From Proof Complexity to Circuit Complexity via Interactive Protocols

TL;DR

This paper explores the connection between proof complexity and circuit complexity through the lens of interactive protocols, showing that certain proof lower bounds imply major complexity class separations, under specific assumptions.

Contribution

It establishes a conditional link between proof complexity lower bounds in the Implicit Extended Frege system and circuit lower bounds, formalizing the soundness of the sum-check protocol within this system.

Findings

Proves that superpolynomial proof lower bounds imply major complexity class separations.

Formalizes the soundness of the sum-check protocol inside the $ extsf{iEF}$ system.

Highlights the need for more efficient interactive proof systems to improve results.

Abstract

Folklore in complexity theory suspects that circuit lower bounds against $\mathbf{NC}^1$ or $\mathbf{P}/\operatorname{poly}$, currently out of reach, are a necessary step towards proving strong proof complexity lower bounds for systems like Frege or Extended Frege. Establishing such a connection formally, however, is already daunting, as it would imply the breakthrough separation $\mathbf{NEXP} \not\subseteq \mathbf{P}/\operatorname{poly}$, as recently observed by Pich and Santhanam (2023). We show such a connection conditionally for the Implicit Extended Frege proof system ($\mathsf{iEF}$) introduced by Kraj\'i\v{c}ek (The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 2004), capable of formalizing most of contemporary complexity theory. In particular, we show that if $\mathsf{iEF}$ proves efficiently the standard derandomization assumption that a concrete Boolean function is hard on average for subexponential-size circuits, then any superpolynomial lower bound on the length of $\mathsf{iEF}$ proofs implies $\#\mathbf{P} \not\subseteq \mathbf{FP}/\operatorname{poly}$ (which would in turn imply, for example, $\mathbf{PSPACE} \not\subseteq \mathbf{P}/\operatorname{poly}$). Our proof exploits the formalization inside $\mathsf{iEF}$ of the soundness of the sum-check protocol of Lund, Fortnow, Karloff, and Nisan (Journal of the ACM, 1992). This has consequences for the self-provability of circuit upper bounds in $\mathsf{iEF}$. Interestingly, further improving our result seems to require progress in constructing interactive proof systems with more efficient provers.