Topology of Venn Diagrams
Topologically faithful diagrams exist for
one, two or three statements, but not if the number of
statements is four or more...
Tony Phillips
Stony Brook University
tony at math.sunysb.edu
Introduction: The calculus of logical functions
John Venn (1834-1923) was a British mathematician and logician; he is best known today for the diagrams that bear his name. In this column we will
review the use of Venn diagrams (defined below), and see why planar Venn diagrams involving
four or more statements cannot give a topologically satisfactory
picture of the way the various combinations of the statements are
logically related.
A Venn diagram is a graphical way of illustrating the calculus
of logical functions. These are functions which assign to a statement a truth-value: 0 ("false") or
1 ("true"). What is calculated is how these functions combine
under the fundamental operations
and, or and not, where these are
defined by
- A and B is true if both A
and B are true, and is false otherwise.
- A or B is true if either A or B
(or both) is true. Equivalently A or B is false if both
A
and B are false, and is true otherwise.
- not A is true if A is false, and
false if A is true.
So the meaning of and, or and not
corresponds to the usual meaning of the words, except that
or means "or" not in the sense of "Are you coming or
going?" but in the sense of "You must be delusional or misinformed," where
the possibility of both is not excluded.
Truth tables
The definitions above can be encapsulated in tables organized like
multiplication and addition tables:
The statement not(A or(B and not C)) = not A and (not B or C)
is a "tautology" (i.e., the values of the left and right-hand sides
are equal for any combination of values of A, B, C). One
algorithmic way of checking that we really have a tautology is to use
truth tables: Tabulate the truth-value of the left side for all
possible combinations of A, B, C truth-values
(there are 2 x 2 x 2 = 8 of
them), do the same for the right side, and check that the outputs
are always the same.
The left side works out as
| A |
B |
C |
not C |
B and not C |
A or (B and not C) |
not(A or (B and not C)) |
| 0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
| 0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
| 0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
| 0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
| 1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
| 1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
| 1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
| 1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
while the right side is
| A |
B |
C |
not B |
not B or C |
not A |
not A and (not B or C) |
| 0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
| 0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
| 0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
| 0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
| 1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
| 1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
| 1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
| 1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
and since the two last columns match, the two statements are equivalent.
Truth tables and diagrams
There is a graphical way of interpreting truth tables, based on the parallelism between and, or, and not and the operations
intersection, union, and complement in set theory. The
parallelism is built into the definitions of the set-theoretic
operations, since X intersect Y is the set of elements
which belong to X and to Y, X union Y is the set of elements
which belong to X or to Y, and the complement of X is
the set of elements which do not belong to X.
For logical purposes we can identify a statement A with
the set of instances in which A is true; then logical
operations on statements are exactly set-theoretic operations on the
corresponding sets. The Venn-diagram idea is to represent the sets
by shapes in the plane, and to reason thereby.
To repeat the previous example in this new format, we represent
the set corresponding to statement A by the set of points
inside a (blue) circle, and likewise for B (yellow) and
for C (red), and we position these circles so that all
possible intersections occur. The three circles sit inside a box
which represents the universe, or the set of all possible instances,
so that the region outside the blue circle represents the
statement not A, etc.
We can construct the region corresponding to the statement
not(A or(B and not C))
stepwise just as we calculated the truth table:

The shaded regions represent
not C, B and not C, A or (B and not C), not (A or (B and not C)).
Similarly we can graphically duplicate the truth-table
computation of not A and (not B or C):

The shaded regions represent
not B, not B or C, not A, not A and (not B or C).
Visual comparison of the two final images shows that the two sets,
and therefore the two statements, are equivalent.
Venn diagrams for more than three statements
In the three-statement Venn diagram, the three circles
and the region outside them partition the "universe" into eight
regions. Each region can be characterized by whether its points are
inside or outside A, B or C: Each region corresponds to a unique threefold
and, running from not A and not B and not C
(the outside) to A and B and C (the innermost). The
usual name for these expressions is conjunctions or,
in analogy with multiplication, monomials.
Furthermore, in the three-statement Venn diagram, the
relative topology of these regions mirrors the relative closeness
of the corresponding monomials, in the following precise sense:
If two monomials differ by switching one statement to its negation,
the two corresponding regions share a common edge. We will call
such a Venn diagram topologically faithful. Topologically faithful diagrams exist for
one, two or three statements, but not if the number of
statements is four or more; the non-existence is proved in the Appendix.
This figure shows one of the standard ways of constructing
a Venn diagram for four statements A, B, C, D; the
regions corresponding to A and B and not C and not D and to
A and B and C and not D are not adjacent, even though the
corresponding monomials only differ in one place. No matter how the curves are drawn, this phenomenon will occur.
Topologically faithful Venn diagrams in higher dimensions
A 4-statement topologically faithful Venn diagram cannot be drawn in the plane,
but an analogous structure does exist in three dimensions:
A topologically faithful "Venn diagram" for the
four statements A, B, C, D: the circles of the 3-statement
planar Venn diagram lie in the (x,y)-plane and are thickened into cylinders up and down along the z-axis.
This does not change their relative topology. A fourth cylinder is
placed with its bottom face in the (x,y)-plane, and so as to enclose the upper part of the cylinders. This splits
each of the original regions into two halves: D
and not D, which share a face in the plane.
This construction can be repeated to give a topologically
faithful four-dimensional
"Venn diagram" for five statements, etc.
Appendix
In the planar 3-statement Venn diagram, let us label a point in each
of the eight regions by the corresponding monomial, and draw a line
segment between two of these points if the regions share a side. The
graph thus obtained is the dual graph of the partition into regions;
by its construction no two edges intersect. The graph itself can be
redrawn as the vertices and edges of a cube, with displacement in
the x-direction corresponding to A <--> not A adjacency
of the corresponding regions,
displacement in
the y-direction corresponding to B <--> not B adjacency,
and displacement in
the z-direction corresponding to C <--> not C adjacency.

A point in each region is labeled with the corresponding
monomial, abbreviating and by & and not by ~. The dual graph, with those points as vertices, and with edges
corresponding to adjacent regions, can be redrawn as the vertices and edges
of a 3-dimensional cube.
In a topologically faithful Venn diagram for the 4 statements
A,B,C,D, the dual graph will
have 16 vertices, labeled from not A and not B and not C and not D up to
A and B and C and D. Each region must share an edge with exactly four
other regions, since there are 4 places where "not" can be inserted or
eliminated. Correspondingly, the dual
graph would
have to show 4 possible directions at each vertex;
this gives the graph of edges of a 4-dimensional cube.

The dual graph of a topologically faithful 4-statement Venn diagram is the graph of edges of a 4-dimensional cube.
Here to compress notation a vertex
is labeled by its coordinates (0 or 1) in the A, B, C
and D directions. The 4-cube is drawn as projected
into 3-space; edges going off in the 4th dimension are shown in
green.
If a perfect Venn diagram for 4 logical variables could be drawn
in the plane, then the dual graph, the graph of edges of the 4-cube,
could also
be drawn in the plane, with no intersections of edges; just as
happened with the 3-variable Venn diagram and the graph of
edges of the 3-cube.
This is impossible, because the graph of edges of the 4-cube
contains K5, the complete graph on 5 vertices.
("Complete" means that each has an edge joining it to the other four).
The next two images show K5 and its
embedding as a subgraph of the graph of edges of the 4-cube.
Since the graph K5 can be
embedded in the graph of edges of the 4-cube, a topologically
faithful 4-variable Venn diagram would embed K5
in the plane; this is known to be impossible.
Here is where the contradiction can be identified: the graph
K5 cannot be drawn in the plane without
two of its edges intersecting. The usual proof of this fact
uses the Jordan Curve Theorem (every simple closed curve
divides the plane into two regions, one "inside" the curve,
and one "outside") and Euler's Theorem (if V, E
and F are the numbers of vertices, edges and faces
of a planar graph, then V - E + F = 2 ). Here is
a more rudimentary argument.
The first three vertices of K5 share
three edges which form a triangle. By the Jordan Curve Theorem
(we only need it for curvilinear polygons; much simpler
to prove than the general statement), the triangle divides the plane
into an inside and an outside. Suppose the fourth vertex goes
inside. Then its edges to the first three vertices divide
that triangle into three regions. Now there is nowhere to
put the fifth vertex. If it is outside, it cannot be connected to
the fourth, but if it is inside it must lie in one of the three
triangles. That triangle will use vertex four and two of the
original vertices, but then the fifth vertex will not be connectible to the remaining original vertex.
There is nowhere to put the fifth vertex: The graph
K5 cannot be embedded in the plane.
Tony Phillips
Stony Brook University
tony at math.sunysb.edu
NOTE: Those who can access JSTOR can find some of the
papers mentioned above there. For those with access, the American Mathematical
Society's MathSciNet can be used to get
additional bibliographic information and reviews of some these materials. Some of the
items above can be accessed via the ACM
Portal, which also provides bibliographic services. |