![]() |
![]() |
Petra Berenbrink, Benjamin Monmege
Stabbing Planes (also known as Branch and Cut) is a proof system introduced very recently which, informally speaking, extends the DPLL method by branching on integer linear inequalities instead of single variables. The techniques known so far to prove size and depth lower bounds for Stabbing Planes are generalizations of those used for the Cutting Planes proof system. For size lower bounds these are established by monotone circuit arguments, while for depth these are found via communication complexity and protection. As such these bounds apply for lifted versions of combinatorial statements. Rank lower bounds for Cutting Planes are also obtained by geometric arguments called protection lemmas. In this work we introduce two new geometric approaches to prove size/depth lower bounds in Stabbing Planes working for any formula: (1) the antichain method, relying on Sperner's Theorem and (2) the covering method which uses results on essential coverings of the boolean cube by linear polynomials, which in turn relies on Alon's combinatorial Nullenstellensatz. We demonstrate their use on classes of combinatorial principles such as the Pigeonhole principle, the Tseitin contradictions and the Linear Ordering Principle. By the first method we prove almost linear size lower bounds and optimal logarithmic depth lower bounds for the Pigeonhole principle and analogous lower bounds for the Tseitin contradictions over the complete graph and for the Linear Ordering Principle. By […]
We study first-order logic (FO) over the structure consisting of finite words over some alphabet $A$, together with the (non-contiguous) subword ordering. In terms of decidability of quantifier alternation fragments, this logic is well-understood: If every word is available as a constant, then even the $\Sigma_1$ (i.e., existential) fragment is undecidable, already for binary alphabets $A$. However, up to now, little is known about the expressiveness of the quantifier alternation fragments: For example, the undecidability proof for the existential fragment relies on Diophantine equations and only shows that recursively enumerable languages over a singleton alphabet (and some auxiliary predicates) are definable. We show that if $|A|\ge 3$, then a relation is definable in the existential fragment over $A$ with constants if and only if it is recursively enumerable. This implies characterizations for all fragments $\Sigma_i$: If $|A|\ge 3$, then a relation is definable in $\Sigma_i$ if and only if it belongs to the $i$-th level of the arithmetical hierarchy. In addition, our result yields an analogous complete description of the $\Sigma_i$-fragments for $i\ge 2$ of the pure logic, where the words of $A^*$ are not available as constants.
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.
The Skolem problem is a long-standing open problem in linear dynamical systems: can a linear recurrence sequence (LRS) ever reach 0 from a given initial configuration? Similarly, the positivity problem asks whether the LRS stays positive from an initial configuration. Deciding Skolem (or positivity) has been open for half a century: the best known decidability results are for LRS with special properties (e.g., low order recurrences). But these problems are easier for "uninitialized" variants, where the initial configuration is not fixed but can vary arbitrarily: checking if there is an initial configuration from which the LRS stays positive can be decided in polynomial time (Tiwari in 2004, Braverman in 2006). In this paper, we consider problems that lie between the initialized and uninitialized variants. More precisely, we ask if 0 (resp. negative numbers) can be avoided from every initial configuration in a neighborhood of a given initial configuration. This can be considered as a robust variant of the Skolem (resp. positivity) problem. We show that these problems lie at the frontier of decidability: if the neighbourhood is given as part of the input, then robust Skolem and robust positivity are Diophantine hard, i.e., solving either would entail major breakthroughs in Diophantine approximations, as happens for (non-robust) positivity. However, if one asks whether such a neighbourhood exists, then the problems turn out to be decidable with PSPACE complexity. Our […]
Every language recognized by a non-deterministic finite automaton can be recognized by a deterministic automaton, at the cost of a potential increase of the number of states, which in the worst case can go from $n$ states to $2^n$ states. In this article, we investigate this classical result in a probabilistic setting where we take a deterministic automaton with $n$ states uniformly at random and add just one random transition. These automata are almost deterministic in the sense that only one state has a non-deterministic choice when reading an input letter. In our model, each state has a fixed probability to be final. We prove that for any $d\geq 1$, with non-negligible probability the minimal (deterministic) automaton of the language recognized by such an automaton has more than $n^d$ states; as a byproduct, the expected size of its minimal automaton grows faster than any polynomial. Our result also holds when each state is final with some probability that depends on $n$, as long as it is not too close to $0$ and $1$, at distance at least $\Omega(\frac1{\sqrt{n}})$ to be precise, therefore allowing models with a sublinear number of final states in expectation.