We investigate the proof complexity of extended Frege (EF) systems for basic transitive modal logics (K4, S4, GL, ...) augmented with the bounded branching axioms $\mathbf{BB}_k$. First, we study feasibility of the disjunction property and more general extension rules in EF systems for these logics: we show that the corresponding decision problems reduce to total coNP search problems (or equivalently, disjoint NP pairs, in the binary case); more precisely, the decision problem for extension rules is equivalent to a certain special case of interpolation for the classical EF system. Next, we use this characterization to prove superpolynomial (or even exponential, with stronger hypotheses) separations between EF and substitution Frege (SF) systems for all transitive logics contained in $\mathbf{S4.2GrzBB_2}$ or $\mathbf{GL.2BB_2}$ under some assumptions weaker than $\mathrm{PSPACE \ne NP}$. We also prove analogous results for superintuitionistic logics: we characterize the decision complexity of multi-conclusion Visser's rules in EF systems for Gabbay--de Jongh logics $\mathbf T_k$, and we show conditional separations between EF and SF for all intermediate logics contained in $\mathbf{T_2 + KC}$.

We investigate properties of the formula p->[]p in the basic modal logic K. We show that K satisfies an infinitary weaker variant of the rule of margins A->[]A / A,~A, and as a consequence, we obtain various negative results about admissibility and unification in K. We describe a complete set of unifiers (i.e., substitutions making the formula provable) of p->[]p, and use it to establish that K has the worst possible unification type: nullary. In well-behaved transitive modal logics, admissibility and unification can be analyzed in terms of projective formulas, introduced by Ghilardi; in particular, projective formulas coincide for these logics with formulas that are admissibly saturated (i.e., derive all their multiple-conclusion admissible consequences) or exact (i.e., axiomatize a theory of a substitution). In contrast, we show that in K, the formula p->[]p is admissibly saturated, but neither projective nor exact. All our results for K also apply to the basic description logic ALC.

We investigate the computational complexity of admissibility of inference rules in infinite-valued {\L}ukasiewicz propositional logic (\L). It was shown in [13] that admissibility in {\L} is checkable in PSPACE. We establish that this result is optimal, i.e., admissible rules of {\L} are PSPACE-complete. In contrast, derivable rules of {\L} are known to be coNP-complete.

We investigate admissible rules of Łukasiewicz multi-valued propositional logic. We show that admissibility of multiple-conclusion rules in Łukasiewicz logic, as well as validity of universal sentences in free MV-algebras, is decidable (in PSPACE).

We construct explicit bases of single-conclusion and multiple-conclusion admissible rules of propositional Łukasiewicz logic, and we prove that every formula has an admissibly saturated approximation. We also show that Łukasiewicz logic has no finite basis of admissible rules.

We investigate the substitution Frege (SF) proof system and its relationship to extended Frege (EF) in the context of modal and superintuitionistic (si) propositional logics. We show that EF is p-equivalent to tree-like SF, and we develop a “normal form” for SF-proofs. We establish connections between SF for a logic L, and EF for certain bimodal expansions of L. We then turn attention to specific families of modal and si logics. We prove p-equivalence of EF and SF for all extensions of KB, all tabular logics, all logics of finite depth and width, and typical examples of logics of finite width and infinite depth. In most cases, we actually show an equivalence with the usual EF system for classical logic with respect to a naturally defined translation. On the other hand, we establish exponential speed-up of SF over EF for all modal and si logics of infinite branching, extending recent lower bounds by P. Hrubeš. We develop a model-theoretical characterization of maximal logics of infinite branching to prove this result.

Abstract We show how to formalize approximate counting via hash functions in subsystems of bounded arithmetic, using variants of the weak pigeonhole principle. We discuss several applications, including a proof of the tournament principle, and an improvement on the known relationship of the collapse of the bounded arithmetic hierarchy to the collapse of the polynomial-time hierarchy.

Abstract We develop canonical rules capable of axiomatizing all systems of multiple-conclusion rules overK4 orIPC, by extension of the method of canonical formulas by Zakharyaschev [37]. We use the framework to give an alternative proof of the known analysis of admissible rules in basic transitive logics, which additionally yields the following dichotomy: any canonical rule is either admissible in the logic, or it is equivalent to an assumption-free rule. Other applications of canonical rules include a generalization of the Blok–Esakia theorem and the theory of modal companions to systems of multiple-conclusion rules or (unitary structural global) consequence relations, and a characterization of splittings in the lattices of consequence relations over monomodal or superintuitionistic logics with the finite model property.

We investigate the proof complexity of analytic subsystems of the deep inference proof system SKSg (the calculus of structures). Exploiting the fact that the cut rule (i↑) of SKSg corresponds to the ¬-left rule in the sequent calculus, we establish that the ‘analytic'system KSg+c↑ has essentially the same complexity as the monotone Gentzen calculus MLK. In particular, KSg+c↑ quasipolynomially simulates SKSg, and admits polynomial-size proofs of some variants of the pigeonhole principle.

Abstract We develop approximate counting of sets definable by Boolean circuits in bounded arithmetic using the dual weak pigeonhole principle (dWPHP(PV)), as a generalization of results from [15]. We discuss applications to formalization of randomized complexity classes (such as BPP, APP, MA, AM) in PV1 + dWPHP(PV).

The principle sPHP a b (P V (α)) states that no oracle circuit can compute a surjection of a onto b. We show that sPHP ϱ(a) π(a) P (a) (P V (α)) is independent of P V1(α)+sPHP Π(a) (P V (α)) for various choices of the parameters π, Π, ϱ, P. We also improve the known separation of iWPHP(P V) from S 1 2 + sWPHP(P V) under cryptographic assumptions.

We construct explicit bases of admissible rules for a representative class of normal modal logics (including the systems K4, GL, S4, Grz, and GL.3), by extending the methods of S. Ghilardi and R. Iemhoff. We also investigate the notion of admissible multiple conclusion rules.