Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Cutting plane versus frege proof systems

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Computer Science Logic (CSL 1990)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 533))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

The cutting plane proof system for proving the unsatisfiability of propositional formulas in conjunctive normalform is based on a natural representation of formulas as systems of integer inequalities. We show: Frege proof systems p-simulate the cutting plane proof system. This strengthens a result in [5], that extended Frege proof systems (which are believed to be stronger than Frege proof systems) p-simulate the cutting plane proof system. Our proof is based on the techniques introduced in [2].

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature

  1. M. Ajtai, The complexity of the pigeonhole principle, Proceedings of the 29th Symposium on foundations of Computer Science (1988) 346–355.

    Google Scholar 

  2. S. Buss, Polynomial size proofs of the propositional pigeonhole principle, Journ. Symb. Logic 52 (1987) 916–927.

    Google Scholar 

  3. C.-L. Chang, R.C.-T. Lee, Symbolic logic and mechanical theorem proving, Academic Press (1973).

    Google Scholar 

  4. P. Clote, Bounded arithmetic and computational complexity, Proceedings Structure in Complexity (1990) 186–199.

    Google Scholar 

  5. W. Cook, C.R. Coullard, G. Turan, On the complexity of cutting plane proofs, Discr. Appl. Math. 18 (1987) 25–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. S.A. Cook, R.A. Reckhow, The relative efficiency of propositional proof systems, Journ. Sym. Logic 44 (1979) 36–50.

    Google Scholar 

  7. A. Haken, The intractability of resolution, Theor. Comp. Sci. 39 (1985) 297–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. J.N. Hooker, Generalized resolution and cutting planes, Annals of Oper. Res. 12 (1988) 217–239.

    Google Scholar 

  9. B. Krishnamurthy, Short proofs for tricky formulas, Acta Informatica 22 (1985) 253–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. P. Pudlak, Ramsey's theorem in bounded arithmetic, Workshop in Comp. Sci. Logic 1990, Springer LNCS, submitted.

    Google Scholar 

  11. R.M. Smullyan, First-order Logic, Springer Verlag 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  12. A. Goerdt, Cutting plane versus Frege proof systems, Technical report, University of Duisburg.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Fachbereich Mathematik/Praktische Informatik, Universität-GH-Duisburg, Lotharstraße 65, D-4100, Duisburg, Germany

    Andreas Goerdt

Authors
  1. Andreas Goerdt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Egon Börger Hans Kleine Büning Michael M. Richter Wolfgang Schönfeld

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1991 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Goerdt, A. (1991). Cutting plane versus frege proof systems. In: Börger, E., Kleine Büning, H., Richter, M.M., Schönfeld, W. (eds) Computer Science Logic. CSL 1990. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 533. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-54487-9_59

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-54487-9_59

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-54487-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-38401-4

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation