Advertisement

Hard Instances of Algorithms and Proof Systems

  • Yijia Chen
  • Jörg Flum
  • Moritz Müller
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7318)

Abstract

If the class Taut of tautologies of propositional logic has no almost optimal algorithm, then every algorithm \(\mathbb{A}\) deciding Taut has a polynomial time computable sequence witnessing that \(\mathbb{A}\) is not almost optimal. We show that this result extends to every \(\Pi_t^p\)-complete problem with t ≥ 1; however, assuming the Measure Hypothesis, there is a problem which has no almost optimal algorithm but is decided by an algorithm without such a hard sequence. Assuming that a problem Q has an almost optimal algorithm, we analyze whether every algorithm deciding Q, which is not almost optimal algorithm, has a hard sequence.

Keywords

Optimal Algorithm Polynomial Time Turing Machine Polynomial Time Algorithm Propositional Logic 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Ben-David, S., Gringauze, A.: On the existence of optimal propositional proof systems and oracle-relativized propositional logic. Electronic Colloquium on Computational Complexity (ECCC), Technical Report TR98-021 (1998)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Beyersdorff, O.: On the correspondence between arithmetic theories and propositional proof systems - a survey. Mathematical Logic Quarterly 55(2), 116–137 (2009)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chen, Y., Flum, J.: On p-Optimal Proof Systems and Logics for PTIME. In: Abramsky, S., Gavoille, C., Kirchner, C., Meyer auf der Heide, F., Spirakis, P.G. (eds.) ICALP 2010, Part II. LNCS, vol. 6199, pp. 321–332. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chen, Y., Flum, J.: Listings and logics. In: Proceedings of the 26th Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS 2011), pp. 165–174. IEEE Computer Society (2011)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hitchcock, J.M., Pavan, A.: Hardness hypotheses, derandomization, and circuit complexity. In: Lodaya, K., Mahajan, M. (eds.) FSTTCS 2004. LNCS, vol. 3328, pp. 336–347. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Krajíc̆ek, J.: Bounded arithmetic, propositional logic, and complexity theory. Cambridge University Press (1995)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Krajíc̆ek, J., Pudlák, P.: Propositional proof systems, the consistency of first order theories and the complexity of computations. The Journal of Symbolic Logic 54, 1063–1088 (1989)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Köbler, J., Messner, J.: Complete problems for promise classes by optimal proof systems for test sets. In: Proceedings of the 13th IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity (CCC 1998), pp. 132–140 (1998)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mayordomo, E.: Almost every set in exponential time is P-bi-immune. Theoretical Computer Science 136(2), 487–506 (1994)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Messner, J.: On the Simulation Order of Proof Systems. PhD Thesis, Univ. Erlangen (2000)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Monroe, H.: Speedup for natural problems and noncomputability. Theoretical Computer Science 412(4-5), 478–481 (2011)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sadowski, Z.: On an optimal propositional proof system and the structure of easy subsets of TAUT. Theoretical Computer Science 288(1), 181–193 (2002)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Stockmeyer, L.: The Complexity of Decision Problems in Automata Theory. PhD. Thesis, MIT (1974)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yijia Chen
    • 1
  • Jörg Flum
    • 2
  • Moritz Müller
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringShanghai Jiao Tong UniversityShanghaiChina
  2. 2.Abteilung für mathematische LogikAlbert-Ludwigs-Universität FreiburgFreiburgGermany
  3. 3.Kurt Gödel Research Center for Mathematical LogicWienAustria

Personalised recommendations