Proof Complexity of Linear Logics
Amirhossein Akbar Tabatabai, Raheleh Jalali

TL;DR
This paper investigates the proof-size complexity of classical propositional logic, revealing how structural rules like contraction and weakening significantly impact proof lengths and establishing exponential lower bounds for certain proof systems.
Contribution
It isolates the impact of structural rules on proof complexity, providing exponential lower bounds and demonstrating proof size differences across various linear logic systems.
Findings
Exponential proof-size lower bounds for LK without contraction.
Sub-exponential lower bounds for LK without weakening.
Existence of polynomial-size proofs in some systems that require exponential-size proofs in others.
Abstract
Proving proof-size lower bounds for , the sequent calculus for classical propositional logic, remains a major open problem in proof complexity. We shed new light on this challenge by isolating the power of structural rules, showing that their combination is extremely stronger than any single rule alone. We establish exponential (resp. sub-exponential) proof-size lower bounds for without contraction (resp. weakening) for formulas with short -proofs. Concretely, we work with the Full Lambek calculus with exchange, , and its contraction-extended variant, , substructural systems underlying linear logic. We construct families of -provable (resp. -provable) formulas that require exponential-size (resp. sub-exponential-size) proofs in affine linear logic (resp. relevant…
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
TopicsLogic, Reasoning, and Knowledge · Logic, programming, and type systems · Formal Methods in Verification
