Results 1 
4 of
4
On the Parameterised Intractability of Monadic SecondOrder Logic
"... Abstract. One of Courcelle’s celebrated results states that if C is a class of graphs of bounded treewidth, then modelchecking for monadic second order logic (MSO2) is fixedparameter tractable (fpt) on C by linear time parameterised algorithms. An immediate question is whether this is best possib ..."
Abstract

Cited by 8 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Abstract. One of Courcelle’s celebrated results states that if C is a class of graphs of bounded treewidth, then modelchecking for monadic second order logic (MSO2) is fixedparameter tractable (fpt) on C by linear time parameterised algorithms. An immediate question is whether this is best possible or whether the result can be extended to classes of unbounded treewidth. In this paper we show that in terms of treewidth, the theorem can not be extended much further. More specifically, we show that if C is a class of graphs which is closed under colourings and satisfies certain constructibility conditions such that the treewidth of C is not bounded by log 16 n then MSO2model checking is not fpt unless SAT can be solved in subexponential time. If the treewidth of C is not polylog. bounded, then MSO2model checking is not fpt unless all problems in the polynomialtime hierarchy can be solved in subexponential time. 1
FixedPoint Definability and Polynomial Time
"... Abstract. My talk will be a survey of recent results about the quest for a logic capturing polynomial time. In a fundamental study of database query languages, Chandra and Harel [4] first raised the question of whether there exists a logic that captures polynomial time. Actually, Chandra and Harel p ..."
Abstract

Cited by 4 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. My talk will be a survey of recent results about the quest for a logic capturing polynomial time. In a fundamental study of database query languages, Chandra and Harel [4] first raised the question of whether there exists a logic that captures polynomial time. Actually, Chandra and Harel phrased the question in a somewhat disguised form; the version that we use today goes back to Gurevich [15]. Briefly, but slightly imprecisely, 1 a logic L captures a complexity class K if exactly those properties of finite structures that are decidable in K are definable in L. The existence of a logic capturing PTIME is still wide open, and it is viewed as one of the main open problems in finite model theory and database theory. One reason the question is interesting is that we know from Fagin’s Theorem [9] that existential secondorder logic captures NP, and we also know that there are logics capturing most natural complexity classes above NP. Gurevich conjectured that there is no logic capturing PTIME. If this conjecture was true, this would not only imply that PTIME ̸ = NP, but it would also show that NP and the complexity
On the Complexity of Gödel’s Proof Predicate
, 2009
"... The undecidability of firstorder logic implies that there is no computable bound on the length of shortest proofs of valid sentences of firstorder logic. Some valid sentences can only have quite long proofs. How hard is it to prove such “hard ” valid sentences? The polynomial time tractability of ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
The undecidability of firstorder logic implies that there is no computable bound on the length of shortest proofs of valid sentences of firstorder logic. Some valid sentences can only have quite long proofs. How hard is it to prove such “hard ” valid sentences? The polynomial time tractability of this problem would imply the fixedparameter tractability of the parameterized problem that, given a natural number n in unary as input and a firstorder sentence ϕ as parameter, asks whether ϕ has a proof of length ≤ n. As the underlying classical problem has been considered by Gödel we denote this problem by pGÖDEL. We show that pGÖDEL is not fixedparameter tractable if DTIME(hO(1)) 6 = NTIME(hO(1)) for all time constructible and increasing functions h. Moreover we analyze the complexity of the construction problem associated with pGÖDEL. 1.
On optimal proof systems and logics for PTIME
"... We prove that TAUT has a poptimal proof system if and only if a logic related to least fixedpoint logic captures polynomial time on all finite structures. Furthermore, we show that TAUT has no effective poptimal proof system if NTIME(hO(1)) 6 ⊆ DTIME(hO(log h)) for every time constructible and i ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
We prove that TAUT has a poptimal proof system if and only if a logic related to least fixedpoint logic captures polynomial time on all finite structures. Furthermore, we show that TAUT has no effective poptimal proof system if NTIME(hO(1)) 6 ⊆ DTIME(hO(log h)) for every time constructible and increasing function h. 1.