Some subsystems of constant-depth Frege with parity

We consider three relatively strong families of subsystems of AC0[2]-Frege proof systems, i.e., propositional proof systems using constant-depth formulas with an additional parity connective, for which exponential lower bounds on proof size are known. In order of increasing strength, the subsystems are (i) constant-depth proof systems with parity axioms and the (ii) treelike and (iii) daglike versions of systems introduced by Krajíček which we call PKcd(⊕). In a PKcd(⊕)-proof, lines are disjunctions (cedents) in which all disjuncts have depth at most d, parities can only appear as the outermost connectives of disjuncts, and all but c disjuncts contain no parity connective at all. We prove that treelike PKO(1)O(1)(⊕) is quasipolynomially but not polynomially equivalent to constant-depth systems with parity axioms. We also verify that the technique for separating parity axioms from parity connectives due to Impagliazzo and Segerlind can be adapted to give a superpolynomial separation between daglike PKO(1)O(1)(⊕) and AC0[2]-Frege; the technique is inherently unable to prove superquasipolynomial separations. We also study proof systems related to the system Res-Lin introduced by Itsykson and Sokolov. We prove that an extension of treelike Res-Lin is polynomially simulated by a system related to daglike PKO(1)O(1)(⊕), and obtain an exponential lower bound for this system.Peer ReviewedPostprint (author's final draft

Circuit complexity, proof complexity, and polynomial identity testing

We introduce a new algebraic proof system, which has tight connections to (algebraic) circuit complexity. In particular, we show that any super-polynomial lower bound on any Boolean tautology in our proof system implies that the permanent does not have polynomial-size algebraic circuits (VNP is not equal to VP). As a corollary to the proof, we also show that super-polynomial lower bounds on the number of lines in Polynomial Calculus proofs (as opposed to the usual measure of number of monomials) imply the Permanent versus Determinant Conjecture. Note that, prior to our work, there was no proof system for which lower bounds on an arbitrary tautology implied any computational lower bound. Our proof system helps clarify the relationships between previous algebraic proof systems, and begins to shed light on why proof complexity lower bounds for various proof systems have been so much harder than lower bounds on the corresponding circuit classes. In doing so, we highlight the importance of polynomial identity testing (PIT) for understanding proof complexity. More specifically, we introduce certain propositional axioms satisfied by any Boolean circuit computing PIT. We use these PIT axioms to shed light on AC^0[p]-Frege lower bounds, which have been open for nearly 30 years, with no satisfactory explanation as to their apparent difficulty. We show that either: a) Proving super-polynomial lower bounds on AC^0[p]-Frege implies VNP does not have polynomial-size circuits of depth d - a notoriously open question for d at least 4 - thus explaining the difficulty of lower bounds on AC^0[p]-Frege, or b) AC^0[p]-Frege cannot efficiently prove the depth d PIT axioms, and hence we have a lower bound on AC^0[p]-Frege. Using the algebraic structure of our proof system, we propose a novel way to extend techniques from algebraic circuit complexity to prove lower bounds in proof complexity

Frege systems for quantified Boolean logic

We define and investigate Frege systems for quantified Boolean formulas (QBF). For these new proof systems, we develop a lower bound technique that directly lifts circuit lower bounds for a circuit class C to the QBF Frege system operating with lines from C. Such a direct transfer from circuit to proof complexity lower bounds has often been postulated for propositional systems but had not been formally established in such generality for any proof systems prior to this work. This leads to strong lower bounds for restricted versions of QBF Frege, in particular an exponential lower bound for QBF Frege systems operating with AC0[p] circuits. In contrast, any non-trivial lower bound for propositional AC0[p]-Frege constitutes a major open problem. Improving these lower bounds to unrestricted QBF Frege tightly corresponds to the major problems in circuit complexity and propositional proof complexity. In particular, proving a lower bound for QBF Frege systems operating with arbitrary P/poly circuits is equivalent to either showing a lower bound for P/poly or for propositional extended Frege (which operates with P/poly circuits). We also compare our new QBF Frege systems to standard sequent calculi for QBF and establish a correspondence to intuitionistic bounded arithmetic.This research was supported by grant nos. 48138 and 60842 from the John Templeton Foundation, EPSRC grant EP/L024233/1, and a Doctoral Prize Fellowship from EPSRC (third author). The second author was funded by the European Research Council under the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007–2013)/ERC grant agreement no. 279611 and under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme/ERC grant agreement no. 648276 AUTAR. The fourth author was supported by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) under project number P28699 and by the European Research Council under the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2014)/ERC Grant Agreement no. 61507. Part of this work was done when Beyersdorff and Pich were at the University of Leeds and Bonacina at Sapienza University Rome.Peer ReviewedPostprint (published version

Lower bounds: from circuits to QBF proof systems

A general and long-standing belief in the proof complexity community asserts that there is a close connection between progress in lower bounds for Boolean circuits and progress in proof size lower bounds for strong propositional proof systems. Although there are famous examples where a transfer from ideas and techniques from circuit complexity to proof complexity has been effective, a formal connection between the two areas has never been established so far. Here we provide such a formal relation between lower bounds for circuit classes and lower bounds for Frege systems for quantified Boolean formulas (QBF). Starting from a propositional proof system P we exhibit a general method how to obtain a QBF proof system P+∀red{P}, which is inspired by the transition from resolution to Q-resolution. For us the most important case is a new and natural hierarchy of QBF Frege systems C-Frege+∀red that parallels the well-studied propositional hierarchy of C-Frege systems, where lines in proofs are restricted to belong to a circuit class C. Building on earlier work for resolution [Beyersdorff, Chew and Janota, 2015a] we establish a lower bound technique via strategy extraction that transfers arbitrary lower bounds for the circuit class C to lower bounds in C-Frege+∀red. By using the full spectrum of state-of-the-art circuit lower bounds, our new lower bound method leads to very strong lower bounds for QBF \FREGE systems: 1. exponential lower bounds and separations for the QBF proof system ACo[p]-Frege+∀red for all primes p; 2. an exponential separation of ACo[p]-Frege+∀red from TCo/d-Frege+∀red; 3. an exponential separation of the hierarchy of constant-depth systems ACo/d-Frege+∀red by formulas of depth independent of d. In the propositional case, all these results correspond to major open problems

Formal Theories for Linear Algebra

We introduce two-sorted theories in the style of [CN10] for the complexity classes \oplusL and DET, whose complete problems include determinants over Z2 and Z, respectively. We then describe interpretations of Soltys' linear algebra theory LAp over arbitrary integral domains, into each of our new theories. The result shows equivalences of standard theorems of linear algebra over Z2 and Z can be proved in the corresponding theory, but leaves open the interesting question of whether the theorems themselves can be proved.Comment: This is a revised journal version of the paper "Formal Theories for Linear Algebra" (Computer Science Logic) for the journal Logical Methods in Computer Scienc

Reasons for Hardness in QBF Proof Complexity

Quantified Boolean Formulas (QBF) extend the canonical NP-complete satisfiability problem by including Boolean quantifiers. Determining the truth of a QBF is PSPACE-complete; this is expected to be a harder problem than satisfiability, and hence QBF solving has much wider applications in practice. QBF proof complexity forms the theoretical basis for understanding QBF solving, as well as providing insights into more general complexity theory, but is less well understood than propositional proof complexity. We begin this thesis by looking at the reasons underlying QBF hardness, and in particular when the hardness is propositional in nature, rather than arising due to the quantifiers. We introduce relaxing QU-Res, a previous model for identifying such propositional hardness, and construct an example where relaxing QU-Res is unsuccessful in this regard. We then provide a new model for identifying such hardness which we prove captures this concept. Now equipped with a means of identifying ‘genuine’ QBF hardness, we prove a new lower bound technique for tree-like QBF proof systems. Lower bounds using this technique allows us to show a new separation between tree-like and dag-like systems. We give a characterisation of lower bounds for a large class of tree-like proof systems, in which such lower bounds play a prominent role. Further to the tree-like bound, we provide a new lower bound technique for QBF proof systems in general. This technique has some similarities to the above technique for tree-like systems, but requires some refinement to provide bounds for dag-like systems. We give applications of this new technique by proving lower bounds across several systems. The first such lower bounds are for a very simple family of QBFs. We then provide a construction to combine false QBFs to give formulas for which we can show lower bounds in this way, allowing the generation of the first random QBF proof complexity lower bounds

QBF Proof Complexity

Quantified Boolean Formulas (QBF) and their proof complexity are not as well understood as propositional formulas, yet remain an area of interest due to their relation to QBF solving. Proof systems for QBF provide a theoretical underpinning for the performance of these solvers. We define a novel calculus IR-calc, which enables unification of the principal existing resolution-based QBF calculi and applies to the more powerful Dependency QBF (DQBF). We completely reveal the relative power of important QBF resolution systems, settling in particular the relationship between the two different types of resolution-based QBF calculi. The most challenging part of this comparison is to exhibit hard formulas that underlie the exponential separations of the proof systems. In contrast to classical proof complexity we are currently short of lower bound techniques for QBF proof systems. To this end we exhibit a new proof technique for showing lower bounds in QBF proof systems based on strategy extraction. We also find that the classical lower bound techniques of the prover-delayer game and feasible interpolation can be lifted to a QBF setting and provide new lower bounds. We investigate more powerful proof systems such as extended resolution and Frege systems. We define and investigate new QBF proof systems that mix propositional rules with a reduction rule, we find the strategy extraction technique also works and directly lifts lower bounds from circuit complexity. Such a direct transfer from circuit to proof complexity lower bounds has often been postulated, but had not been formally established for propositional proof systems prior to this work. This leads to strong lower bounds for restricted versions of QBF Frege, in particular an exponential lower bound for QBF Frege systems operating with AC0[p] circuits. In contrast, any non-trivial lower bound for propositional AC0[p]-Frege constitutes a major open problem

On the Pseudo-Deterministic Query Complexity of NP Search Problems

We study pseudo-deterministic query complexity - randomized query algorithms that are required to output the same answer with high probability on all inputs. We prove Ω(√n) lower bounds on the pseudo-deterministic complexity of a large family of search problems based on unsatisfiable random CNF instances, and also for the promise problem (FIND1) of finding a 1 in a vector populated with at least half one’s. This gives an exponential separation between randomized query complexity and pseudo-deterministic complexity, which is tight in the quantum setting. As applications we partially solve a related combinatorial coloring problem, and we separate random tree-like Resolution from its pseudo-deterministic version. In contrast to our lower bound, we show, surprisingly, that in the zero-error, average case setting, the three notions (deterministic, randomized, pseudo-deterministic) collapse