Understanding Gentzen and Frege Systems for QBF

Recently Beyersdorff, Bonacina, and Chew [10] introduced a natural class of Frege systems for quantified Boolean formulas (QBF) and showed strong lower bounds for restricted versions of these systems. Here we provide a comprehensive analysis of the new extended Frege system from [10], denoted EF + ∀red, which is a natural extension of classical extended Frege EF. Our main results are the following: Firstly, we prove that the standard Gentzen-style system G*1 p-simulates EF + ∀red and that G*1 is strictly stronger under standard complexity-theoretic hardness assumptions. Secondly, we show a correspondence of EF + ∀red to bounded arithmetic: EF + ∀red can be seen as the non-uniform propositional version of intuitionistic S12. Specifically, intuitionistic S12 proofs of arbitrary statements in prenex form translate to polynomial-size EF + ∀red proofs, and EF + ∀red is in a sense the weakest system with this property. Finally, we show that unconditional lower bounds for EF + ∀red would imply either a major breakthrough in circuit complexity or in classical proof complexity, and in fact the converse implications hold as well. Therefore, the system EF + ∀red naturally unites the central problems from circuit and proof complexity. Technically, our results rest on a formalised strategy extraction theorem for EF + ∀red akin to witnessing in intuitionistic S12 and a normal form for EF + ∀red proofs

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

Understanding Cutting Planes for QBFs

We define a cutting planes system CP+8red for quantified Boolean formulas (QBF) and analyse the proof-theoretic strength of this new calculus. While in the propositional case, Cutting Planes is of intermediate strength between resolution and Frege, our findings here show that the situation in QBF is slightly more complex: while CP+8red is again weaker than QBF Frege and stronger than the CDCL-based QBF resolution systems Q-Res and QU-Res, it turns out to be incomparable to even the weakest expansion-based QBF resolution system 8Exp+Res. Technically, our results establish the effectiveness of two lower boun

Lower Bound Techniques for QBF Proof Systems

How do we prove that a false QBF is inded false? How big a proof is needed? The special case when all quantifiers are existential is the well-studied setting of propositional proof complexity. Expectedly, universal quantifiers change the game significantly. Several proof systems have been designed in the last couple of decades to handle QBFs. Lower bound paradigms from propositional proof complexity cannot always be extended - in most cases feasible interpolation and consequent transfer of circuit lower bounds works, but obtaining lower bounds on size by providing lower bounds on width fails dramatically. A new paradigm with no analogue in the propositional world has emerged in the form of strategy extraction, allowing for transfer of circuit lower bounds, as well as obtaining independent genuine QBF lower bounds based on a semantic cost measure. This talk will provide a broad overview of some of these developments

Feasible Interpolation for QBF Resolution Calculi

In sharp contrast to classical proof complexity we are currently short of lower bound techniques for QBF proof systems. In this paper we establish the feasible interpolation technique for all resolution-based QBF systems, whether modelling CDCL or expansion-based solving. This both provides the first general lower bound method for QBF proof systems as well as largely extends the scope of classical feasible interpolation. We apply our technique to obtain new exponential lower bounds to all resolution-based QBF systems for a new class of QBF formulas based on the clique problem. Finally, we show how feasible interpolation relates to the recently established lower bound method based on strategy extraction

Reasons for Hardness in QBF Proof Systems

We aim to understand inherent reasons for lower bounds for QBF proof systems, and revisit and compare two previous approaches in this direction. The first of these relates size lower bounds for strong QBF Frege systems to circuit lower bounds via strategy extraction (Beyersdorff & Pich, LICS\u2716). Here we show a refined version of strategy extraction and thereby for any QBF proof system obtain a trichotomy for hardness: (1) via circuit lower bounds, (2) via propositional Resolution lower bounds, or (3) `genuine\u27 QBF lower bounds. The second approach tries to explain QBF lower bounds through quantifier alternations in a system called relaxing QU-Res (Chen, ICALP\u2716). We prove a strong lower bound for relaxing QU-Res, which also exhibits significant shortcomings of that model. Prompted by this we propose an alternative, improved version, allowing more flexible oracle queries in proofs. We show that lower bounds in our new model correspond to the trichotomy obtained via strategy extraction

Size, Cost and Capacity: A Semantic Technique for Hard Random QBFs

As a natural extension of the SAT problem, an array of proof systems for quantified Boolean formulas (QBF) have been proposed, many of which extend a propositional proof system to handle universal quantification. By formalising the construction of the QBF proof system obtained from a propositional proof system by adding universal reduction (Beyersdorff, Bonacina & Chew, ITCS'16), we present a new technique for proving proof-size lower bounds in these systems. The technique relies only on two semantic measures: the cost of a QBF, and the capacity of a proof. By examining the capacity of proofs in several QBF systems, we are able to use the technique to obtain lower bounds based on cost alone. As applications of the technique, we first prove exponential lower bounds for a new family of simple QBFs representing equality. The main application is in proving exponential lower bounds with high probability for a class of randomly generated QBFs, the first 'genuine' lower bounds of this kind, which apply to the QBF analogues of resolution, Cutting Planes, and Polynomial Calculus. Finally, we employ the technique to give a simple proof of hardness for a prominent family of QBFs

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

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

A game characterisation of tree-like Q-Resolution size

We provide a characterisation for the size of proofs in tree-like Q-Resolution and tree-like QU-Resolution by a Prover–Delayer game, which is inspired by a similar characterisation for the proof size in classical tree-like Resolution. This gives one of the first successful transfers of one of the lower bound techniques for classical proof systems to QBF proof systems. We apply our technique to show the hardness of three classes of formulas for tree-like Q-Resolution. In particular, we give a proof of the hardness of the parity formulas from Beyersdorff et al. (2015) for tree-like Q-Resolution and of the formulas of Kleine Büning et al. (1995) for tree-like QU-Resolution