14 Search Results for "Lauria, Massimo"

Document
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.SAT.2025.7
Redundancy Rules for MaxSAT

Authors: Ilario Bonacina, Maria Luisa Bonet, Sam Buss, and Massimo Lauria

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 341, 28th International Conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing (SAT 2025)

Abstract
The concept of redundancy in SAT leads to more expressive and powerful proof search techniques, e.g., able to express various inprocessing techniques, and originates interesting hierarchies of proof systems [Heule et.al'20, Buss-Thapen'19]. Redundancy has also been integrated in MaxSAT [Ihalainen et.al'22, Berg et.al'23, Bonacina et.al'24]. In this paper, we define a structured hierarchy of redundancy proof systems for MaxSAT, with the goal of studying its proof complexity. We obtain MaxSAT variants of proof systems such as SPR, PR, SR, and others, previously defined for SAT. All our rules are polynomially checkable, unlike [Ihalainen et.al'22]. Moreover, they are simpler and weaker than [Berg et.al'23], and possibly amenable to lower bounds. This work also complements the approach of [Bonacina et.al'24]. Their proof systems use different rule sets for soft and hard clauses, while here we propose a system using only hard clauses and blocking variables. This is easier to integrate with current solvers and proof checkers. We discuss the strength of the systems introduced, we show some limitations of them, and we give a short cost-SR proof that any assignment for the weak pigeonhole principle PHP^m_n falsifies at least m-n clauses.
Cite as

Ilario Bonacina, Maria Luisa Bonet, Sam Buss, and Massimo Lauria. Redundancy Rules for MaxSAT. In 28th International Conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing (SAT 2025). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 341, pp. 7:1-7:17, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2025)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{bonacina_et_al:LIPIcs.SAT.2025.7,
  author =	{Bonacina, Ilario and Bonet, Maria Luisa and Buss, Sam and Lauria, Massimo},
  title =	{{Redundancy Rules for MaxSAT}},
  booktitle =	{28th International Conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing (SAT 2025)},
  pages =	{7:1--7:17},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-381-2},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2025},
  volume =	{341},
  editor =	{Berg, Jeremias and Nordstr\"{o}m, Jakob},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.SAT.2025.7},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-237411},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.SAT.2025.7},
  annote =	{Keywords: MaxSAT, Redundancy Rules, Pigeonhole Principle}
}
Document
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2025.32
A Lower Bound for k-DNF Resolution on Random CNF Formulas via Expansion

Authors: Anastasia Sofronova and Dmitry Sokolov

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 339, 40th Computational Complexity Conference (CCC 2025)

Abstract
Random Δ-CNF formulas are one of the few candidates that are expected to be hard for proof systems and SAT algotirhms. Assume we sample m clauses over n variables. Here, the main complexity parameter is clause density, χ := m/n. For a fixed Δ, there exists a satisfiability threshold c_Δ such that for χ > c_Δ a formula is unsatisfiable with high probability. and for χ < c_Δ it is satisfiable with high probability. Near satisfiability threshold, there are various lower bounds for algorithms and proof systems [Eli Ben-Sasson, 2001; Eli Ben-Sasson and Russell Impagliazzo, 1999; Michael Alekhnovich and Alexander A. Razborov, 2003; Dima Grigoriev, 2001; Grant Schoenebeck, 2008; Pavel Hrubes and Pavel Pudlák, 2017; Noah Fleming et al., 2017; Dmitry Sokolov, 2024], and for high-density regimes, there exist upper bounds [Uriel Feige et al., 2006; Sebastian Müller and Iddo Tzameret, 2014; Jackson Abascal et al., 2021; Venkatesan Guruswami et al., 2022]. One of the frontiers in the direction of proving lower bounds on these formulas is the k-DNF Resolution proof system (aka Res(k)). There are several known results for k = 𝒪(√{log n}/{log log n}}) [Nathan Segerlind et al., 2004; Michael Alekhnovich, 2011], that are applicable only for density regime near the threshold. In this paper, we show the first Res(k) lower bound that is applicable in higher-density regimes. Our results work for slightly larger k = 𝒪(√{log n}).
Cite as

Anastasia Sofronova and Dmitry Sokolov. A Lower Bound for k-DNF Resolution on Random CNF Formulas via Expansion. In 40th Computational Complexity Conference (CCC 2025). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 339, pp. 32:1-32:27, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2025)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{sofronova_et_al:LIPIcs.CCC.2025.32,
  author =	{Sofronova, Anastasia and Sokolov, Dmitry},
  title =	{{A Lower Bound for k-DNF Resolution on Random CNF Formulas via Expansion}},
  booktitle =	{40th Computational Complexity Conference (CCC 2025)},
  pages =	{32:1--32:27},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-379-9},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2025},
  volume =	{339},
  editor =	{Srinivasan, Srikanth},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2025.32},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-237269},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2025.32},
  annote =	{Keywords: proof complexity, random CNFs}
}
Document
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2025.28
Provably Total Functions in the Polynomial Hierarchy

Authors: Noah Fleming, Deniz Imrek, and Christophe Marciot

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 339, 40th Computational Complexity Conference (CCC 2025)

Abstract
TFNP studies the complexity of total, verifiable search problems, and represents the first layer of the total function polynomial hierarchy (TFPH). Recently, problems in higher levels of the TFPH have gained significant attention, partly due to their close connection to circuit lower bounds. However, very little is known about the relationships between problems in levels of the hierarchy beyond TFNP. Connections to proof complexity have had an outsized impact on our understanding of the relationships between subclasses of TFNP in the black-box model. Subclasses are characterized by provability in certain proof systems, which has allowed for tools from proof complexity to be applied in order to separate TFNP problems. In this work we begin a systematic study of the relationship between subclasses of total search problems in the polynomial hierarchy and proof systems. We show that, akin to TFNP, reductions to a problem in TFΣ_d are equivalent to proofs of the formulas expressing the totality of the problems in some Σ_d-proof system. Having established this general correspondence, we examine important subclasses of TFPH. We show that reductions to the StrongAvoid problem are equivalent to proofs in a Σ₂-variant of the (unary) Sherali-Adams proof system. As well, we explore the TFPH classes which result from well-studied proof systems, introducing a number of new TFΣ₂ classes which characterize variants of DNF resolution, as well as TFΣ_d classes capturing levels of Σ_d-bounded-depth Frege.
Cite as

Noah Fleming, Deniz Imrek, and Christophe Marciot. Provably Total Functions in the Polynomial Hierarchy. In 40th Computational Complexity Conference (CCC 2025). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 339, pp. 28:1-28:40, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2025)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{fleming_et_al:LIPIcs.CCC.2025.28,
  author =	{Fleming, Noah and Imrek, Deniz and Marciot, Christophe},
  title =	{{Provably Total Functions in the Polynomial Hierarchy}},
  booktitle =	{40th Computational Complexity Conference (CCC 2025)},
  pages =	{28:1--28:40},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-379-9},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2025},
  volume =	{339},
  editor =	{Srinivasan, Srikanth},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2025.28},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-237223},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2025.28},
  annote =	{Keywords: TFNP, TFPH, Proof Complxity, Characterizations}
}
Document
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2025.14
On the Automatability of Tree-Like k-DNF Resolution

Authors: Gaia Carenini and Susanna F. de Rezende

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 339, 40th Computational Complexity Conference (CCC 2025)

Abstract
A proof system 𝒫 is said to be automatable in time f(N) if there exists an algorithm that given as input an unsatisfiable formula F outputs a refutation of F in the proof system 𝒫 in time f(N), where N is the size of the smallest 𝒫-refutation of F plus the size of F. Atserias and Bonet (ECCC 2002), observed that tree-like k-DNF resolution is automatable in time N^{c⋅klog N} for a universal constant c. We show that, under the randomized exponential-time hypothesis (rETH), this is tight up to a O(log k)-factor in the exponent, i.e., we prove that tree-like k-DNF resolution, for k at most logarithmic in the number of variables of F, is not automatable in time N^o((k/log k)⋅log N) unless rETH is false. Our proof builds on the non-automatability results for resolution by Atserias and Müller (FOCS 2019), for algebraic proof systems by de Rezende, Göös, Nordström, Pitassi, Robere and Sokolov (STOC 2021), and for tree-like resolution by de Rezende (LAGOS 2021).
Cite as

Gaia Carenini and Susanna F. de Rezende. On the Automatability of Tree-Like k-DNF Resolution. In 40th Computational Complexity Conference (CCC 2025). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 339, pp. 14:1-14:21, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2025)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{carenini_et_al:LIPIcs.CCC.2025.14,
  author =	{Carenini, Gaia and de Rezende, Susanna F.},
  title =	{{On the Automatability of Tree-Like k-DNF Resolution}},
  booktitle =	{40th Computational Complexity Conference (CCC 2025)},
  pages =	{14:1--14:21},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-379-9},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2025},
  volume =	{339},
  editor =	{Srinivasan, Srikanth},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2025.14},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-237081},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2025.14},
  annote =	{Keywords: Proof Complexity, Tree-like k-DNF Resolution, Automatability}
}
Document
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.SAT.2024.7
MaxSAT Resolution with Inclusion Redundancy

Authors: Ilario Bonacina, Maria Luisa Bonet, and Massimo Lauria

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

Abstract
Popular redundancy rules for SAT are not necessarily sound for MaxSAT. The works of [Bonacina-Bonet-Buss-Lauria'24] and [Ihalainen-Berg-Järvisalo'22] proposed ways to adapt them, but required specific encodings and more sophisticated checks during proof verification. Here, we propose a different way to adapt redundancy rules from SAT to MaxSAT. Our rules do not require specific encodings, their correctness is simpler to check, but they are slightly less expressive. However, the proposed redundancy rules, when added to MaxSAT-Resolution, are already strong enough to capture Branch-and-bound algorithms, enable short proofs of the optimal cost of notable principles (e.g., the Pigeonhole Principle and the Parity Principle), and allow to break simple symmetries (e.g., XOR-ification does not make formulas harder).
Cite as

Ilario Bonacina, Maria Luisa Bonet, and Massimo Lauria. MaxSAT Resolution with Inclusion Redundancy. In 27th International Conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing (SAT 2024). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 305, pp. 7:1-7:15, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2024)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{bonacina_et_al:LIPIcs.SAT.2024.7,
  author =	{Bonacina, Ilario and Bonet, Maria Luisa and Lauria, Massimo},
  title =	{{MaxSAT Resolution with Inclusion Redundancy}},
  booktitle =	{27th International Conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing (SAT 2024)},
  pages =	{7:1--7:15},
  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.2024.7},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-205298},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.SAT.2024.7},
  annote =	{Keywords: MaxSAT, Redundancy, MaxSAT resolution, Branch-and-bound, Pigeonhole principle, Parity Principle}
}
Document
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.ITCS.2024.48
Proving Unsatisfiability with Hitting Formulas

Authors: Yuval Filmus, Edward A. Hirsch, Artur Riazanov, Alexander Smal, and Marc Vinyals

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 287, 15th Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conference (ITCS 2024)

Abstract
A hitting formula is a set of Boolean clauses such that any two of the clauses cannot be simultaneously falsified. Hitting formulas have been studied in many different contexts at least since [Iwama, 1989] and, based on experimental evidence, Peitl and Szeider [Tomás Peitl and Stefan Szeider, 2022] conjectured that unsatisfiable hitting formulas are among the hardest for resolution. Using the fact that hitting formulas are easy to check for satisfiability we make them the foundation of a new static proof system {{rmHitting}}: a refutation of a CNF in {{rmHitting}} is an unsatisfiable hitting formula such that each of its clauses is a weakening of a clause of the refuted CNF. Comparing this system to resolution and other proof systems is equivalent to studying the hardness of hitting formulas. Our first result is that {{rmHitting}} is quasi-polynomially simulated by tree-like resolution, which means that hitting formulas cannot be exponentially hard for resolution and partially refutes the conjecture of Peitl and Szeider. We show that tree-like resolution and {{rmHitting}} are quasi-polynomially separated, while for resolution, this question remains open. For a system that is only quasi-polynomially stronger than tree-like resolution, {{rmHitting}} is surprisingly difficult to polynomially simulate in another proof system. Using the ideas of Raz-Shpilka’s polynomial identity testing for noncommutative circuits [Raz and Shpilka, 2005] we show that {{rmHitting}} is p-simulated by {{rmExtended {{rmFrege}}}}, but we conjecture that much more efficient simulations exist. As a byproduct, we show that a number of static (semi)algebraic systems are verifiable in deterministic polynomial time. We consider multiple extensions of {{rmHitting}}, and in particular a proof system {{{rmHitting}}(⊕)} related to the {{{rmRes}}(⊕)} proof system for which no superpolynomial-size lower bounds are known. {{{rmHitting}}(⊕)} p-simulates the tree-like version of {{{rmRes}}(⊕)} and is at least quasi-polynomially stronger. We show that formulas expressing the non-existence of perfect matchings in the graphs K_{n,n+2} are exponentially hard for {{{rmHitting}}(⊕)} via a reduction to the partition bound for communication complexity. See the full version of the paper for the proofs. They are omitted in this Extended Abstract.
Cite as

Yuval Filmus, Edward A. Hirsch, Artur Riazanov, Alexander Smal, and Marc Vinyals. Proving Unsatisfiability with Hitting Formulas. In 15th Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conference (ITCS 2024). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 287, pp. 48:1-48:20, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2024)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{filmus_et_al:LIPIcs.ITCS.2024.48,
  author =	{Filmus, Yuval and Hirsch, Edward A. and Riazanov, Artur and Smal, Alexander and Vinyals, Marc},
  title =	{{Proving Unsatisfiability with Hitting Formulas}},
  booktitle =	{15th Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conference (ITCS 2024)},
  pages =	{48:1--48:20},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-309-6},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2024},
  volume =	{287},
  editor =	{Guruswami, Venkatesan},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.ITCS.2024.48},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-195762},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.ITCS.2024.48},
  annote =	{Keywords: hitting formulas, polynomial identity testing, query complexity}
}
Document
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.MFCS.2022.23
On Vanishing Sums of Roots of Unity in Polynomial Calculus and Sum-Of-Squares

Authors: Ilario Bonacina, Nicola Galesi, and Massimo Lauria

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 241, 47th International Symposium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science (MFCS 2022)

Abstract
Vanishing sums of roots of unity can be seen as a natural generalization of knapsack from Boolean variables to variables taking values over the roots of unity. We show that these sums are hard to prove for polynomial calculus and for sum-of-squares, both in terms of degree and size.
Cite as

Ilario Bonacina, Nicola Galesi, and Massimo Lauria. On Vanishing Sums of Roots of Unity in Polynomial Calculus and Sum-Of-Squares. In 47th International Symposium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science (MFCS 2022). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 241, pp. 23:1-23:15, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2022)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{bonacina_et_al:LIPIcs.MFCS.2022.23,
  author =	{Bonacina, Ilario and Galesi, Nicola and Lauria, Massimo},
  title =	{{On Vanishing Sums of Roots of Unity in Polynomial Calculus and Sum-Of-Squares}},
  booktitle =	{47th International Symposium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science (MFCS 2022)},
  pages =	{23:1--23:15},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-256-3},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2022},
  volume =	{241},
  editor =	{Szeider, Stefan and Ganian, Robert and Silva, Alexandra},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.MFCS.2022.23},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-168211},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.MFCS.2022.23},
  annote =	{Keywords: polynomial calculus, sum-of-squares, roots of unity, knapsack}
}
Document
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2021.40
The Power of Negative Reasoning

Authors: Susanna F. de Rezende, Massimo Lauria, Jakob Nordström, and Dmitry Sokolov

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 200, 36th Computational Complexity Conference (CCC 2021)

Abstract
Semialgebraic proof systems have been studied extensively in proof complexity since the late 1990s to understand the power of Gröbner basis computations, linear and semidefinite programming hierarchies, and other methods. Such proof systems are defined alternately with only the original variables of the problem and with special formal variables for positive and negative literals, but there seems to have been no study how these different definitions affect the power of the proof systems. We show for Nullstellensatz, polynomial calculus, Sherali-Adams, and sums-of-squares that adding formal variables for negative literals makes the proof systems exponentially stronger, with respect to the number of terms in the proofs. These separations are witnessed by CNF formulas that are easy for resolution, which establishes that polynomial calculus, Sherali-Adams, and sums-of-squares cannot efficiently simulate resolution without having access to variables for negative literals.
Cite as

Susanna F. de Rezende, Massimo Lauria, Jakob Nordström, and Dmitry Sokolov. The Power of Negative Reasoning. In 36th Computational Complexity Conference (CCC 2021). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 200, pp. 40:1-40:24, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2021)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{derezende_et_al:LIPIcs.CCC.2021.40,
  author =	{de Rezende, Susanna F. and Lauria, Massimo and Nordstr\"{o}m, Jakob and Sokolov, Dmitry},
  title =	{{The Power of Negative Reasoning}},
  booktitle =	{36th Computational Complexity Conference (CCC 2021)},
  pages =	{40:1--40:24},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-193-1},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2021},
  volume =	{200},
  editor =	{Kabanets, Valentine},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2021.40},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-143140},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2021.40},
  annote =	{Keywords: Proof complexity, Polynomial calculus, Nullstellensatz, Sums-of-squares, Sherali-Adams}
}
Document
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2019.6
Resolution and the Binary Encoding of Combinatorial Principles

Authors: Stefan Dantchev, Nicola Galesi, and Barnaby Martin

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 137, 34th Computational Complexity Conference (CCC 2019)

Abstract
Res(s) is an extension of Resolution working on s-DNFs. We prove tight n^{Omega(k)} lower bounds for the size of refutations of the binary version of the k-Clique Principle in Res(o(log log n)). Our result improves that of Lauria, Pudlák et al. [Massimo Lauria et al., 2017] who proved the lower bound for Res(1), i.e. Resolution. The exact complexity of the (unary) k-Clique Principle in Resolution is unknown. To prove the lower bound we do not use any form of the Switching Lemma [Nathan Segerlind et al., 2004], instead we apply a recursive argument specific for binary encodings. Since for the k-Clique and other principles lower bounds in Resolution for the unary version follow from lower bounds in Res(log n) for their binary version we start a systematic study of the complexity of proofs in Resolution-based systems for families of contradictions given in the binary encoding. We go on to consider the binary version of the weak Pigeonhole Principle Bin-PHP^m_n for m>n. Using the the same recursive approach we prove the new result that for any delta>0, Bin-PHP^m_n requires proofs of size 2^{n^{1-delta}} in Res(s) for s=o(log^{1/2}n). Our lower bound is almost optimal since for m >= 2^{sqrt{n log n}} there are quasipolynomial size proofs of Bin-PHP^m_n in Res(log n). Finally we propose a general theory in which to compare the complexity of refuting the binary and unary versions of large classes of combinatorial principles, namely those expressible as first order formulae in Pi_2-form and with no finite model.
Cite as

Stefan Dantchev, Nicola Galesi, and Barnaby Martin. Resolution and the Binary Encoding of Combinatorial Principles. In 34th Computational Complexity Conference (CCC 2019). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 137, pp. 6:1-6:25, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2019)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{dantchev_et_al:LIPIcs.CCC.2019.6,
  author =	{Dantchev, Stefan and Galesi, Nicola and Martin, Barnaby},
  title =	{{Resolution and the Binary Encoding of Combinatorial Principles}},
  booktitle =	{34th Computational Complexity Conference (CCC 2019)},
  pages =	{6:1--6:25},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-116-0},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2019},
  volume =	{137},
  editor =	{Shpilka, Amir},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2019.6},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-108287},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2019.6},
  annote =	{Keywords: Proof complexity, k-DNF resolution, binary encodings, Clique and Pigeonhole principle}
}
Document
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2017.2
Graph Colouring is Hard for Algorithms Based on Hilbert's Nullstellensatz and Gröbner Bases

Authors: Massimo Lauria and Jakob Nordström

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 79, 32nd Computational Complexity Conference (CCC 2017)

Abstract
We consider the graph k-colouring problem encoded as a set of polynomial equations in the standard way. We prove that there are bounded-degree graphs that do not have legal k-colourings but for which the polynomial calculus proof system defined in [Clegg et al. '96, Alekhnovich et al. '02] requires linear degree, and hence exponential size, to establish this fact. This implies a linear degree lower bound for any algorithms based on Gröbner bases solving graph k-colouring} using this encoding. The same bound applies also for the algorithm studied in a sequence of papers [De Loera et al. '08, '09, '11, '15] based on Hilbert's Nullstellensatz proofs for a slightly different encoding, thus resolving an open problem mentioned, e.g., in [De Loera et al. '09] and [Li et al. '16]. We obtain our results by combining the polynomial calculus degree lower bound for functional pigeonhole principle (FPHP) formulas over bounded-degree bipartite graphs in [Miksa and Nordström '15] with a reduction from FPHP to k-colouring derivable by polynomial calculus in constant degree.
Cite as

Massimo Lauria and Jakob Nordström. Graph Colouring is Hard for Algorithms Based on Hilbert's Nullstellensatz and Gröbner Bases. In 32nd Computational Complexity Conference (CCC 2017). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 79, pp. 2:1-2:20, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2017)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{lauria_et_al:LIPIcs.CCC.2017.2,
  author =	{Lauria, Massimo and Nordstr\"{o}m, Jakob},
  title =	{{Graph Colouring is Hard for Algorithms Based on Hilbert's Nullstellensatz and Gr\"{o}bner Bases}},
  booktitle =	{32nd Computational Complexity Conference (CCC 2017)},
  pages =	{2:1--2:20},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-040-8},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2017},
  volume =	{79},
  editor =	{O'Donnell, Ryan},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2017.2},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-75410},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2017.2},
  annote =	{Keywords: proof complexity, Nullstellensatz, Gr\"{o}bner basis, polynomial calculus, cutting planes, colouring}
}
Document
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.STACS.2016.35
Semantic Versus Syntactic Cutting Planes

Authors: Yuval Filmus, Pavel Hrubeš, and Massimo Lauria

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

Abstract
In this paper, we compare the strength of the semantic and syntactic version of the cutting planes proof system. First, we show that the lower bound technique of Pudlák applies also to semantic cutting planes: the proof system has feasible interpolation via monotone real circuits, which gives an exponential lower bound on lengths of semantic cutting planes refutations. Second, we show that semantic refutations are stronger than syntactic ones. In particular, we give a formula for which any refutation in syntactic cutting planes requires exponential length, while there is a polynomial length refutation in semantic cutting planes. In other words, syntactic cutting planes does not p-simulate semantic cutting planes. We also give two incompatible integer inequalities which require exponential length refutation in syntactic cutting planes. Finally, we pose the following problem, which arises in connection with semantic inference of arity larger than two: can every multivariate non-decreasing real function be expressed as a composition of non-decreasing real functions in two variables?
Cite as

Yuval Filmus, Pavel Hrubeš, and Massimo Lauria. Semantic Versus Syntactic Cutting Planes. In 33rd Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS 2016). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 47, pp. 35:1-35:13, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2016)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{filmus_et_al:LIPIcs.STACS.2016.35,
  author =	{Filmus, Yuval and Hrube\v{s}, Pavel and Lauria, Massimo},
  title =	{{Semantic Versus Syntactic Cutting Planes}},
  booktitle =	{33rd Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS 2016)},
  pages =	{35:1--35:13},
  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.2016.35},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-57367},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.STACS.2016.35},
  annote =	{Keywords: proof complexity, cutting planes, lower bounds}
}
Document
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2015.448
Tight Size-Degree Bounds for Sums-of-Squares Proofs

Authors: Massimo Lauria and Jakob Nordström

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 33, 30th Conference on Computational Complexity (CCC 2015)

Abstract
We exhibit families of 4-CNF formulas over n variables that have sums-of-squares (SOS) proofs of unsatisfiability of degree (a.k.a. rank) d but require SOS proofs of size n^Omega(d) for values of d = d(n) from constant all the way up to n^delta for some universal constant delta. This shows that the n^O(d) running time obtained by using the Lasserre semidefinite programming relaxations to find degree-d SOS proofs is optimal up to constant factors in the exponent. We establish this result by combining NP-reductions expressible as low-degree SOS derivations with the idea of relativizing CNF formulas in [Krajicek '04] and [Dantchev and Riis '03], and then applying a restriction argument as in [Atserias, Müller, and Oliva '13] and [Atserias, Lauria, and Nordstrom '14]. This yields a generic method of amplifying SOS degree lower bounds to size lower bounds, and also generalizes the approach in [ALN14] to obtain size lower bounds for the proof systems resolution, polynomial calculus, and Sherali-Adams from lower bounds on width, degree, and rank, respectively.
Cite as

Massimo Lauria and Jakob Nordström. Tight Size-Degree Bounds for Sums-of-Squares Proofs. In 30th Conference on Computational Complexity (CCC 2015). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 33, pp. 448-466, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2015)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{lauria_et_al:LIPIcs.CCC.2015.448,
  author =	{Lauria, Massimo and Nordstr\"{o}m, Jakob},
  title =	{{Tight Size-Degree Bounds for Sums-of-Squares Proofs}},
  booktitle =	{30th Conference on Computational Complexity (CCC 2015)},
  pages =	{448--466},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-939897-81-1},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2015},
  volume =	{33},
  editor =	{Zuckerman, David},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2015.448},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-50736},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2015.448},
  annote =	{Keywords: Proof complexity, resolution, Lasserre, Positivstellensatz, sums-of-squares, SOS, semidefinite programming, size, degree, rank, clique, lower bound}
}
Document
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.STACS.2014.300
From Small Space to Small Width in Resolution

Authors: Yuval Filmus, Massimo Lauria, Mladen Miksa, Jakob Nordström, and Marc Vinyals

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 25, 31st International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS 2014)

Abstract
In 2003, Atserias and Dalmau resolved a major open question about the resolution proof system by establishing that the space complexity of formulas is always an upper bound on the width needed to refute them. Their proof is beautiful but somewhat mysterious in that it relies heavily on tools from finite model theory. We give an alternative, completely elementary, proof that works by simple syntactic manipulations of resolution refutations. As a by-product, we develop a "black-box" technique for proving space lower bounds via a "static" complexity measure that works against any resolution refutation -- previous techniques have been inherently adaptive. We conclude by showing that the related question for polynomial calculus (i.e., whether space is an upper bound on degree) seems unlikely to be resolvable by similar methods.
Cite as

Yuval Filmus, Massimo Lauria, Mladen Miksa, Jakob Nordström, and Marc Vinyals. From Small Space to Small Width in Resolution. In 31st International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS 2014). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 25, pp. 300-311, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2014)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{filmus_et_al:LIPIcs.STACS.2014.300,
  author =	{Filmus, Yuval and Lauria, Massimo and Miksa, Mladen and Nordstr\"{o}m, Jakob and Vinyals, Marc},
  title =	{{From Small Space to Small Width in Resolution}},
  booktitle =	{31st International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS 2014)},
  pages =	{300--311},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-939897-65-1},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2014},
  volume =	{25},
  editor =	{Mayr, Ernst W. and Portier, Natacha},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.STACS.2014.300},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-44661},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.STACS.2014.300},
  annote =	{Keywords: proof complexity, resolution, width, space, polynomial calculus, PCR}
}
Document
DOI: 10.4230/DagSemProc.10061.4
Hardness of Parameterized Resolution

Authors: Olaf Beyersdorff, Nicola Galesi, and Massimo Lauria

Published in: Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings, Volume 10061, Circuits, Logic, and Games (2010)

Abstract
Parameterized Resolution and, moreover, a general framework for parameterized proof complexity was introduced by Dantchev, Martin, and Szeider (FOCS'07). In that paper, Dantchev et al. show a complexity gap in tree-like Parameterized Resolution for propositional formulas arising from translations of first-order principles. We broadly investigate Parameterized Resolution obtaining the following main results: 1) We introduce a purely combinatorial approach to obtain lower bounds to the proof size in tree-like Parameterized Resolution. For this we devise a new asymmetric Prover-Delayer game which characterizes proofs in (parameterized) tree-like Resolution. By exhibiting good Delayer strategies we then show lower bounds for the pigeonhole principle as well as the order principle. 2) Interpreting a well-known FPT algorithm for vertex cover as a DPLL procedure for Parameterized Resolution, we devise a proof search algorithm for Parameterized Resolution and show that tree-like Parameterized Resolution allows short refutations of all parameterized contradictions given as bounded-width CNF's. 3) We answer a question posed by Dantchev, Martin, and Szeider showing that dag-like Parameterized Resolution is not fpt-bounded. We obtain this result by proving that the pigeonhole principle requires proofs of size $n^{Omega(k)}$ in dag-like Parameterized Resolution. For this lower bound we use a different Prover-Delayer game which was developed for Resolution by Pudlák.
Cite as

Olaf Beyersdorff, Nicola Galesi, and Massimo Lauria. Hardness of Parameterized Resolution. In Circuits, Logic, and Games. Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings, Volume 10061, pp. 1-28, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2010)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{beyersdorff_et_al:DagSemProc.10061.4,
  author =	{Beyersdorff, Olaf and Galesi, Nicola and Lauria, Massimo},
  title =	{{Hardness of Parameterized Resolution}},
  booktitle =	{Circuits, Logic, and Games},
  pages =	{1--28},
  series =	{Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings (DagSemProc)},
  ISSN =	{1862-4405},
  year =	{2010},
  volume =	{10061},
  editor =	{Benjamin Rossman and Thomas Schwentick and Denis Th\'{e}rien and Heribert Vollmer},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/DagSemProc.10061.4},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-25254},
  doi =		{10.4230/DagSemProc.10061.4},
  annote =	{Keywords: Proof complexity, parameterized complexity, Resolution, Prover-Delayer Games}
}
  • Refine by Type
  • 14 Document/PDF
  • 4 Document/HTML

  • Refine by Publication Year
  • 4 2025
  • 2 2024
  • 1 2022
  • 1 2021
  • 1 2019
  • Show More...

  • Refine by Author
  • 9 Lauria, Massimo
  • 4 Nordström, Jakob
  • 3 Bonacina, Ilario
  • 3 Filmus, Yuval
  • 3 Galesi, Nicola
  • Show More...

  • Refine by Series/Journal
  • 13 LIPIcs
  • 1 DagSemProc

  • Refine by Classification
  • 7 Theory of computation → Proof complexity
  • 2 Computing methodologies → Representation of polynomials
  • 2 Theory of computation → Complexity theory and logic
  • 1 Theory of computation
  • 1 Theory of computation → Complexity classes

  • Refine by Keyword
  • 4 Proof complexity
  • 4 proof complexity
  • 3 polynomial calculus
  • 2 MaxSAT
  • 2 Nullstellensatz
  • Show More...

Any Issues?
X

Feedback on the Current Page

CAPTCHA

Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted to Dagstuhl Publishing

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail
© 2023-2026 Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH About DROPS Imprint Privacy Contact