A4 Refereed article in a conference publication
Computational and proof complexity of partial string avoidability
Authors: Dimitry Itsykson, Alexander Okhotin, Vsevolod Oparin
Editors: Piotr Faliszewski, Anca Muscholl, Rolf Niedermeier
Conference name: International Symposium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science
Publisher: Schloss Dagstuhl- Leibniz-Zentrum fur Informatik GmbH, Dagstuhl Publishing
Publication year: 2016
Journal: LIPICS – Leibniz international proceedings in informatics
Book title : 41st International Symposium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science (MFCS 2016)
Journal name in source: Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics, LIPIcs
Series title: Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics
Volume: 58
First page : 51:1
Last page: 51:13
ISBN: 978-3-95977-016-3
DOI: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.MFCS.2016.51
Web address : http://drops.dagstuhl.de/opus/volltexte/2016/6463/
Self-archived copy’s web address: https://research.utu.fi/converis/portal/detail/Publication/29617294
The partial string avoidability problem, also known as partial word avoidability, is stated as follows: given a finite set of strings with possible ``holes'' (undefined symbols), determine whether there exists any two-sided infinite string containing no substrings from this set, assuming that a hole matches every symbol. The problem is known to be NP-hard and in PSPACE, and this paper establishes its PSPACE-completeness. Next, string avoidability over the binary alphabet is interpreted as a version of conjunctive normal form (CNF) satisfiability problem (SAT), with each clause having infinitely many shifted variants. Non-satisfiability of these formulas can be proved using variants of classical propositional proof systems, augmented with derivation rules for shifting constraints (such as clauses, inequalities, polynomials, etc). Two results on their proof complexity are established. First, there is a particular formula that has a short refutation in Resolution with shift, but requires classical proofs of exponential size (Resolution, Cutting Plane, Polynomial Calculus, etc.). At the same time, exponential lower bounds for shifted versions of classical proof systems are established.
Downloadable publication This is an electronic reprint of the original article. |