Many-Valued Logics and Holographic Proofs

We reformulate the subject of holographic proof checking in terms of three-valued logic. In this reformulation the recursive proof checking idea of Arora and Safra gets an especially elegant form. Our approach gives a more concise and accurate treatment of the holographic proof theory, and yields easy to check proofs about holographic proofs. A consequence of our results is that for any Ɛ > 0 MAX3SAT instances cannot be approximated in TIME(2n1-Ɛ) within a factor which tends to 1 when n tends to infinity, unless 3SAT can be solved in TIME(2n1-Ɛ) for some Ɛ > 0.

[1]  Carsten Lund,et al.  Proof verification and hardness of approximation problems , 1992, Proceedings., 33rd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[2]  László Lovász,et al.  Interactive proofs and the hardness of approximating cliques , 1996, JACM.

[3]  Madhu Sudan,et al.  Efficient Checking of Polynomials and Proofs and the Hardness of Appoximation Problems , 1995, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[4]  Leonid A. Levin,et al.  Checking computations in polylogarithmic time , 1991, STOC '91.

[5]  L. Babai,et al.  On slightly superlinear transparent proofs , 1993 .

[6]  Sanjeev Arora,et al.  Probabilistic checking of proofs; a new characterization of NP , 1992, Proceedings., 33rd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[7]  Carsten Lund,et al.  Hardness of approximations , 1996 .

[8]  Lance Fortnow,et al.  On the Power of Multi-Prover Interactive Protocols , 1994, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[9]  Silvio Micali,et al.  The Knowledge Complexity of Interactive Proof Systems , 1989, SIAM J. Comput..

[10]  Ran Raz,et al.  A parallel repetition theorem , 1995, STOC '95.

[11]  Daniel A. Spielman,et al.  Nearly-linear size holographic proofs , 1994, STOC '94.