Yet another argument in favour of NP=CoNP

by   Edward Hermann Haeusler, et al.

This article shows yet another proof of NP=CoNP. In a previous article, we proved that NP=PSPACE and from it we can conclude that NP=CoNP immediately. The former proof shows how to obtain polynomial and, polynomial in time checkable Dag-like proofs for all purely implicational Minimal logic tautologies. From the fact that Minimal implicational logic is PSPACE-complete we get the proof that NP=PSPACE. This first proof of NP=CoNP uses Hudelmaier linear upper-bound on the height of Sequent Calculus minimal implicational logic proofs. In an addendum to the proof of NP=PSPACE, we observe that we do not need to use Hudelmaier upper-bound since any proof of non-hamiltonicity for any graph is linear upper-bounded. By the CoNP-completeness of non-hamiltonicity, we obtain NP=CoNP as a corollary of the first proof. In this article we show the third proof of CoNP=NP, also providing polynomial size and polynomial verifiable certificates that are Dags. They are generated from normal Natural Deduction proofs, linear height upper-bounded too, by removing redundancy, i.e., repeated parts. The existence of repeated parts is a consequence of the redundancy theorem for a family of super-polynomial proofs in the purely implicational Minimal logic. It is mandatory to read at least two previous articles to get the details of the proof presented here. The article that proves the redundancy theorem and the article that shows how to remove the repeated parts of a normal Natural Deduction proof to have a polynomial Dag certificate for minimal implicational logic tautologies.


page 1

page 2

page 3

page 4


Going from the huge to the small: Efficient succinct representation of proofs in Minimal implicational logic

A previous article shows that any linear height bounded normal proof of ...

On the Intrinsic Redundancy in Huge Natural Deduction proofs II: Analysing M_ Super-Polynomial Proofs

This article precisely defines huge proofs within the system of Natural ...

On the horizontal compression of dag-derivations in minimal purely implicational logic

In this report, we define (plain) Dag-like derivations in the purely imp...

A Closer Look at Some Recent Proof Compression-Related Claims

Gordeev and Haeusler [GH19] claim that each tautology ρ of minimal propo...

Enumerating proofs of positive formulae

We provide a semi-grammatical description of the set of normal proofs of...

Proof Compression and NP Versus PSPACE II: Addendum

In [3] we proved the conjecture NP = PSPACE by advanced proof theoretic ...

Revisiting Counter-model Generation for Minimal Implicational Logic

The LMT^→ sequent calculus was introduced in Santos (2016). This paper p...

Please sign up or login with your details

Forgot password? Click here to reset