Results 1  10
of
34
The relative efficiency of propositional proof systems
 Journal of Symbolic Logic
, 1979
"... http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, noncom ..."
Abstract

Cited by 332 (5 self)
 Add to MetaCart
http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, noncommercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
The Complexity Of Propositional Proofs
 Bulletin of Symbolic Logic
, 1995
"... This paper of Tseitin is a landmark as the first to give nontrivial lower bounds for propositional proofs; although it predates the first papers on ..."
Abstract

Cited by 105 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
This paper of Tseitin is a landmark as the first to give nontrivial lower bounds for propositional proofs; although it predates the first papers on
Controlled Integrations of the Cut Rule into Connection Tableau Calculi
"... In this paper techniques are developed and compared which increase the inferential power of tableau systems for classical firstorder logic. The mechanisms are formulated in the framework of connection tableaux, which is an amalgamation of the connection method and the tableau calculus, and a genera ..."
Abstract

Cited by 61 (3 self)
 Add to MetaCart
In this paper techniques are developed and compared which increase the inferential power of tableau systems for classical firstorder logic. The mechanisms are formulated in the framework of connection tableaux, which is an amalgamation of the connection method and the tableau calculus, and a generalization of model elimination. Since connection tableau calculi are among the weakest proof systems with respect to proof compactness, and the (backward) cut rule is not suitable for the firstorder case, we study alternative methods for shortening proofs. The techniques we investigate are the folding up and the folding down operation. Folding up represents an efficient way of supporting the basic calculus, which is topdown oriented, with lemmata derived in a bottomup manner. It is shown that both techniques can also be viewed as controlled integrations of the cut rule. In order to remedy the additional redundancy imported into tableau proof procedures by the new inference rules, we develop and apply an extension of the regularity condition on tableaux and the mechanism of antilemmata which realizes a subsumption concept on tableaux. Using the framework of the theorem prover SETHEO, we have implemented three new proof procedures which overcome the deductive weakness of cutfree tableau systems. Experimental results demonstrate the superiority of the systems with folding up over the cutfree variant and the one with folding down.
The Taming of the Cut. Classical Refutations with Analytic Cut
 JOURNAL OF LOGIC AND COMPUTATION
, 1994
"... The method of analytic tableaux is a direct descendant of Gentzen's cutfree sequent calculus and is regarded as a paradigm of the notion of analytic deduction in classical logic. However, cutfree systems are anomalous from the prooftheoretical, the semantical and the computational point of view. F ..."
Abstract

Cited by 52 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
The method of analytic tableaux is a direct descendant of Gentzen's cutfree sequent calculus and is regarded as a paradigm of the notion of analytic deduction in classical logic. However, cutfree systems are anomalous from the prooftheoretical, the semantical and the computational point of view. Firstly, they cannot represent the use of auxiliary lemmas in proofs. Secondly, they cannot express the bivalence of classical logic. Thirdly, they are extremely inefficient, as is emphasized by the "computational scandal" that such systems cannot polynomially simulate the truthtables. None of these anomalies occurs if the cut rule is allowed. This raises the problem of formulating a proof system which incorporates a cut rule and yet can provide a suitable model of classical analytic deduction. For this purpose we present an alternative refutation system for classical logic, that we call KE. This system, though being "close" to Smullyan's tableau method, is not cutfree but includes a class...
Intelligent Backtracking On Constraint Satisfaction Problems: Experimental And Theoretical Results
, 1995
"... The Constraint Satisfaction Problem is a type of combinatorial search problem of much interest in Artificial Intelligence and Operations Research. The simplest algorithm for solving such a problem is chronological backtracking, but this method suffers from a malady known as "thrashing," in which ess ..."
Abstract

Cited by 48 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
The Constraint Satisfaction Problem is a type of combinatorial search problem of much interest in Artificial Intelligence and Operations Research. The simplest algorithm for solving such a problem is chronological backtracking, but this method suffers from a malady known as "thrashing," in which essentially the same subproblems end up being solved repeatedly. Intelligent backtracking algorithms, such as backjumping and dependencydirected backtracking, were designed to address this difficulty, but the exact utility and range of applicability of these techniques have not been fully explored. This dissertation describes an experimental and theoretical investigation into the power of these intelligent backtracking algorithms. We compare the empirical performance of several such algorithms on a range of problem distributions. We show that the more sophisticated algorithms are especially useful on those problems with a small number of constraints that happen to be difficult for chronologica...
Space Complexity In Propositional Calculus
 SIAM JOURNAL OF COMPUTING
, 2002
"... We study space complexity in the framework of propositional proofs. We consider a natural model analogous to Turing machines with a readonly input tape and such popular propositional proof systems as resolution, polynomial calculus, and Frege systems. We propose two di#erent space measures, corresp ..."
Abstract

Cited by 40 (8 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We study space complexity in the framework of propositional proofs. We consider a natural model analogous to Turing machines with a readonly input tape and such popular propositional proof systems as resolution, polynomial calculus, and Frege systems. We propose two di#erent space measures, corresponding to the maximal number of bits, and clauses/monomials that need to be kept in the memory simultaneously. We prove a number of lower and upper bounds in these models, as well as some structural results concerning the clause space for resolution and Frege systems.
Proof Complexity In Algebraic Systems And Bounded Depth Frege Systems With Modular Counting
"... We prove a lower bound of the form N on the degree of polynomials in a Nullstellensatz refutation of the Count q polynomials over Zm , where q is a prime not dividing m. In addition, we give an explicit construction of a degree N design for the Count q principle over Zm . As a corollary, us ..."
Abstract

Cited by 32 (9 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We prove a lower bound of the form N on the degree of polynomials in a Nullstellensatz refutation of the Count q polynomials over Zm , where q is a prime not dividing m. In addition, we give an explicit construction of a degree N design for the Count q principle over Zm . As a corollary, using Beame et al. (1994) we obtain a lower bound of the form 2 for the number of formulas in a constantdepth Frege proof of the modular counting principle Count q from instances of the counting principle Count m . We discuss
On the Proof Complexity of Deep Inference
, 2000
"... We obtain two results about the proof complexity of deep inference: 1) deepinference proof systems are as powerful as Frege ones, even when both are extended with the Tseitin extension rule or with the substitution rule; 2) there are analytic deepinference proof systems that exhibit an exponential ..."
Abstract

Cited by 31 (13 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We obtain two results about the proof complexity of deep inference: 1) deepinference proof systems are as powerful as Frege ones, even when both are extended with the Tseitin extension rule or with the substitution rule; 2) there are analytic deepinference proof systems that exhibit an exponential speedup over analytic Gentzen proof systems that they polynomially simulate.
Worstcase Analysis, 3SAT Decision and Lower Bounds: Approaches for Improved SAT Algorithms
"... . New methods for worstcase analysis and (3)SAT decision are presented. The focus lies on the central ideas leading to the improved bound 1:5045 n for 3SAT decision ([Ku96]; n is the number of variables). The implications for SAT decision in general are discussed and elucidated by a number of h ..."
Abstract

Cited by 21 (6 self)
 Add to MetaCart
. New methods for worstcase analysis and (3)SAT decision are presented. The focus lies on the central ideas leading to the improved bound 1:5045 n for 3SAT decision ([Ku96]; n is the number of variables). The implications for SAT decision in general are discussed and elucidated by a number of hypothesis'. In addition an exponential lower bound for a general class of SATalgorithms is given and the only possibilities to remain under this bound are pointed out. In this article the central ideas leading to the improved worstcase upper bound 1:5045 n for 3SAT decision ([Ku96]) are presented. 1) In nine sections the following subjects are treated: 1. "Gauging of branchings": The " function" and the concept of a "distance function" is introduced, our main tools for the analysis of SAT algorithms, and, as we propose, also a basis for (complete) practical algorithms. 2. "Estimating the size of arbitrary trees": The " Lemma" is presented, yielding an upper bound for the number of l...
Resolution and Binary Decision Diagrams Cannot Simulate Each Other Polynomially
 Discrete Applied Mathematics
, 2000
"... There are many di#erent ways of proving formulas in proposition logic. Many of these can easily be characterized as forms of resolution (e.g. [12] and [9]). Others use socalled binary decision diagrams (BDDs) [2, 10]. Experimental evidence suggests that BDDs and resolution based techniques are f ..."
Abstract

Cited by 20 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
There are many di#erent ways of proving formulas in proposition logic. Many of these can easily be characterized as forms of resolution (e.g. [12] and [9]). Others use socalled binary decision diagrams (BDDs) [2, 10]. Experimental evidence suggests that BDDs and resolution based techniques are fundamentally di#erent, in the sense that their performance can di#er very much on benchmarks [14]. In this paper we confirm these findings by mathematical proof. We provide examples that are easy for BDDs and exponentially hard for any form of resolution, and vice versa, examples that are easy for resolution and exponentially hard for BDDs. 1 Introduction We consider formulas in proposition logic: formulas consisting of proposition letters from some set P, constants t (true) and f (false) and connectives #, #, , # and #. There are di#erent ways of proving the correctness of these formulas, i.e., proving that a given formula is a tautology. In the automatic reasoning community reso...