<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<OAI-PMH xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/OAI-PMH.xsd">
  <responseDate>2026-08-11T00:06:56Z</responseDate>
  <request identifier="5058" metadataPrefix="oai_dc" verb="GetRecord">https://drops.dagstuhl.de/oai</request>
  <GetRecord>
    <record>
      <header>
        <identifier>oai:drops-oai.dagstuhl.de:5058</identifier>
        <datestamp>2024-03-06T10:35:47Z</datestamp>
        <setSpec>ddc:004</setSpec>
        <setSpec>open_access</setSpec>
      </header>
      <metadata>
        <oai_dc:dc xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
          <dc:title>Non-Commutative Formulas and Frege Lower Bounds: a New Characterization of Propositional Proofs</dc:title>
          <dc:creator>Li, Fu</dc:creator>
          <dc:creator>Tzameret, Iddo</dc:creator>
          <dc:creator>Wang, Zhengyu</dc:creator>
          <dc:subject>Proof complexity</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>algebraic complexity</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>arithmetic circuits</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>Frege</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>non-commutative formulas</dc:subject>
          <dc:description>Does every Boolean tautology have a short propositional-calculus proof? Here, a propositional-calculus (i.e. Frege) proof  is any  proof starting from a set of axioms and deriving new Boolean formulas using a fixed set of sound derivation rules. Establishing  any super-polynomial size lower bound on Frege proofs (in terms of the size of the formula proved) is a major open problem in proof complexity, and among a handful of fundamental hardness questions in complexity theory by and large. Non-commutative arithmetic formulas, on the other hand, constitute a quite weak computational model, for which exponential-size lower bounds were shown already back in 1991 by Nisan [STOC 1991], using  a particularly transparent argument. &#13;
&#13;
In this work we show that Frege lower bounds in fact follow from corresponding size lower bounds on non-commutative formulas computing certain polynomials (and that such lower bounds on non-commutative formulas must exist, unless NP=coNP). More precisely, we demonstrate a natural association between tautologies T to non-commutative polynomials p, such that:&#13;
&#13;
(*) if T has a polynomial-size Frege proof then p has a polynomial-size non-commutative arithmetic formula; and conversely, when T is a DNF, if p has a polynomial-size non-commutative arithmetic formula over GF(2) then T has a Frege proof of quasi-polynomial size.&#13;
&#13;
The argument is a characterization of Frege proofs as non-commutative formulas: we show that the Frege  system is (quasi-)polynomially equivalent to a non-commutative Ideal Proof System (IPS), following the recent work of Grochow and Pitassi [FOCS 2014] that introduced a propositional proof system in which proofs are arithmetic circuits, and the work in [Tzameret 2011] that considered adding the commutator as an axiom in algebraic propositional proof systems. This gives a characterization of propositional Frege proofs in terms of (non-commutative) arithmetic formulas that is tighter than (the formula version of IPS) in Grochow and Pitassi [FOCS 2014], in the following sense:&#13;
&#13;
(i) The non-commutative IPS is polynomial-time checkable - whereas the original IPS was checkable in probabilistic polynomial-time; and&#13;
(ii) Frege proofs unconditionally quasi-polynomially simulate the non-commutative IPS - whereas Frege was shown to  efficiently simulate IPS only assuming that the decidability of PIT for (commutative) arithmetic formulas by polynomial-size circuits is efficiently provable in Frege.</dc:description>
          <dc:publisher>Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik</dc:publisher>
          <dc:contributor>Fu Li and Iddo Tzameret and Zhengyu Wang</dc:contributor>
          <dc:date>2015</dc:date>
          <dc:relation>Is Part Of LIPIcs, Volume 33, 30th Conference on Computational Complexity (CCC 2015)</dc:relation>
          <dc:type>InProceedings</dc:type>
          <dc:type>Text</dc:type>
          <dc:type>doc-type:ResearchArticle</dc:type>
          <dc:type>publishedVersion</dc:type>
          <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
          <dc:identifier>doi:10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2015.412</dc:identifier>
          <dc:identifier>urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-50585</dc:identifier>
          <dc:identifier>https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2015.412</dc:identifier>
          <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
          <dc:rights>https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode</dc:rights>
        </oai_dc:dc>
      </metadata>
    </record>
  </GetRecord>
</OAI-PMH>
