces the expression, but they must not be required for coverage.
- Operator precedence errors: Assuming AND and OR have equal precedence. Standard Boolean precedence is NOT > AND > OR. Misreading
asA + B * C
instead of(A + B) * C
changes the function entirely.A + (B * C) - Stopping at algebraic simplification: Algebraic methods may find a local minimum, not the global minimum. Always cross-check with a K-map (or Quine-McCluskey for >6 variables) to confirm minimality.
- Confusing minterms and maxterms: Minterms are AND terms (product terms) that appear in SOP; maxterms are OR terms (sum terms) that appear in POS. Minterm m3 for 3 variables is A'BC; maxterm M3 is A+B'+C'.
Related Skills
-- map the minimized expression to a gate-level circuitdesign-logic-circuit
-- structured logical reasoning that shares formal logic foundationsargumentation