MHB Can KMAP Fully Minimize This SOP Expression?

  • Thread starter Thread starter shamieh
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on minimizing a given sum of products (SOP) expression using a Karnaugh map (KMAP). The original expression was f = !y_{1}!y_{0} + !x_{1}x_{0}!y_{1} + x_{1}!y_{1} + x_{1}!y_{0} + x_{1}x_{0}y_{1}, which participants helped simplify to f = x_{1}x_{0} + !y_{1}!y_{0} + x_{1}!y_{0} + x_{0}!y_{1} + x_{1}!y_{1}. Key insights included the importance of overlapping regions in the KMAP to achieve minimal expressions and the ability to remove variables from minterms without altering the function if the new cells are already covered. The conversation emphasized the need for careful grouping to fully leverage the KMAP's potential for simplification. Overall, the discussion highlighted effective strategies for minimizing Boolean expressions using KMAPs.
shamieh
Messages
538
Reaction score
0
I used a KMAP and got this as my expression

f = !y_{1}!y_{0} + !x_{1}x_{0}!y_{1} + x_{1}!y_{1} + x_{1}!y_{0} + x_{1}x_{0}y_{1}Is there any way I can minimize this? Maybe I'm just not seeing it. I thought the whole point of a KMAP was to minimize the expression?

Some how the answer is this: f = x_{1}x_{0} + !y_{1}!y_{0} + x_{1}!y_{0} + x_{0}!y_{1} + x_{1}!y_{1}

If anyone is interested I had to design a circuit with output f with 4 inputs. I'm supposed to be showing the simplest sum of product expression for f. My f row for my truth table was this:
1
0
0
0

1
1
0
0

1
1
1
0

1
1
1
1Thanks in advance
 
Technology news on Phys.org
shamieh said:
I used a KMAP and got this as my expression

f = !y_{1}!y_{0} + !x_{1}x_{0}!y_{1} + x_{1}!y_{1} + x_{1}!y_{0} + x_{1}x_{0}y_{1}

...

Some how the answer is this: f = x_{1}x_{0} + !y_{1}!y_{0} + x_{1}!y_{0} + x_{0}!y_{1} + x_{1}!y_{1}
You can turn the three-variable minterms into two-variable ones, namely, remove $!x_1$ from $x_0!x_1!y_1$ and $y_1$ from $x_0x_1y_1$.
 
Evgeny.Makarov said:
You can turn the three-variable minterms into two-variable ones, namely, remove $!x_1$ from $x_0!x_1!y_1$ and $y_1$ from $x_0x_1y_1$.
Well I can't combine them because they don't differ by two variables correct? So what minimization "tool" should I use? Should I factor something? I mean how do you just "get rid of them". See what I'm saying? What method I should I be using? Sorry if I sound ignorant.
 
When you remove a variable from a three-variable minterm, its representation in the Karnaugh map grows from 2 to 4 cells. However, if the added two cells are already covered by other minterms, then the Boolean function does not change.

In this case, the minterm $x_0y_1y_1$ represents two cells in the middle of column 3 ($x_0=x_1=1$). When you remove $y_1$, the result is the complete column 3. But the top cell of column 3 is already covered by $!y_0!y_1$, and the bottom cell of column 3 is covered by $x_1!y_1$. So removing $y_1$ from $x_0y_1y_1$ does not change the function. A similar thing happens with turning $x_0!x_1!y_1$ into $x_0!y_1$.

When reading off a minimal formula from a Karnaugh map, the temptation is always to break the cells corresponding to 1 into disjoint regions. But this results in smaller regions and therefore larger minterms. Instead, one must make regions as large as possible by using the fact that overlap is allowed.
 
Awesome explanation! Thanks so much. So it looks like I probably missed a overlapping grouping I could of put together then - thus getting not exactly the complete minimization.
 
Thread 'Is this public key encryption?'
I've tried to intuit public key encryption but never quite managed. But this seems to wrap it up in a bow. This seems to be a very elegant way of transmitting a message publicly that only the sender and receiver can decipher. Is this how PKE works? No, it cant be. In the above case, the requester knows the target's "secret" key - because they have his ID, and therefore knows his birthdate.
I tried a web search "the loss of programming ", and found an article saying that all aspects of writing, developing, and testing software programs will one day all be handled through artificial intelligence. One must wonder then, who is responsible. WHO is responsible for any problems, bugs, deficiencies, or whatever malfunctions which the programs make their users endure? Things may work wrong however the "wrong" happens. AI needs to fix the problems for the users. Any way to...
Back
Top