The polynomial bounds of proof complexity in Frege systems

2009 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 193-198 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. R. Aleksanyan ◽  
A. A. Chubaryan
Author(s):  
Sarah Sigley ◽  
Olaf Beyersdorff

AbstractWe investigate the proof complexity of modal resolution systems developed by Nalon and Dixon (J Algorithms 62(3–4):117–134, 2007) and Nalon et al. (in: Automated reasoning with analytic Tableaux and related methods—24th international conference, (TABLEAUX’15), pp 185–200, 2015), which form the basis of modal theorem proving (Nalon et al., in: Proceedings of the twenty-sixth international joint conference on artificial intelligence (IJCAI’17), pp 4919–4923, 2017). We complement these calculi by a new tighter variant and show that proofs can be efficiently translated between all these variants, meaning that the calculi are equivalent from a proof complexity perspective. We then develop the first lower bound technique for modal resolution using Prover–Delayer games, which can be used to establish “genuine” modal lower bounds for size of dag-like modal resolution proofs. We illustrate the technique by devising a new modal pigeonhole principle, which we demonstrate to require exponential-size proofs in modal resolution. Finally, we compare modal resolution to the modal Frege systems of Hrubeš (Ann Pure Appl Log 157(2–3):194–205, 2009) and obtain a “genuinely” modal separation.


Author(s):  
Sam Buss ◽  
Jakob Nordström

This chapter gives an overview of proof complexity and connections to SAT solving, focusing on proof systems such as resolution, Nullstellensatz, polynomial calculus, and cutting planes (corresponding to conflict-driven clause learning, algebraic approaches using linear algebra or Gröbner bases, and pseudo-Boolean solving, respectively). There is also a discussion of extended resolution (which is closely related to DRAT proof logging) and Frege and extended Frege systems more generally. An ample supply of references for further reading is provided, including for some topics omitted in this chapter.


1996 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 256-298 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Buss ◽  
R. Impagliazzo ◽  
J. Krajíček ◽  
P. Pudlák ◽  
A. A. Razborov ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-25
Author(s):  
Dmitry Itsykson ◽  
Alexander Okhotin ◽  
Vsevolod Oparin

The partial string avoidability problem is stated as follows: given a finite set of strings with possible “holes” (wildcard symbols), determine whether there exists a two-sided infinite string containing no substrings from this set, assuming that a hole matches every symbol. The problem is known to be NP-hard and in PSPACE, and this article establishes its PSPACE-completeness. Next, string avoidability over the binary alphabet is interpreted as a version of conjunctive normal form satisfiability problem, where each clause has infinitely many shifted variants. Non-satisfiability of these formulas can be proved using variants of classical propositional proof systems, augmented with derivation rules for shifting proof lines (such as clauses, inequalities, polynomials, etc.). First, it is proved that there is a particular formula that has a short refutation in Resolution with a shift rule but requires classical proofs of exponential size. At the same time, it is shown that exponential lower bounds for classical proof systems can be translated for their shifted versions. Finally, it is shown that superpolynomial lower bounds on the size of shifted proofs would separate NP from PSPACE; a connection to lower bounds on circuit complexity is also established.


2011 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-85 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Dantchev ◽  
Barnaby Martin ◽  
Stefan Szeider
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Thomas Bläsius ◽  
Tobias Friedrich ◽  
Andreas Göbel ◽  
Jordi Levy ◽  
Ralf Rothenberger
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document