Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorMadhu Sudan.en_US
dc.contributor.authorAlekhnovitch, Mikhail, 1978-en_US
dc.contributor.otherMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Mathematics.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2005-10-14T19:58:28Z
dc.date.available2005-10-14T19:58:28Z
dc.date.copyright2003en_US
dc.date.issued2003en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/29344
dc.descriptionThesis (Ph. D.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Mathematics, 2003.en_US
dc.descriptionIncludes bibliographical references (p. 135-143).en_US
dc.description.abstractThe thesis considers two fundamental questions in propositional proof complexity: lower bounds on the size of the shortest proof and automatizability of propositional proof systems. With respect to the first part, we develop a new paradigm for proving lower bounds in propositional calculus. Our method is based on the purely computational concept of pseudorandom generator. Namely, we call a pseudorandom generator Gn: [0, 1 ] - [0, 1]m hard for a propositional proof system P if P cannot efficiently prove the (properly encoded) statement G (xl,...,xn) f b for any string b [0, 1]m. We consider a variety of "combinatorial" pseudorandom generators inspired by the Nisan-Wigderson generator on the one hand, and by the construction of Tseitin tautologies on the other. We prove that under certain circumstances these generators are hard for such proof systems as Resolution, Polynomial Calculus and Polynomial Calculus with Resolution (PCR). As to the second part, we prove that the problem of approximating the size of the shortest proof within factor 2log1-o(1) is NP-hard. This result is very robust in that it holds for almost all natural proof systems, including: Frege systems, extended Frege systems, resolution, Horn resolution, the sequent calculus, the cut-free sequent calculus, as well as the polynomial calculus. We introduce the Monotone Minimum (Circuit) Satisfying Assignment problem and reduce it to the problem of approximating the length of proofs. Finally, we show that neither Resolution nor tree-like Resolution is automatizable unless the class W[P] from the hierarchy of parameterized problems is fixed-parameter tractable by randomized algorithms with one-sided error.en_US
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityby Mikhail Alekhnovitch.en_US
dc.format.extent143 p.en_US
dc.format.extent5200175 bytes
dc.format.extent5199983 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherMassachusetts Institute of Technologyen_US
dc.rightsM.I.T. theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. See provided URL for inquiries about permission.en_US
dc.rights.urihttp://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582
dc.subjectMathematics.en_US
dc.titlePropositional proof systems : efficiency and automatizabilityen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.description.degreePh.D.en_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Mathematics
dc.identifier.oclc52760120en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record