Papers for
proof system designers
Papers whose findings have a practical use for this group, as judged from the abstract. Open a paper to read what it means in practice.
Quantifier shifts can shorten proofs but cause local unsoundness
Proof Theory of Quantifier Shifts - An Overview
Abstract: Quantifier shifts are one of the oldest proof methods, but they are orthogonal to the cut free format: They can shorten proofs non-elementarily. (The proof is based on the sequence of proofs exhibiting a non-elementary difference between proofs with cuts and cut-free proofs by Orevkov). The cost is, however, that those proofs are globally sound but locally unsound. (Their subderivations might be unsound in contrast to the Hilbert concept of proof). In non-classical logics these calculi are only sound when all quantifier shifts are added. This characterizes all intermediate logics where Skolemization and the epsilon calculus is conservative (in contrast to the epsilon theorem which holds only for finite-valued Goedel logics).
Proof complexity generators hidden inside demi-bits generators revealed
Many Proof Complexity Generators Inside One Demi-Bits Generator
Abstract: For a propositional proof system $\mathcal{P}$ and a polynomial-time function $G: \{0, 1\}^n \to \{0, 1\}^N$ ($N > 10n$), we say that $G$ is a *proof complexity generator* against $\mathcal{P}$ if $\mathcal{P}$ cannot efficiently prove the (suitably encoded) statement "$y\not\in\mathrm{Range}(G)$" for every $y \in \{0, 1\}^N$, and $G$ is a *demi-bits generator* against $\mathcal{P}$ if $\mathcal{P}$ cannot efficiently prove the statement "$y \not\in\mathrm{Range}(G)$" for a noticeable fraction of $y \in \{0, 1\}^N$. As can be seen from the definitions, proof complexity generators are qualitatively stronger objects than demi-bits generators. Our main result is that, perhaps counter-intuitively, every demi-bits generator "contains" exponentially many proof complexity generators. In fact, a random subset of output bits of a demi-bits generator forms a proof complexity generator with constant probability. This result is an extremely simple corollary of Pajor's Lemma (a strengthening of the well-known Sauer--Shelah Lemma). This result allows us to exhibit the hardness of the Range Avoidance problem ($\text{Avoid}$) in several new, restricted settings of interest. Along the way, we introduce the notion of *zero-error disperser families* that can transform demi-bits generators into proof complexity generators, and show that this family can be computed by projections (i.e., without any circuit complexity overhead). Using a different instantiation of this family, we construct proof complexity generators from *barely non-trivial* demi-bits generators $G: \{0, 1\}^n \to \{0, 1\}^N$, where the number of hard-to-prove statements of the form "$y \not \in \mathrm{Range}(G)$" just slightly exceeds $2^n$ (which is the number of *false* statements of this form).