Effectively Polynomial Simulations

We introduce a more general notion of efficient simulation between proof systems, which we call effectively-p simulation. We argue that this notion is more natural from a complexity-theoretic point of view, and by revisiting standard concepts in this light we obtain some surprising new results. First, we give several examples where effectively-p simulations are possible between different propositional proof systems, but where p-simulations are impossible (sometimes under complexity assumptions). Secondly, we prove that the rather weak proof system G0 for quantified propositional logic (QBF) can effectively-p simulate any proof system for QBF. Thus our definition sheds new light on the comparative power of proof systems. We also give some evidence that with respect to Frege and Extended Frege systems, an effectively-p simulation may not be possible. Lastly, we prove new relationships between effectively-p simulations, automatizability, and the P versus NP question.

[1]  Zenon Sadowski,et al.  On an Optimal Quantified Propositional Proof System and a Complete Language for NP cap co-NP , 1997, FCT.

[2]  Christian Glaßer,et al.  Survey of Disjoint NP-pairs and Relations to Propositional Proof Systems , 2005, Essays in Memory of Shimon Even.

[3]  Toniann Pitassi,et al.  Clause Learning Can Effectively P-Simulate General Propositional Resolution , 2008, AAAI.

[4]  Peter Clote.  Boolean functions, invariance groups and parallel complexity , 1989, [1989] Proceedings. Structure in Complexity Theory Fourth Annual Conference.

[5]  Henry A. Kautz,et al.  Towards Understanding and Harnessing the Potential of Clause Learning , 2004, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[6]  Alexander A. Razborov,et al.  Complexity of Propositional Proofs , 2010, CSR.

[7]  Evangelos Kranakis,et al.  Boolean Functions, Invariance Groups, and Parallel Complexity , 1991, SIAM J. Comput..

[8]  Russell Impagliazzo,et al.  Using the Groebner basis algorithm to find proofs of unsatisfiability , 1996, STOC '96.

[9]  Roberto J. Bayardo,et al.  Counting Models Using Connected Components , 2000, AAAI/IAAI.

[10]  Toniann Pitassi,et al.  The complexity of resolution refinements , 2003, 18th Annual IEEE Symposium of Logic in Computer Science, 2003. Proceedings..

[11]  Richard E. Ladner,et al.  On the Structure of Polynomial Time Reducibility , 1975, JACM.

[12]  Pavel Pudlák,et al.  Monotone simulations of nonmonotone proofs , 2001, Proceedings 16th Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity.

[13]  Toniann Pitassi,et al.  Combining Component Caching and Clause Learning for Effective Model Counting , 2004, SAT.

[14]  Alexander A. Razborov,et al.  On provably disjoint NP-pairs , 1994, Electron. Colloquium Comput. Complex..

[15]  Allen Van Gelder,et al.  Pool Resolution and Its Relation to Regular Resolution and DPLL with Clause Learning , 2005, LPAR.

[16]  Jan Krajícek,et al.  Quantified propositional calculi and fragments of bounded arithmetic , 1990, Math. Log. Q..

[17]  Stephen A. Cook,et al.  The Relative Efficiency of Propositional Proof Systems , 1979, Journal of Symbolic Logic.

[18]  Toniann Pitassi,et al.  Propositional Proof Complexity: Past, Present and Future , 2001, Bull. EATCS.

[19]  Fahiem Bacchus,et al.  Using More Reasoning to Improve #SAT Solving , 2007, AAAI.

[20]  Pavel Pudl ak a.  On reducibility and symmetry of disjoint NP pairs , 2003 .

[21]  Stephen A. Cook,et al.  The proof complexity of linear algebra , 2004, Ann. Pure Appl. Log..

[22]  Sharad Malik,et al.  Chaff: engineering an efficient SAT solver , 2001, Proceedings of the 38th Design Automation Conference (IEEE Cat. No.01CH37232).

[23]  Nathan Segerlind,et al.  The Complexity of Propositional Proofs , 2007, Bull. Symb. Log..

[24]  Philipp Hertel,et al.  Formalizing Dangerous SAT Encodings , 2007, SAT.

[25]  Pavel Pudlák,et al.  On reducibility and symmetry of disjoint NP pairs , 2003, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[26]  Toniann Pitassi,et al.  Non-Automatizability of Bounded-Depth Frege Proofs , 2004, computational complexity.

[27]  Ran Raz,et al.  On Interpolation and Automatization for Frege Systems , 2000, SIAM J. Comput..

[28]  Robert Beals,et al.  Symmetry and complexity , 1992, STOC '92.

[29]  Maria Luisa Bonet,et al.  On the automatizability of resolution and related propositional proof systems , 2002, Inf. Comput..

[30]  Toniann Pitassi,et al.  Hardness amplification in proof complexity , 2009, STOC '10.