We develop a method for establishing the independence of some Zf(a)-formulas from S'2(a). In particular, we show that T'2(a) is not VZ*(a)-conservative over S'2(a). We characterize the Z^-definable functions of T2 as being precisely the functions definable as projections of polynomial local search (PLS) problems. Although it is still an open problem whether bounded arithmetic S2 is finitely axiomatizable, considerable progress on this question has been made: S2 +1 is V2f+1-conservative over T'2 [3], but it is not V2!f+2-conservative unless £f+2 = Ylf+2 [10], and in addition, T2 is not VZf+1-conservative over S'2 unless LogSpace s? = Af+1 [8]. In particular, S2 is not finitely axiomatizable provided that the polynomial-time hierarchy does not collapse [10]. For the theory S2(a) these results imply (with some additional arguments) absolute results: S'2 + (a) is V2f+,(a)-conservative but not VZf+2(a)-conservative over T'2(a), and T'2(a) is not VZf+i(c*)-conservative over S'2(a). Here a represents a new uninterpreted predicate symbol adjoined to the language of arithmetic which may be used in induction formulas; from a computer science perspective, a represents an oracle. In this paper we pursue this line of investigation further by showing that T'2(a) is also not V2f(a)-conservative over S'2(a). This was known for / = 1, 2 by [9,17] (see also [2]), and our present proof uses a version of the pigeonhole principle similar to the arguments in [2,9]. Perhaps more importantly, we formulate a general method (Theorem 2.6) which can be used to show the unprovability of other 2f(a)-formulas from S'2(a). Our methods are analogous in spirit to the proof strategy of [8]: prove a witnessing theorem to show that provability of a Zf+1(a)-formula A in S'2(a) implies that it is witnessed by a function of certain complexity and then employ techniques of boolean complexity to construct an oracle a such that the formula A cannot be witnessed by a function of the prescribed complexity. Our formula A shall be 2f(a) and thus we can use the original witnessing theorem of [2]. The boolean complexity used is the same as in [8], namely Hastad's switching lemmas [6].

The bounded arithmetic theory S 2 is finitely axiomatized if and only if the polynomial hierarchy provably collapses. If T 2 equals S then T 2 is equal to S 2 and proves that the polynomial time hierarchy collapses to # , and, in fact, to the Boolean hierarchy over # and to # i+1 /poly .

We consider tautologies formed from a pseudo-random number generator, dened in Krajcek [12] and in Alekhnovich et.al. [2]. We explain a strategy of proving their hardness for EF via a conjecture about bounded arithmetic formulated in Krajcek [12]. Further we give a purely nitary statement, in a form of a hardness condition posed on a function, equivalent to the conjecture. This is accompanied by a brief explanation, aimed at non-logicians, of the relation between propositional proof complexity and bounded arithmetic. It is a fundamental problem of mathematical logic to decide if tautologies can be inferred in propositional calculus in substantially fewer steps than it takes to check all possible truth assignments. This is closely related to the famous P/NP problem of Cook [3]. By propositional calculus I mean any text-book system based on a nite number of inference rules and axiom schemes that is sound and complete. The qualication substantially less means that the nu...

This is a survey of basic facts about bounded arithmetic and about the relationships between bounded arithmetic and propositional proof complexity. We introduce the theories S 2 of bounded arithmetic and characterize their proof theoretic strength and their provably total functions in terms of the polynomial time hierarchy. We discuss other axiomatizations of bounded arithmetic, such as minimization axioms. It is shown that the bounded arithmetic hierarchy collapses if and only if bounded arithmetic proves that the polynomial hierarchy collapses. We discuss Frege and extended Frege proof length, and the two translations from bounded arithmetic proofs into propositional proofs. We present some theorems on bounding the lengths of propositional interpolants in terms of cut-free proof length and in terms of the lengths of resolution refutations. We then define the RazborovRudich notion of natural proofs of P NP and discuss Razborov's theorem that certain fragments of bounded arithmetic cannot prove superpolynomial lower bounds on circuit size, assuming a strong cryptographic conjecture. Finally, a complete presentation of a proof of the theorem of Razborov is given. 1 Review of Computational Complexity 1.1 Feasibility This article will be concerned with various "feasible" forms of computability and of provability. For something to be feasibly computable, it must be computable in practice in the real world, not merely e#ectively computable in the sense of being recursively computable.

Abstract IPV+ is IPV (which is essentially IS12) with polynomial-induction on \Sigma b+1-formulas disjoined with arbitrary formulas in which the induction variable does not occur. This paper proves that IPV+ is sound and complete with respect to Kripke structures in which every world is a model of CPV (essentially S12). Thus IPV is sound with respect to such structures. In this setting, this is a strengthening of the usual completeness and soundness theorems for first-order intuitionistic theories. Using Kripke structures a conservation result is proved for PV1 over IPV.

This survey discusses theories of bounded arithmetic, growth rates of definable functions, natural proofs, interpolation theorems, connections to cryptography, and the difficulty of obtaining independence results.

This paper presents a new proof of the characterization of the provably recursive functions of the fragments I# n of Peano arithmetic. The proof method also characterizes the # k -definable functions of I# n and of theories axiomatized by transfinite induction on ordinals. The proofs are completely proof-theoretic and use the method of witness functions and witness oracles.

this paper. 2 General orderings This section states a couple results about general orderings. By a "general ordering" we mean any order defined by a # 1 -formula; by comparison the results of sections 3 and 4 concern specific natural well-orderings based on ordinal notations

this paper is to survey some results which should give an idea to an outsider of what is going on in this eld and explain motivations for the studied problems. We recommend [3, 5, 15, 11, 34] to those who want to learn more about this subject

We firstly survey several forms of Herbrand's theorem. What is commonly called "Herbrand's theorem" in many textbooks is actually a very simple form of Herbrand's theorem which applies only to ##-formulas; but the original statement of Herbrand's theorem applied to arbitrary first-order formulas. We give a direct proof, based on cutelimination, of what is essentially Herbrand's original theorem. The "nocounterexample theorems" recently used in bounded and Peano arithmetic are immediate corollaries of this form of Herbrand's theorem.