Optimal Proof Systems for Complex Sets are Hard to Find
Fabian Egidy, Christian Gla{\ss}er

TL;DR
This paper constructs oracles demonstrating the inherent difficulty in finding complex sets with optimal proof systems, highlighting longstanding open problems in computational complexity theory.
Contribution
It provides the first oracle-based evidence that certain complex sets lack optimal proof systems, clarifying the difficulty of longstanding open questions.
Findings
No sets in PSPACE extbackslash NP have optimal proof systems relative to O_1.
No sets outside NQP have optimal proof systems relative to O_2.
Existence of arbitrarily complex sets with almost optimal algorithms but no optimal proof systems relative to O_2.
Abstract
We provide the first evidence for the inherent difficulty of finding complex sets with optimal proof systems. For this, we construct oracles and with the following properties, where denotes the class of recursively enumerable sets and the class of sets accepted in non-deterministic quasi-polynomial time. - : No set in has optimal proof systems and is infinite - : No set in has optimal proof systems and Oracle is the first relative to which complex sets with optimal proof systems do not exist. By oracle , no relativizable proof can show that there exist sets in with optimal proof systems, even when assuming an infinite . By oracle , no…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsAdvanced Database Systems and Queries · Logic, programming, and type systems · Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge
