REVIEW 1 cited by
Separations in Proof Complexity and TFNP
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
abstract
It is well-known that Resolution proofs can be efficiently simulated by Sherali-Adams (SA) proofs. We show, however, that any such simulation needs to exploit huge coefficients: Resolution cannot be efficiently simulated by SA when the coefficients are written in unary. We also show that Reversible Resolution (a variant of MaxSAT Resolution) cannot be efficiently simulated by Nullstellensatz (NS). These results have consequences for total NP search problems. First, we characterise the classes PPADS, PPAD, SOPL by unary-SA, unary-NS, and Reversible Resolution, respectively. Second, we show that, relative to an oracle, PLS $\not\subseteq$ PPP, SOPL $\not\subseteq$ PPA, and EOPL $\not\subseteq$ UEOPL. In particular, together with prior work, this gives a complete picture of the black-box relationships between all classical TFNP classes introduced in the 1990s.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Separations above TFNP from Sherali-Adams Lower Bounds
LOP is separated from Strong Avoid and Least Number in the black-box TFΣ2 setting, via Σ2-variant Sherali-Adams pseudo-expectations.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.