On the Correspondence between Display Postulates and Deep Inference in Nested Sequent Calculi for Tense Logics

We consider two styles of proof calculi for a family of tense logics, presented in a formalism based on nested sequents. A nested sequent can be seen as a tree of traditional single-sided sequents. Our first style of calculi is what we call "shallow calculi", where inference rules are only applied at the root node in a nested sequent. Our shallow calculi are extensions of Kashima's calculus for tense logic and share an essential characteristic with display calculi, namely, the presence of structural rules called "display postulates". Shallow calculi enjoy a simple cut elimination procedure, but are unsuitable for proof search due to the presence of display postulates and other structural rules. The second style of calculi uses deep-inference, whereby inference rules can be applied at any node in a nested sequent. We show that, for a range of extensions of tense logic, the two styles of calculi are equivalent, and there is a natural proof theoretic correspondence between display postulates and deep inference. The deep inference calculi enjoy the subformula property and have no display postulates or other structural rules, making them a better framework for proof search

Belief-Propagation for Weighted b-Matchings on Arbitrary Graphs and its Relation to Linear Programs with Integer Solutions

We consider the general problem of finding the minimum weight \bm-matching on arbitrary graphs. We prove that, whenever the linear programming (LP) relaxation of the problem has no fractional solutions, then the belief propagation (BP) algorithm converges to the correct solution. We also show that when the LP relaxation has a fractional solution then the BP algorithm can be used to solve the LP relaxation. Our proof is based on the notion of graph covers and extends the analysis of (Bayati-Shah-Sharma 2005 and Huang-Jebara 2007}. These results are notable in the following regards: (1) It is one of a very small number of proofs showing correctness of BP without any constraint on the graph structure. (2) Variants of the proof work for both synchronous and asynchronous BP; it is the first proof of convergence and correctness of an asynchronous BP algorithm for a combinatorial optimization problem.Comment: 28 pages, 2 figures. Submitted to SIAM journal on Discrete Mathematics on March 19, 2009; accepted for publication (in revised form) August 30, 2010; published electronically July 1, 201