We study the problem of obtaining lower bounds for polynomial calculus (PC) and polynomial calculus resolution (PCR) on proof degree, and hence by [Impagliazzo et al. ’99] also on proof size. [Alekhnovich and Razborov’03] established that if the clause-variable incidence graph of a conjunctive normal form (CNF) formula F is a good enough expander, then proving that F is unsatisfiable requires high PC/PCR degree. We further develop their techniques to show that if one can “cluster” clauses and variables in a way that “respects the structure” of the formula in a certain sense, then it is sufficient that the incidence graph of this clustered version is an expander. We also show how a weaker structural condition is sufficient to obtain lower bounds on width for the resolution proof system, and give a unified treatment that highlights similarities and differences between resolution and polynomial calculus (PC) lower bounds. As a corollary of our main technical theorem, we prove that the functional pigeonhole principle (FPHP) formulas require high PC/PCR degree when restricted to constant-degree expander graphs. This answers an open question in [Razborov’02], and also implies that the standard CNF encoding of the FPHP formulas require exponential proof size in polynomial calculus resolution (PCR). Thus, while onto-FPHP formulas are easy for polynomial calculus, as shown in [Riis’93], both FPHP and onto-PHP formulas are hard even when restricted to bounded-degree expanders.

Aggregation of location estimates from multiple services for provisioning of location information enhances the accuracy and robustness of the final location information. Recent Internet of Things (IoT)-based localization service architectures therefore envision a "manager" for selecting and invoking provisioning services and, in the later step, aggregating the received information and providing it to location-based applications. The selection of provisioning services should take into account the accuracy and latency requirements from the applications and accuracy, latency, and power consumption characteristics of provisioning services. However, it is yet unclear how such selection should be made. We propose two algorithms for the selection of provisioning services aiming at meeting latency and subsequently accuracy requirements from the applications, one subject to minimizing per-request power consumption, while the other subject to a per-time bucket power minimization. In the considered examples, we show that the per-time bucket optimization achieves around 25% better performance in terms of power consumption, while trading-off accuracy satisfaction.

In 2003, Atserias and Dalmau resolved a major open question about the resolution proof system by establishing that the space complexity of a Conjunctive Normal Form (CNF) formula is always an upper bound on the width needed to refute the formula. Their proof is beautiful but uses a nonconstructive argument based on Ehrenfeucht-Fraïssé games. We give an alternative, more explicit, proof that works by simple syntactic manipulations of resolution refutations. As a by-product, we develop a “black-box” technique for proving space lower bounds via a “static” complexity measure that works against any resolution refutation—previous techniques have been inherently adaptive. We conclude by showing that the related question for polynomial calculus (i.e., whether space is an upper bound on degree) seems unlikely to be resolvable by similar methods.

In 2003, Atserias and Dalmau resolved a major open question about the resolution proof system by establishing that the space complexity of formulas is always an upper bound on the width needed to refute them. Their proof is beautiful but somewhat mysterious in that it relies heavily on tools from finite model theory. We give an alternative, completely elementary, proof that works by simple syntactic manipulations of resolution refutations. As a by-product, we develop a "black-box" technique for proving space lower bounds via a "static" complexity measure that works against any resolution refutation -- previous techniques have been inherently adaptive. We conclude by showing that the related question for polynomial calculus (i.e., whether space is an upper bound on degree) seems unlikely to be resolvable by similar methods.