11 Search Results for "Chew, Leroy"

Document
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.MFCS.2024.27
Polynomial Calculus for Quantified Boolean Logic: Lower Bounds Through Circuits and Degree

Authors: Olaf Beyersdorff, Tim Hoffmann, Kaspar Kasche, and Luc Nicolas Spachmann

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 306, 49th International Symposium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science (MFCS 2024)

Abstract
We initiate an in-depth proof-complexity analysis of polynomial calculus (𝒬-PC) for Quantified Boolean Formulas (QBF). In the course of this we establish a tight proof-size characterisation of 𝒬-PC in terms of a suitable circuit model (polynomial decision lists). Using this correspondence we show a size-degree relation for 𝒬-PC, similar in spirit, yet different from the classic size-degree formula for propositional PC by Impagliazzo, Pudlák and Sgall (1999). We use the circuit characterisation together with the size-degree relation to obtain various new lower bounds on proof size in 𝒬-PC. This leads to incomparability results for 𝒬-PC systems over different fields.
Cite as

Olaf Beyersdorff, Tim Hoffmann, Kaspar Kasche, and Luc Nicolas Spachmann. Polynomial Calculus for Quantified Boolean Logic: Lower Bounds Through Circuits and Degree. In 49th International Symposium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science (MFCS 2024). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 306, pp. 27:1-27:15, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2024)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{beyersdorff_et_al:LIPIcs.MFCS.2024.27,
  author =	{Beyersdorff, Olaf and Hoffmann, Tim and Kasche, Kaspar and Spachmann, Luc Nicolas},
  title =	{{Polynomial Calculus for Quantified Boolean Logic: Lower Bounds Through Circuits and Degree}},
  booktitle =	{49th International Symposium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science (MFCS 2024)},
  pages =	{27:1--27:15},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-335-5},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2024},
  volume =	{306},
  editor =	{Kr\'{a}lovi\v{c}, Rastislav and Ku\v{c}era, Anton{\'\i}n},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.MFCS.2024.27},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-205834},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.MFCS.2024.27},
  annote =	{Keywords: proof complexity, QBF, polynomial calculus, circuits, lower bounds}
}
Document
Invited Talk
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.SAT.2024.1
Models and Counter-Models of Quantified Boolean Formulas (Invited Talk)

Authors: Martina Seidl

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 305, 27th International Conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing (SAT 2024)

Abstract
Because of the duality of universal and existential quantification, quantified Boolean formulas (QBF), the extension of propositional logic with quantifiers over the Boolean variables, have not only solutions in terms of models for true formulas like in SAT. Also false QBFs have solutions in terms of counter-models. Both models and counter-models can be represented as certain binary trees or as sets of Boolean functions reflecting the dependencies among the variables of a formula. Such solutions encode the answers to application problems for which QBF solvers are employed like the plan for a planning problem or the error trace of a verification problem. Therefore, models and counter-models are at the core of theory and practice of QBF solving. In this invited talk, we survey approaches that deal with models and counter-models of QBFs and identify some open challenges.
Cite as

Martina Seidl. Models and Counter-Models of Quantified Boolean Formulas (Invited Talk). In 27th International Conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing (SAT 2024). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 305, pp. 1:1-1:7, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2024)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{seidl:LIPIcs.SAT.2024.1,
  author =	{Seidl, Martina},
  title =	{{Models and Counter-Models of Quantified Boolean Formulas}},
  booktitle =	{27th International Conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing (SAT 2024)},
  pages =	{1:1--1:7},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-334-8},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2024},
  volume =	{305},
  editor =	{Chakraborty, Supratik and Jiang, Jie-Hong Roland},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.SAT.2024.1},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-205238},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.SAT.2024.1},
  annote =	{Keywords: Quantified Boolean Formula, Solution Extraction, Solution Counting}
}
Document
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.SAT.2024.5
The Relative Strength of #SAT Proof Systems

Authors: Olaf Beyersdorff, Johannes K. Fichte, Markus Hecher, Tim Hoffmann, and Kaspar Kasche

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 305, 27th International Conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing (SAT 2024)

Abstract
The propositional model counting problem #SAT asks to compute the number of satisfying assignments for a given propositional formula. Recently, three #SAT proof systems kcps (knowledge compilation proof system), MICE (model counting induction by claim extension), and CPOG (certified partitioned-operation graphs) have been introduced with the aim to model #SAT solving and enable proof logging for solvers. Prior to this paper, the relations between these proof systems have been unclear and very few proof complexity results are known. We completely determine the simulation order of the three systems, establishing that CPOG simulates both MICE and kcps, while MICE and kcps are exponentially incomparable. This implies that CPOG is strictly stronger than the other two systems.
Cite as

Olaf Beyersdorff, Johannes K. Fichte, Markus Hecher, Tim Hoffmann, and Kaspar Kasche. The Relative Strength of #SAT Proof Systems. In 27th International Conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing (SAT 2024). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 305, pp. 5:1-5:19, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2024)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{beyersdorff_et_al:LIPIcs.SAT.2024.5,
  author =	{Beyersdorff, Olaf and Fichte, Johannes K. and Hecher, Markus and Hoffmann, Tim and Kasche, Kaspar},
  title =	{{The Relative Strength of #SAT Proof Systems}},
  booktitle =	{27th International Conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing (SAT 2024)},
  pages =	{5:1--5:19},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-334-8},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2024},
  volume =	{305},
  editor =	{Chakraborty, Supratik and Jiang, Jie-Hong Roland},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.SAT.2024.5},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-205276},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.SAT.2024.5},
  annote =	{Keywords: Model Counting, #SAT, Proof Complexity, Proof Systems, Lower Bounds, Knowledge Compilation}
}
Document
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.SAT.2024.28
Strategy Extraction by Interpolation

Authors: Friedrich Slivovsky

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 305, 27th International Conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing (SAT 2024)

Abstract
In applications, QBF solvers are often required to generate strategies. This typically involves a process known as strategy extraction, where a Boolean circuit encoding a strategy is computed from a proof. It has previously been observed that Craig interpolation in propositional logic can be seen as a special case of QBF strategy extraction. In this paper we explore this connection further and show that, conversely, any strategy for a false QBF corresponds to a sequence of interpolants in its complete (Herbrand) expansion. Inspired by this correspondence, we present a new strategy extraction algorithm for the expansion-based proof system Exp+Res. Its asymptotic running time matches the best known bound of O(mn) for a proof with m lines and n universally quantified variables. We report on experiments comparing this algorithm with a strategy extraction algorithm based on combining partial strategies, as well as with round-based strategy extraction.
Cite as

Friedrich Slivovsky. Strategy Extraction by Interpolation. In 27th International Conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing (SAT 2024). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 305, pp. 28:1-28:20, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2024)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{slivovsky:LIPIcs.SAT.2024.28,
  author =	{Slivovsky, Friedrich},
  title =	{{Strategy Extraction by Interpolation}},
  booktitle =	{27th International Conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing (SAT 2024)},
  pages =	{28:1--28:20},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-334-8},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2024},
  volume =	{305},
  editor =	{Chakraborty, Supratik and Jiang, Jie-Hong Roland},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.SAT.2024.28},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-205509},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.SAT.2024.28},
  annote =	{Keywords: QBF, Expansion, Strategy Extraction, Interpolation}
}
Document
Track A: Algorithms, Complexity and Games
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.ICALP.2024.12
From Proof Complexity to Circuit Complexity via Interactive Protocols

Authors: Noel Arteche, Erfan Khaniki, Ján Pich, and Rahul Santhanam

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 297, 51st International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming (ICALP 2024)

Abstract
Folklore in complexity theory suspects that circuit lower bounds against NC¹ or P/poly, currently out of reach, are a necessary step towards proving strong proof complexity lower bounds for systems like Frege or Extended Frege. Establishing such a connection formally, however, is already daunting, as it would imply the breakthrough separation NEXP ⊈ P/poly, as recently observed by Pich and Santhanam [Pich and Santhanam, 2023]. We show such a connection conditionally for the Implicit Extended Frege proof system (iEF) introduced by Krajíček [Krajíček, 2004], capable of formalizing most of contemporary complexity theory. In particular, we show that if iEF proves efficiently the standard derandomization assumption that a concrete Boolean function is hard on average for subexponential-size circuits, then any superpolynomial lower bound on the length of iEF proofs implies #P ⊈ FP/poly (which would in turn imply, for example, PSPACE ⊈ P/poly). Our proof exploits the formalization inside iEF of the soundness of the sum-check protocol of Lund, Fortnow, Karloff, and Nisan [Lund et al., 1992]. This has consequences for the self-provability of circuit upper bounds in iEF. Interestingly, further improving our result seems to require progress in constructing interactive proof systems with more efficient provers.
Cite as

Noel Arteche, Erfan Khaniki, Ján Pich, and Rahul Santhanam. From Proof Complexity to Circuit Complexity via Interactive Protocols. In 51st International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming (ICALP 2024). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 297, pp. 12:1-12:20, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2024)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{arteche_et_al:LIPIcs.ICALP.2024.12,
  author =	{Arteche, Noel and Khaniki, Erfan and Pich, J\'{a}n and Santhanam, Rahul},
  title =	{{From Proof Complexity to Circuit Complexity via Interactive Protocols}},
  booktitle =	{51st International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming (ICALP 2024)},
  pages =	{12:1--12:20},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-322-5},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2024},
  volume =	{297},
  editor =	{Bringmann, Karl and Grohe, Martin and Puppis, Gabriele and Svensson, Ola},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.ICALP.2024.12},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-201557},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.ICALP.2024.12},
  annote =	{Keywords: proof complexity, circuit complexity, interactive protocols}
}
Document
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.STACS.2023.21
Extending Merge Resolution to a Family of QBF-Proof Systems

Authors: Sravanthi Chede and Anil Shukla

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 254, 40th International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS 2023)

Abstract
Merge Resolution (MRes [Olaf Beyersdorff et al., 2021]) is a recently introduced proof system for false QBFs. Unlike other known QBF proof systems, it builds winning strategies for the universal player (countermodels) within the proofs as merge maps. Merge maps are deterministic branching programs in which isomorphism checking is efficient, as a result MRes is a polynomial time verifiable proof system. In this paper, we introduce a family of proof systems MRes-ℛ in which the information of countermodels are stored in any pre-fixed complete representation ℛ. Hence, corresponding to each possible complete representation ℛ, we have a sound and refutationally complete QBF-proof system in MRes-ℛ. To handle these arbitrary representations, we introduce consistency checking rules in MRes-ℛ instead of the isomorphism checking in MRes. As a result these proof systems are not polynomial time verifiable (Non-P). Consequently, the paper shows that using merge maps is too restrictive and with a slight change in rules, it can be replaced with arbitrary representations leading to several interesting proof systems. We relate these new systems with the implicit proof system from the algorithm in [Joshua Blinkhorn et al., 2021], which was designed to solve DQBFs (Dependency QBFs) using clause-strategy pairs like MRes. We use the OBDD (Ordered Binary Decision Diagrams) representation suggested in [Joshua Blinkhorn et al., 2021] and deduce that "Ordered" versions of the proof systems in MRes-ℛ are indeed polynomial time verifiable. On the lower bound side, we lift the lower bound result of regular MRes ([Olaf Beyersdorff et al., 2020]) by showing that the completion principle formulas (CR_n) from [Mikolás Janota and João Marques-Silva, 2015] which are shown to be hard for regular MRes in [Olaf Beyersdorff et al., 2020], are also hard for any regular proof system in MRes-ℛ. Thereby, the paper lifts the lower bound of regular MRes to an entire class of proof systems, which use various complete representations, including those undiscovered, instead of only merge maps. Thereby proving that the hardness of CR_n formulas is intact even after changing the weak isomorphism checking in MRes to the stronger consistency checking in MRes-ℛ.
Cite as

Sravanthi Chede and Anil Shukla. Extending Merge Resolution to a Family of QBF-Proof Systems. In 40th International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS 2023). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 254, pp. 21:1-21:20, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2023)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{chede_et_al:LIPIcs.STACS.2023.21,
  author =	{Chede, Sravanthi and Shukla, Anil},
  title =	{{Extending Merge Resolution to a Family of QBF-Proof Systems}},
  booktitle =	{40th International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS 2023)},
  pages =	{21:1--21:20},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-266-2},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2023},
  volume =	{254},
  editor =	{Berenbrink, Petra and Bouyer, Patricia and Dawar, Anuj and Kant\'{e}, Mamadou Moustapha},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.STACS.2023.21},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-176737},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.STACS.2023.21},
  annote =	{Keywords: Proof complexity, QBFs, Merge Resolution, Simulation, Lower Bound}
}
Document
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.SAT.2022.10
Relating Existing Powerful Proof Systems for QBF

Authors: Leroy Chew and Marijn J. H. Heule

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 236, 25th International Conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing (SAT 2022)

Abstract
We advance the theory of QBF proof systems by showing the first simulation of the universal checking format QRAT by a theory-friendly system. We show that the sequent system G fully p-simulates QRAT, including the Extended Universal Reduction (EUR) rule which was recently used to show QRAT does not have strategy extraction. Because EUR heavily uses resolution paths our technique also brings resolution path dependency and sequent systems closer together. While we do not recommend G for practical applications this work can potentially show what features are needed for a new QBF checking format stronger than QRAT.
Cite as

Leroy Chew and Marijn J. H. Heule. Relating Existing Powerful Proof Systems for QBF. In 25th International Conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing (SAT 2022). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 236, pp. 10:1-10:22, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2022)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{chew_et_al:LIPIcs.SAT.2022.10,
  author =	{Chew, Leroy and Heule, Marijn J. H.},
  title =	{{Relating Existing Powerful Proof Systems for QBF}},
  booktitle =	{25th International Conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing (SAT 2022)},
  pages =	{10:1--10:22},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-242-6},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2022},
  volume =	{236},
  editor =	{Meel, Kuldeep S. and Strichman, Ofer},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.SAT.2022.10},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-166845},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.SAT.2022.10},
  annote =	{Keywords: QBF, Proof Complexity, Verification, Strategy Extraction, Sequent Calculus}
}
Document
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.STACS.2022.22
Towards Uniform Certification in QBF

Authors: Leroy Chew and Friedrich Slivovsky

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 219, 39th International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS 2022)

Abstract
We pioneer a new technique that allows us to prove a multitude of previously open simulations in QBF proof complexity. In particular, we show that extended QBF Frege p-simulates clausal proof systems such as IR-Calculus, IRM-Calculus, Long-Distance Q-Resolution, and Merge Resolution. These results are obtained by taking a technique of Beyersdorff et al. (JACM 2020) that turns strategy extraction into simulation and combining it with new local strategy extraction arguments. This approach leads to simulations that are carried out mainly in propositional logic, with minimal use of the QBF rules. Our proofs therefore provide a new, largely propositional interpretation of the simulated systems. We argue that these results strengthen the case for uniform certification in QBF solving, since many QBF proof systems now fall into place underneath extended QBF Frege.
Cite as

Leroy Chew and Friedrich Slivovsky. Towards Uniform Certification in QBF. In 39th International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS 2022). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 219, pp. 22:1-22:23, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2022)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{chew_et_al:LIPIcs.STACS.2022.22,
  author =	{Chew, Leroy and Slivovsky, Friedrich},
  title =	{{Towards Uniform Certification in QBF}},
  booktitle =	{39th International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS 2022)},
  pages =	{22:1--22:23},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-222-8},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2022},
  volume =	{219},
  editor =	{Berenbrink, Petra and Monmege, Benjamin},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.STACS.2022.22},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-158326},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.STACS.2022.22},
  annote =	{Keywords: QBF, Proof Complexity, Verification, Frege, Extended Frege, Strategy Extraction}
}
Document
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.FSTTCS.2016.40
Understanding Cutting Planes for QBFs

Authors: Olaf Beyersdorff, Leroy Chew, Meena Mahajan, and Anil Shukla

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 65, 36th IARCS Annual Conference on Foundations of Software Technology and Theoretical Computer Science (FSTTCS 2016)

Abstract
We define a cutting planes system CP+ForallRed 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+ForallRed 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 ForallExp+Res. Technically, our results establish the effectiveness of two lower bound techniques for CP+ForallRed: via strategy extraction and via monotone feasible interpolation.
Cite as

Olaf Beyersdorff, Leroy Chew, Meena Mahajan, and Anil Shukla. Understanding Cutting Planes for QBFs. In 36th IARCS Annual Conference on Foundations of Software Technology and Theoretical Computer Science (FSTTCS 2016). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 65, pp. 40:1-40:15, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2016)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{beyersdorff_et_al:LIPIcs.FSTTCS.2016.40,
  author =	{Beyersdorff, Olaf and Chew, Leroy and Mahajan, Meena and Shukla, Anil},
  title =	{{Understanding Cutting Planes for QBFs}},
  booktitle =	{36th IARCS Annual Conference on Foundations of Software Technology and Theoretical Computer Science (FSTTCS 2016)},
  pages =	{40:1--40:15},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-027-9},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2016},
  volume =	{65},
  editor =	{Lal, Akash and Akshay, S. and Saurabh, Saket and Sen, Sandeep},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.FSTTCS.2016.40},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-68758},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.FSTTCS.2016.40},
  annote =	{Keywords: proof complexity, QBF, cutting planes, resolution, simulations}
}
Document
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.STACS.2016.15
Are Short Proofs Narrow? QBF Resolution is not Simple

Authors: Olaf Beyersdorff, Leroy Chew, Meena Mahajan, and Anil Shukla

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 47, 33rd Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS 2016)

Abstract
The groundbreaking paper 'Short proofs are narrow - resolution made simple' by Ben-Sasson and Wigderson (J. ACM 2001) introduces what is today arguably the main technique to obtain resolution lower bounds: to show a lower bound for the width of proofs. Another important measure for resolution is space, and in their fundamental work, Atserias and Dalmau (J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 2008) show that space lower bounds again can be obtained via width lower bounds. Here we assess whether similar techniques are effective for resolution calculi for quantified Boolean formulas (QBF). A mixed picture emerges. Our main results show that both the relations between size and width as well as between space and width drastically fail in Q-resolution, even in its weaker tree-like version. On the other hand, we obtain positive results for the expansion-based resolution systems Forall-Exp+Res and IR-calc, however only in the weak tree-like models. Technically, our negative results rely on showing width lower bounds together with simultaneous upper bounds for size and space. For our positive results we exhibit space and width-preserving simulations between QBF resolution calculi.
Cite as

Olaf Beyersdorff, Leroy Chew, Meena Mahajan, and Anil Shukla. Are Short Proofs Narrow? QBF Resolution is not Simple. In 33rd Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS 2016). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 47, pp. 15:1-15:14, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2016)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{beyersdorff_et_al:LIPIcs.STACS.2016.15,
  author =	{Beyersdorff, Olaf and Chew, Leroy and Mahajan, Meena and Shukla, Anil},
  title =	{{Are Short Proofs Narrow? QBF Resolution is not Simple}},
  booktitle =	{33rd Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS 2016)},
  pages =	{15:1--15:14},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-001-9},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2016},
  volume =	{47},
  editor =	{Ollinger, Nicolas and Vollmer, Heribert},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.STACS.2016.15},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-57164},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.STACS.2016.15},
  annote =	{Keywords: proof complexity, QBF, resolution, lower bound techniques, simulations}
}
Document
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.STACS.2015.76
Proof Complexity of Resolution-based QBF Calculi

Authors: Olaf Beyersdorff, Leroy Chew, and Mikolás Janota

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 30, 32nd International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS 2015)

Abstract
Proof systems for quantified Boolean formulas (QBFs) provide a theoretical underpinning for the performance of important QBF solvers. However, the proof complexity of these proof systems is currently not well understood and in particular lower bound techniques are missing. In this paper we exhibit a new and elegant proof technique for showing lower bounds in QBF proof systems based on strategy extraction. This technique provides a direct transfer of circuit lower bounds to lengths of proofs lower bounds. We use our method to show the hardness of a natural class of parity formulas for Q-resolution and universal Q-resolution. Variants of the formulas are hard for even stronger systems as long-distance Q-resolution and extensions. With a completely different lower bound argument we show the hardness of the prominent formulas of Kleine Büning et al. [34] for the strong expansion-based calculus IR-calc. Our lower bounds imply new exponential separations between two different types of resolution-based QBF calculi: proof systems for CDCL-based solvers (Q-resolution, long-distance Q-resolution) and proof systems for expansion-based solvers (forallExp+Res and its generalizations IR-calc and IRM-calc). The relations between proof systems from the two different classes were not known before.
Cite as

Olaf Beyersdorff, Leroy Chew, and Mikolás Janota. Proof Complexity of Resolution-based QBF Calculi. In 32nd International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS 2015). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 30, pp. 76-89, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2015)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{beyersdorff_et_al:LIPIcs.STACS.2015.76,
  author =	{Beyersdorff, Olaf and Chew, Leroy and Janota, Mikol\'{a}s},
  title =	{{Proof Complexity of Resolution-based QBF Calculi}},
  booktitle =	{32nd International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS 2015)},
  pages =	{76--89},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-939897-78-1},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2015},
  volume =	{30},
  editor =	{Mayr, Ernst W. and Ollinger, Nicolas},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.STACS.2015.76},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-49057},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.STACS.2015.76},
  annote =	{Keywords: proof complexity, QBF, lower bound techniques, separations}
}
  • Refine by Author
  • 5 Beyersdorff, Olaf
  • 5 Chew, Leroy
  • 3 Shukla, Anil
  • 2 Hoffmann, Tim
  • 2 Kasche, Kaspar
  • Show More...

  • Refine by Classification
  • 6 Theory of computation → Proof complexity
  • 3 Theory of computation → Automated reasoning
  • 1 Theory of computation → Circuit complexity
  • 1 Theory of computation → Complexity theory and logic
  • 1 Theory of computation → Logic and verification
  • Show More...

  • Refine by Keyword
  • 7 QBF
  • 5 proof complexity
  • 3 Proof Complexity
  • 3 Strategy Extraction
  • 2 Verification
  • Show More...

  • Refine by Type
  • 11 document

  • Refine by Publication Year
  • 5 2024
  • 2 2016
  • 2 2022
  • 1 2015
  • 1 2023

Questions / Remarks / Feedback
X

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing


Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail
© 2023-2024 Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH Imprint Privacy Contact