We upgrade [1] to a complete proof of the conjecture NP = PSPACE that is known as one of the fundamental open problems in the mathematical theory of computational complexity. Since minimal propositional logic is known to be PSPACE complete, while PSPACE to include NP, it suffices to show that every valid purely implicational formula ρ has a proof whose weight (= total number of symbols) and time complexity of the provability involved are both polynomial in the weight of ρ. As is [1], we use proof theoretic approach -in both sequential and natural deduction forms.Recall that in [1] we considered any valid ρ in question that had (by the definition of validity) a "short" tree-like proof π in the Hudelmaier-style cutfree sequent calculus for minimal logic. The "shortness" means that the height of π, the total number and maximum weight of different formulas occurring in it are all polynomial in the weight of ρ. However, the size (= total number of nodes), and hence also the weight, of π could be exponential in that of ρ. To overcome this trouble we embedded π into Prawitz's proof system of natural deductions containing single formulas, instead of sequents.As in π, the height, the total number and maximum formula weight of the resulting tree-like natural deduction ∂ 1 are polynomial, whereas the size of ∂ 1 still could be exponential, in the weight of ρ. In our next, crucial move, ∂ 1 was deterministically compressed into a "small" dag-like deduction ∂ whose horizontal levels contained only mutually different formulas, which made the whole weight polynomial in that of ρ. However, ∂ required a more complicated verification of the underlying provability of ρ. In the present paper we further compress ∂ into a desired deduction ∂ 0 that deterministically proves ρ in time and space polynomial in the weight of ρ. [Working in a natural deduction calculus is essential because tree-to-dag horizontal compression of π merging equal sequents, instead of formulas, is (possible but) insufficient, since the total number of different sequents occurring in π might be exponential in the weight of ρ -even assuming that all formulas occurring in sequents are subformulas of ρ.]

We upgrade [3] to a complete proof of the conjecture NP = PSPACE that is known as one of the fundamental open problems in the mathematical theory of computational complexity; this proof is based on [2]. Since minimal propositional logic is known to be PSPACE complete, while PSPACE to include NP, it suffices to show that every valid purely implicational formula ρ has a proof whose weight (= total number of symbols) and time complexity of the provability involved are both polynomial in the weight of ρ. As in [3], we use proof theoretic approach. Recall that in [3] we considered any valid ρ in question that had (by the definition of validity) a "short" tree-like proof π in the Hudelmaier-style cutfree sequent calculus for minimal logic. The "shortness" means that the height of π and the total weight of different formulas occurring in it are both polynomial in the weight of ρ. However, the size (= total number of nodes), and hence also the weight, of π could be exponential in that of ρ. To overcome this trouble we embedded π into Prawitz's proof system of natural deductions containing single formulas, instead of sequents. As in π, the height and the total weight of different formulas of the resulting tree-like natural deduction ∂1 were polynomial, although the size of ∂1 still could be exponential, in the weight of ρ. In our next, crucial move, ∂1 was deterministically compressed into a "small", although multipremise, dag-like deduction ∂ whose horizontal levels contained only mutually different formulas, which made the whole weight polynomial in that of ρ. However, ∂ required a more complicated verification of the underlying provability of ρ. In this paper we present a nondeterministic compression of ∂ into a desired standard dag-like deduction ∂0 that deterministically proves ρ in time and space polynomial in the weight of ρ. Together with [3] this completes the proof of NP = PSPACE. Natural deductions are essential for our proof. Tree-to-dag horizontal compression of π merging equal sequents, instead of formulas, is (possible but) not sufficient, since the total number of different sequents in π might be exponential in the weight of ρ − even assuming that all formulas occurring in sequents are subformulas of ρ. On the other hand, we need Hudelmaier's cutfree sequent calculus in order to control both the height and total weight of different formulas of the initial tree-like proof π, since standard Prawitz's normalization although providing natural deductions with the subformula property does not preserve polynomial heights. It is not clear yet if we can omit references to π even in the proof of the weaker result NP = coNP.

No abstract

No abstract

Optimization in sports is a field of increasing interest. Combinatorial optimization techniques have been applied, for example, to game scheduling and playoff elimination. A common problem usually found in sports management is the assignment of referees to games already scheduled. There are a number of rules and objectives that should be taken into account when referees are assigned to games. We address a simplified version of a referee assignment problem common to many amateur leagues of sports such as soccer, baseball, and basketball. The problem is formulated by integer programming and its decision version is proved to be NP-complete. To tackle real-life large instances of the referee assignment problem, we propose a three-phase heuristic approach based on a constructive procedure, a repair heuristic to make solutions feasible, and a local search heuristic to improve feasible solutions. Numerical results on realistic instances are presented and discussed.

In [3] we proved the conjecture NP = PSPACE by advanced proof theoretic methods that combined Hudelmaier's cut-free sequent calculus for minimal logic (HSC) [5] with the horizontal compressing in the corresponding minimal Prawitz-style natural deduction (ND) [6]. In this Addendum we show how to prove a weaker result NP = coNP without referring to HSC. The underlying idea (due to the second author) is to omit full minimal logic and compress only \naive" normal tree-like ND refutations of the existence of Hamiltonian cycles in given non-Hamiltonian graphs, since the Hamiltonian graph problem in NP-complete. Thus, loosely speaking, the proof of NP = coNP can be obtained by HSC-elimination from our proof of NP = PSPACE [3].

Propositional Dynamic Logic (PDL) is a multi-modal logic used for specifying and reasoning on sequential programs. Petri Net is a widely used formalism to specify and to analyse concurrent programs with a very nice graphical representation. In this work, we propose a PDL to reasoning about Petri Nets. First we define a compositional encoding of Petri Nets from basic nets as terms. Second, we use these terms as PDL programs and provide a compositional semantics to PDL Formulas. Finally, we present an axiomatization and prove completeness w.r.t. our semantics. The advantage of our approach is that we can do reasoning about Petri Nets using our dynamic logic and we do not need to to translate it to other formalisms. Moreover our approach is compositional allowing for construction of complex nets using basic ones.

No abstract