Difficulty: Easy
Correct Answer: Incorrect
Explanation:
Introduction / Context:Boolean reduction aims to represent a logic function as simply as possible. However, “one form only” is misleading because a single function can be written in different, equally valid canonical or minimal forms (e.g., SOP and POS), and even multiple minimal SOP realizations can exist depending on don’t-cares or grouping choices.
Given Data / Assumptions:
Concept / Approach:A Boolean function has unique truth behavior but may admit many algebraic expressions. Canonical SOP and POS are both valid for the same function. Minimization (via algebra/K-maps/Quine–McCluskey) often yields alternative but equivalent minimal expressions differing by implicant choice when symmetry or don’t-cares exist.
Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Recognize that canonical SOP and POS both represent the same function.Step 2: Note that minimization does not force a single unique algebraic result.Step 3: Conclude that “only one form” is incorrect.Verification / Alternative check:Construct a simple function with multiple prime implicant covers; different valid covers produce distinct minimal SOP expressions with identical truth tables.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Correct: Conflicts with existence of SOP and POS for the same function.Only true for two-variable functions: Not generally true even for two variables.Ambiguous / Insufficient information: The claim is clear enough to evaluate.Common Pitfalls:Confusing uniqueness of a truth table with uniqueness of an algebraic expression.
Final Answer:Incorrect
Discussion & Comments