On the pigeonhole and related principles in deep inference and monotone systems

International audienceWe construct quasipolynomial-size proofs of the propositional pigeonhole principle in the deep inference system KS, addressing an open problem raised in previous works and matching the best known upper bound for the more general class of monotone proofs. We make significant use of monotone formulae computing boolean threshold functions, an idea previously considered in works of Atserias et al. The main construction, monotone proofs witnessing the symmetry of such functions, involves an implementation of merge-sort in the design of proofs in order to tame the structural behaviour of atoms, and so the complexity of normalization. Proof transformations from previous work on atomic flows are then employed to yield appropriate KS proofs. As further results we show that our constructions can be applied to provide quasipolynomial-size KS proofs of the parity principle and the generalized pigeonhole principle. These bounds are inherited for the class of monotone proofs, and we are further able to construct n^O(log log n) -size monotone proofs of the weak pigeonhole principle with (1 + ε)n pigeons and n holes for ε = 1/ polylog n, thereby also improving the best known bounds for monotone proofs

Online Learning of k-CNF Boolean Functions

This paper revisits the problem of learning a k-CNF Boolean function from examples in the context of online learning under the logarithmic loss. In doing so, we give a Bayesian interpretation to one of Valiant's celebrated PAC learning algorithms, which we then build upon to derive two efficient, online, probabilistic, supervised learning algorithms for predicting the output of an unknown k-CNF Boolean function. We analyze the loss of our methods, and show that the cumulative log-loss can be upper bounded, ignoring logarithmic factors, by a polynomial function of the size of each example.Comment: 20 LaTeX pages. 2 Algorithms. Some Theorem

Resolution over Linear Equations and Multilinear Proofs

We develop and study the complexity of propositional proof systems of varying strength extending resolution by allowing it to operate with disjunctions of linear equations instead of clauses. We demonstrate polynomial-size refutations for hard tautologies like the pigeonhole principle, Tseitin graph tautologies and the clique-coloring tautologies in these proof systems. Using the (monotone) interpolation by a communication game technique we establish an exponential-size lower bound on refutations in a certain, considerably strong, fragment of resolution over linear equations, as well as a general polynomial upper bound on (non-monotone) interpolants in this fragment. We then apply these results to extend and improve previous results on multilinear proofs (over fields of characteristic 0), as studied in [RazTzameret06]. Specifically, we show the following: 1. Proofs operating with depth-3 multilinear formulas polynomially simulate a certain, considerably strong, fragment of resolution over linear equations. 2. Proofs operating with depth-3 multilinear formulas admit polynomial-size refutations of the pigeonhole principle and Tseitin graph tautologies. The former improve over a previous result that established small multilinear proofs only for the \emph{functional} pigeonhole principle. The latter are different than previous proofs, and apply to multilinear proofs of Tseitin mod p graph tautologies over any field of characteristic 0. We conclude by connecting resolution over linear equations with extensions of the cutting planes proof system.Comment: 44 page

Complexity of Non-Monotonic Logics

Over the past few decades, non-monotonic reasoning has developed to be one of the most important topics in computational logic and artificial intelligence. Different ways to introduce non-monotonic aspects to classical logic have been considered, e.g., extension with default rules, extension with modal belief operators, or modification of the semantics. In this survey we consider a logical formalism from each of the above possibilities, namely Reiter's default logic, Moore's autoepistemic logic and McCarthy's circumscription. Additionally, we consider abduction, where one is not interested in inferences from a given knowledge base but in computing possible explanations for an observation with respect to a given knowledge base. Complexity results for different reasoning tasks for propositional variants of these logics have been studied already in the nineties. In recent years, however, a renewed interest in complexity issues can be observed. One current focal approach is to consider parameterized problems and identify reasonable parameters that allow for FPT algorithms. In another approach, the emphasis lies on identifying fragments, i.e., restriction of the logical language, that allow more efficient algorithms for the most important reasoning tasks. In this survey we focus on this second aspect. We describe complexity results for fragments of logical languages obtained by either restricting the allowed set of operators (e.g., forbidding negations one might consider only monotone formulae) or by considering only formulae in conjunctive normal form but with generalized clause types. The algorithmic problems we consider are suitable variants of satisfiability and implication in each of the logics, but also counting problems, where one is not only interested in the existence of certain objects (e.g., models of a formula) but asks for their number.Comment: To appear in Bulletin of the EATC

Model Counting of Query Expressions: Limitations of Propositional Methods

Query evaluation in tuple-independent probabilistic databases is the problem of computing the probability of an answer to a query given independent probabilities of the individual tuples in a database instance. There are two main approaches to this problem: (1) in `grounded inference' one first obtains the lineage for the query and database instance as a Boolean formula, then performs weighted model counting on the lineage (i.e., computes the probability of the lineage given probabilities of its independent Boolean variables); (2) in methods known as `lifted inference' or `extensional query evaluation', one exploits the high-level structure of the query as a first-order formula. Although it is widely believed that lifted inference is strictly more powerful than grounded inference on the lineage alone, no formal separation has previously been shown for query evaluation. In this paper we show such a formal separation for the first time. We exhibit a class of queries for which model counting can be done in polynomial time using extensional query evaluation, whereas the algorithms used in state-of-the-art exact model counters on their lineages provably require exponential time. Our lower bounds on the running times of these exact model counters follow from new exponential size lower bounds on the kinds of d-DNNF representations of the lineages that these model counters (either explicitly or implicitly) produce. Though some of these queries have been studied before, no non-trivial lower bounds on the sizes of these representations for these queries were previously known.Comment: To appear in International Conference on Database Theory (ICDT) 201