If the inverse of implication ` p to q ` is defined as ` ~ p to ~q` , then the inverse of the proposition ` ( p ^^ ~ q) to r ` is

The inverse of the proposition ( p ^^ ~ q) to s

The inverse of the proposition ( p ^^ ~ q) to s

The inverse of the proposition ( p ^^ ~ q) to s

The inverse of the proposition (p ^^ ~q) rarr r is

The inverse of the proposition (p ^^ ~q) rarr r is

The inverse of the proposition (p ^^ ~q) rarr r is

The inverse of the proposition (p ^^ ~q) rarr r is

If the inverse of implication p rarr q is defined as ~p rarr ~q , then the inverse of the proposition (p ^^ ~q) rarr r is not equivalent to : I : ~r rarr p vv q II : ~p vv ~q rarr ~r III : r rarr p ^^ ~q The true statements in the above are :