Space proof complexity for random 3-CNFs

We investigate the space complexity of refuting 3-CNFs in Resolution and algebraic systems. We prove that every Polynomial Calculus with Resolution refutation of a random 3-CNF φ in n variables requires, with high probability, distinct monomials to be kept simultaneously in memory. The same construction also proves that every Resolution refutation of φ requires, with high probability, clauses each of width to be kept at the same time in memory. This gives a lower bound for the total space needed in Resolution to refute φ. These results are best possible (up to a constant factor) and answer questions about space complexity of 3-CNFs

The Model-Theoretic Expressiveness of Propositional Proof Systems

We establish new, and surprisingly tight, connections between propositional proof complexity and finite model theory. Specifically, we show that the power of several propositional proof systems, such as Horn resolution, bounded width resolution, and the polynomial calculus of bounded degree, can be characterised in a precise sense by variants of fixed-point logics that are of fundamental importance in descriptive complexity theory. Our main results are that Horn resolution has the same expressive power as least fixed-point logic, that bounded width resolution captures existential least fixed-point logic, and that the (monomial restriction of the) polynomial calculus of bounded degree solves precisely the problems definable in fixed-point logic with counting

On the Relative Strength of Pebbling and Resolution

The last decade has seen a revival of interest in pebble games in the context of proof complexity. Pebbling has proven a useful tool for studying resolution-based proof systems when comparing the strength of different subsystems, showing bounds on proof space, and establishing size-space trade-offs. The typical approach has been to encode the pebble game played on a graph as a CNF formula and then argue that proofs of this formula must inherit (various aspects of) the pebbling properties of the underlying graph. Unfortunately, the reductions used here are not tight. To simulate resolution proofs by pebblings, the full strength of nondeterministic black-white pebbling is needed, whereas resolution is only known to be able to simulate deterministic black pebbling. To obtain strong results, one therefore needs to find specific graph families which either have essentially the same properties for black and black-white pebbling (not at all true in general) or which admit simulations of black-white pebblings in resolution. This paper contributes to both these approaches. First, we design a restricted form of black-white pebbling that can be simulated in resolution and show that there are graph families for which such restricted pebblings can be asymptotically better than black pebblings. This proves that, perhaps somewhat unexpectedly, resolution can strictly beat black-only pebbling, and in particular that the space lower bounds on pebbling formulas in [Ben-Sasson and Nordstrom 2008] are tight. Second, we present a versatile parametrized graph family with essentially the same properties for black and black-white pebbling, which gives sharp simultaneous trade-offs for black and black-white pebbling for various parameter settings. Both of our contributions have been instrumental in obtaining the time-space trade-off results for resolution-based proof systems in [Ben-Sasson and Nordstrom 2009].Comment: Full-length version of paper to appear in Proceedings of the 25th Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity (CCC '10), June 201

Proof complexity for the maximum satisfiability problem and its use in SAT refutations

MaxSAT, the optimization version of the well-known SAT problem, has attracted a lot of research interest in the past decade. Motivated by the many important applications and inspired by the success of modern SAT solvers, researchers have developed many MaxSAT solvers. Since most research is algorithmic, its significance is mostly evaluated empirically. In this paper, we want to address MaxSAT from the more formal point of view of proof complexity. With that aim, we start providing basic definitions and proving some basic results. Then we analyse the effect of adding split and virtual, two original inference rules, to MaxSAT resolution. We show that each addition makes the resulting proof system stronger, even when virtual is restricted to empty clauses (0-virtual). We also analyse the power of our proof systems in the particular case of SAT refutations. We show that our strongest system, ResSV, is equivalent to circular and dual rail with split. We also analyse empirically some known gadget-based reformulations. Our results seem to indicate that the advantage of these three seemingly different systems over general resolution comes mainly from their ability of augmenting the original formula with hypothetical inconsistencies, as captured in a very simple way by the virtual rule.Under project RTI2018-094403-B-C33 funded by MCIN/AEI/ 10.13039/501100011033 and FEDER ”Una manera de hacer Europa"Peer ReviewedPostprint (author's final draft

Definable inapproximability: New challenges for duplicator

AbstractWe consider the hardness of approximation of optimization problems from the point of view of definability. For many $\textrm{NP}$-hard optimization problems it is known that, unless $\textrm{P} = \textrm{NP}$, no polynomial-time algorithm can give an approximate solution guaranteed to be within a fixed constant factor of the optimum. We show, in several such instances and without any complexity theoretic assumption, that no algorithm that is expressible in fixed-point logic with counting (FPC) can compute an approximate solution. Since important algorithmic techniques for approximation algorithms (such as linear or semidefinite programming) are expressible in FPC, this yields lower bounds on what can be achieved by such methods. The results are established by showing lower bounds on the number of variables required in first-order logic with counting to separate instances with a high optimum from those with a low optimum for fixed-size instances.</jats:p

A Finite-Model-Theoretic View on Propositional Proof Complexity

We establish new, and surprisingly tight, connections between propositional proof complexity and finite model theory. Specifically, we show that the power of several propositional proof systems, such as Horn resolution, bounded-width resolution, and the polynomial calculus of bounded degree, can be characterised in a precise sense by variants of fixed-point logics that are of fundamental importance in descriptive complexity theory. Our main results are that Horn resolution has the same expressive power as least fixed-point logic, that bounded-width resolution captures existential least fixed-point logic, and that the polynomial calculus with bounded degree over the rationals solves precisely the problems definable in fixed-point logic with counting. By exploring these connections further, we establish finite-model-theoretic tools for proving lower bounds for the polynomial calculus over the rationals and over finite fields