Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Detailed Answer
Quick Answer
Concise responses based on abstracts only
Detailed Answer
Well-researched responses based on abstracts and relevant paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 27 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 46 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 23 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 29 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 70 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 117 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 459 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4 34 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

Finite Model Theory and Proof Complexity revisited: Distinguishing graphs in Choiceless Polynomial Time and the Extended Polynomial Calculus (2206.05086v3)

Published 10 Jun 2022 in cs.LO and cs.CC

Abstract: This paper extends prior work on the connections between logics from finite model theory and propositional/algebraic proof systems. We show that if all non-isomorphic graphs in a given graph class can be distinguished in the logic Choiceless Polynomial Time with counting (CPT), then they can also be distinguished in the bounded-degree extended polynomial calculus (EPC), and the refutations have roughly the same size as the resource consumption of the CPT-sentence. This allows to transfer lower bounds for EPC to CPT and thus constitutes a new potential approach towards better understanding the limits of CPT. A super-polynomial EPC lower bound for a PTIME-instance of the graph isomorphism problem would separate CPT from PTIME and thus solve a major open question in finite model theory. Further, using our result, we provide a model theoretic proof for the separation of bounded-degree polynomial calculus and bounded-degree extended polynomial calculus.

Citations (1)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Dice Question Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Follow-Up Questions

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Authors (1)