P != NP, propositional proof complexity, and resolution lower bounds for the weak pigeonhole principle
Ran Raz
Abstract
Ran Raz
Abstract
Recent results established exponential lower bounds for the length of any Resolution proof for the weak pigeonhole principle. More formally, it was proved that any Resolution proof for the weak pigeonhole principle, with n holes and any number of pigeons, is of length ), (for a constant = 1=3). One corollary is that certain propositional formulations of the statement P 6= NP do not have short Resolution proofs. After a short introduction to the problem of P 6= NP and to the research area of propositional proof complexity, I will discuss the above mentioned lower bounds for the weak pigeonhole principle and the connections to the hardness of proving P 6= NP .
OpenAlex reports 8 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Recent results established exponential lower bounds for the length of any Resolution proof for the weak pigeonhole principle. More formally, it was proved that any Resolution proof for the weak pigeonhole principle, with n holes and any number of pigeons, is of length ), (for a constant = 1=3). One corollary is that certain propositional formulations of the statement P 6= NP do not have short Resolution proofs. After a short introduction to the problem of P 6= NP and to the research area of propositional proof complexity, I will discuss the above mentioned lower bounds for the weak pigeonhole principle and the connections to the hardness of proving P 6= NP .
Key concepts: Pigeonhole principle, Proof complexity, Mathematical proof, Resolution (logic), Corollary, Mathematics, Combinatorics, Statement (logic)