Conditional Lower Bound for a System of Constant-Depth Proofs with Modular Connectives

It is known that constant-depth Frege proofs of some tautologies require exponential size. No such lower bound result is known for more general proof systems. We consider sequent calculus proofs in which formulas can contain modular connectives and only the cut formulas are restricted to be of constant depth. Under a plausible hardness assumption concerning small-depth Boolean circuits, we prove an exponential lower bound for such proofs. We prove this lower bound directly from the computational hardness assumption. By using the same approach, we obtain the following additional results. We provide a much simpler proof of a known (unconditional) lower bound in the case where only conjunctions and disjunctions are allowed. We establish a conditional exponential separation between the power of constant-depth proofs that use different modular connectives. Finally, under a plausible hardness assumption concerning the polynomial-time hierarchy, we show that the hierarchy Gi* of quantified propositional proof systems does not collapse

[1]  Armin Haken,et al.  The Intractability of Resolution , 1985, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[2]  Jeff B. Paris,et al.  Provability of the Pigeonhole Principle and the Existence of Infinitely Many Primes , 1988, J. Symb. Log..

[3]  R. Smolensky On representations by low-degree polynomials , 1993, Proceedings of 1993 IEEE 34th Annual Foundations of Computer Science.

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

[5]  Miklós Ajtai,et al.  The complexity of the Pigeonhole Principle , 1988, [Proceedings 1988] 29th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[6]  Stephen A. Cook,et al.  An Exponential Lower Bound for the Size of Monotone Real Circuits , 1999, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[7]  Toniann Pitassi,et al.  A new proof of the weak pigeonhole principle , 2000, STOC '00.

[8]  Pavel Pudlák,et al.  Lower bounds for resolution and cutting plane proofs and monotone computations , 1997, Journal of Symbolic Logic.

[9]  Johan Håstad,et al.  Almost optimal lower bounds for small depth circuits , 1986, STOC '86.

[10]  Jan Krajícek,et al.  Bounded Arithmetic and the Polynomial Hierarchy , 1991, Ann. Pure Appl. Log..

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

[12]  Russell Impagliazzo,et al.  Exponential lower bounds for the pigeonhole principle , 1992, STOC '92.

[13]  Rasmus Ejlers Møgelberg,et al.  Proceedings of the 22nd Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science , 2007 .

[14]  Jan Krajícek,et al.  An Exponenetioal Lower Bound to the Size of Bounded Depth Frege Proofs of the Pigeonhole Principle , 1995, Random Struct. Algorithms.

[15]  Roman Smolensky,et al.  Algebraic methods in the theory of lower bounds for Boolean circuit complexity , 1987, STOC.

[16]  Jan Kra,et al.  Lower Bounds to the Size of Constant-depth Propositional Proofs , 1994 .

[17]  Stephen A. Cook,et al.  Quantified propositional calculus and a second-order theory for NC1 , 2005, Arch. Math. Log..