Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2602.02294

The SPARSE-Relativization Framework and Applications to Optimal Proof Systems

Fabian Egidy
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

We investigate the following longstanding open questions raised by Kraj\'i\v{c}ek and Pudl\'ak (J. Symb. L. 1989), Sadowski (FCT 1997), K\"obler and Messner (CCC 1998) and Messner (PhD 2000). Q1: Does TAUT have (p-)optimal proof systems? Q2: Does QBF have (p-)optimal proof systems? Q3: Are there arbitrarily complex sets with (p-)optimal proof systems? Recently, Egidy and Gla{\ss}er (STOC 2025) contributed to these questions by constructing oracles that show that there are no relativizable proofs for positive answers of these questions, even when assuming well-established conjectures about the separation of complexity classes. We continue this line of research by providing the same proof barrier for negative answers of these questions. For this, we introduce the SPARSE-relativization framework, which is an application of the notion of bounded relativization by Hirahara, Lu, and Ren (CCC 2023). This framework allows the construction of sparse oracles for statements such that additional useful properties (like an infinite polynomial-time hierarchy) hold. By applying the SPARSE-relativization framework, we show that the oracle construction of Egidy and Gla{\ss}er also yields the following new oracle. O1: No set in PSPACE\NP has optimal proof systems, $\mathrm{NP} \subsetneq \mathrm{PH} \subsetneq \mathrm{PSPACE}$, and PH collapses We use techniques of Cook and Kraj\'i\v{c}ek (J. Symb. L. 2007) and Beyersdorff, K\"obler, and M\"uller (Inf. Comp. 2011) and apply our SPARSE-relativization framework to obtain the following new oracle. O2: All sets in PSPACE have p-optimal proof systems, there are arbitrarily complex sets with p-optimal proof systems, and PH is infinite Together with previous results, our oracles show that questions Q1 and Q2 are independent of an infinite or collapsing polynomial-time hierarchy.

Explore related subjects

cs.CC

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Fabian Egidy. 2026-02-02. The SPARSE-Relativization Framework and Applications to Optimal Proof Systems. https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.02294

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

The Computational Complexity of Holant Problems on 4-regular Graphs from the Stable Subgroup Sequence of $SL(2,\mathbb{C})$

The Holant framework provides a general setting for studying counting problems and includes graph homomorphisms (\#GH) and counting constraint satisfaction problems (\#CSP) as special cases. Over the past twenty years, a series of computational complexity dichotomies have been established for Holant problems, but the classification for complex-valued signatures is still open. The main obstacle is the case in which all signatures have even arity. In this paper, we establish a dichotomy for Holant problems with a complex-valued 4-ary signature, which is a key base case for the full classification of Holant problems. We present a new strategy by introducing Schur's theorem, the classification of finite subgroups of $\mathrm{SL}(2,\mathbb{C})$ and stable subgroup sequences into the proof. These new techniques are of independent interest.

cs.CC↗
arXiv2026

Topology inside NC$^1$

We show that ACC$^0$ is precisely what can be computed with constant-width circuits of polynomial size and polylogarithmic genus. This extends a characterization given by Hansen, showing that planar constant-width circuits also characterize ACC$^0$. Thus polylogarithmic genus provides no additional computational power in this model. We consider other generalizations of planarity, including crossing number and thickness. We show that constant-width circuits of polynomial size and thickness two already suffice to capture all of NC$^1$.

cs.CC↗