Abstract
The partial string avoidability problem is stated as follows: given a finite set of strings with possible “holes” (wildcard symbols), determine whether there exists a two-sided infinite string containing no substrings from this set, assuming that a hole matches every symbol. The problem is known to be NP-hard and in PSPACE, and this article establishes its PSPACE-completeness. Next, string avoidability over the binary alphabet is interpreted as a version of conjunctive normal form satisfiability problem, where each clause has infinitely many shifted variants. Non-satisfiability of these formulas can be proved using variants of classical propositional proof systems, augmented with derivation rules for shifting proof lines (such as clauses, inequalities, polynomials, etc.). First, it is proved that there is a particular formula that has a short refutation in Resolution with a shift rule but requires classical proofs of exponential size. At the same time, it is shown that exponential lower bounds for classical proof systems can be translated for their shifted versions. Finally, it is shown that superpolynomial lower bounds on the size of shifted proofs would separate NP from PSPACE; a connection to lower bounds on circuit complexity is also established.
- Alfred V. Aho and Margaret J. Corasick. 1975. Efficient string matching: An aid to bibliographic search. Commun. ACM 18, 6 (June 1975), 333--340 Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Michael Alekhnovich and Alexander A. Razborov. 2001. Lower bounds for polynomial calculus: Non-binomial case. In Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS’01). IEEE Computer Society, Las Vegas, NV, 190--199. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/SFCS.2001.959893 Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Valeriy Balabanov, Magdalena Widl, and Jie-Hong R. Jiang. 2014. QBF resolution systems and their proof complexities. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing (SAT’14). Springer, Cham, 154--169.Google Scholar
- J. Berstel and D. Perrin. 2002. Finite and infinite words. In Algebraic Combinatorics on Words, M. Lothaire (Ed.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1--44.Google Scholar
- Olaf Beyersdorff, Leroy Chew, and Mikolás Janota. 2019. New resolution-based QBF calculi and their proof complexity. Trans. Comput. Theory 11, 4 (2019), 26:1--26:42. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3352155 Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Olaf Beyersdorff, Luke Hinde, and Ján Pich. 2017. Reasons for hardness in QBF proof systems. In Proceedings of the 37th IARCS Annual Conference on Foundations of Software Technology and Theoretical Computer Science (FSTTCS’17) (LIPIcs), Satya V. Lokam and R. Ramanujam (Eds.), Vol. 93. Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, Dagstuhl, 14:1--14:15. DOI:https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.FSTTCS.2017.14Google Scholar
- Brandon Blakeley, Francine Blanchet-Sadri, Josh Gunter, and Narad Rampersad. 2010. On the complexity of deciding avoidability of sets of partial words. Theor. Comput. Sci. 411, 49 (2010), 4263--4271. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Francine Blanchet-Sadri, Raphaël M. Jungers, and Justin Palumbo. 2009. Testing avoidability on sets of partial words is hard. Theor. Comput. Sci. 410, 8–10 (2009), 968--972. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Samuel R. Buss. 2012. Towards NP-P via proof complexity and search. Ann. Pure Appl. Logic 163, 7 (2012), 906--917.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Stephen A. Cook and Robert A. Reckhow. 1979. The relative efficiency of propositional proof systems. J. Symbol. Logic 44, 1 (Mar. 1979), 36--50.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Armin Haken. 1985. The intractability of resolution. Theor. Comput. Sci. 39 (1985), 297--308.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Russell Impagliazzo, Pavel Pudlák, and Jirí Sgall. 1999. Lower bounds for the polynomial calculus and the Gröbner basis algorithm. Comput. Complex. 8, 2 (1999), 127--144. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Mikolás Janota and Joao Marques-Silva. 2015. Expansion-based QBF solving versus Q-resolution. Theor. Comput. Sci. 577 (2015), 25--42. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Hans Kleine Büning, Marek Karpinski, and Andreas Flögel. 1995. Resolution for quantified Boolean formulas. Info. Comput. 117, 1 (1995), 12--18. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- László Lovász, Moni Naor, Ilan Newman, and Avi Wigderson. 1995. Search problems in the decision tree model. SIAM J. Discrete Math. 8, 1 (1995), 119--132. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1137/S0895480192233867 Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Pavel Pudlak. 1997. Lower bounds for resolution and cutting plane proofs and monotone computations. J. Symbol. Logic 62, 3 (1997), 981--998.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Alexander A. Razborov. 1998. Lower bounds for the polynomial calculus. Comput. Complex. 7, 4 (1998), 291--324. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Alasdair Urquhart. 1987. Hard examples for resolution. J. ACM 34, 1 (1987), 209--219. Google Scholar
Digital Library
Index Terms
Computational and Proof Complexity of Partial String Avoidability
Recommendations
On the complexity of deciding avoidability of sets of partial words
Blanchet-Sadri et al. have shown that Avoidability, or the problem of deciding the avoidability of a finite set of partial words over an alphabet of size k>=2, is NP-hard [F. Blanchet-Sadri, R. Jungers, J. Palumbo, Testing avoidability on sets of ...
Nisan-Wigderson generators in proof complexity: new lower bounds
CCC '22: Proceedings of the 37th Computational Complexity ConferenceA map g : {0, 1}n → {0, 1}m (m > n) is a hard proof complexity generator for a proof system P iff for every string b ∈ {0, 1}m \ Rng(g), formula τb(g) naturally expressing b ∉ Rng(g) requires superpolynomial size P-proofs. One of the well-studied maps ...
Circuit Complexity, Proof Complexity, and Polynomial Identity Testing
FOCS '14: Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE 55th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer ScienceWe introduce a new and natural algebraic proof system, which has tight connections to (algebraic) circuit complexity. In particular, we show that any super-polynomial lower bound on any Boolean tautology in our proof system implies that the permanent ...






Comments