Paper detail

Separation Results for Constant-Depth and Multilinear Ideal Proof Systems

In this work, we establish separation theorems for several subsystems of the Ideal Proof System (IPS), an algebraic proof system introduced by Grochow and Pitassi (J. ACM, 2018). Separation theorems are well-studied in the context of classical complexity theory, Boolean circuit complexity, and algebraic complexity. In an important work of Forbes, Shpilka, Tzameret, and Wigderson (ToC, 2021), two proof techniques were introduced to prove lower bounds for subsystems of the IPS, namely the functional method and the multiples method. We use these techniques and obtain the following results. Hierarchy theorem for constant-depth IPS: Recently, Limaye, Srinivasan, and Tavenas (J. ACM 2025) proved a hierarchy theorem for constant-depth algebraic circuits. We adapt the result and prove a hierarchy theorem for constant-depth $\mathsf{IPS}$. We show that there is an unsatisfiable multilinear instance refutable by a depth-$Δ$ $\mathsf{IPS}$ such that any depth-($Δ/10)$ $\mathsf{IPS}$ refutation for it must have superpolynomial size. This result is proved by building on the multiples method. Separation theorems for multilinear IPS: In an influential work, Raz (ToC, 2006) unconditionally separated two algebraic complexity classes, namely multilinear $\mathsf{NC}^{1}$ from multilinear $\mathsf{NC}^{2}$. In this work, we prove a similar result for a well-studied fragment of multilinear-$\mathsf{IPS}$. Specifically, we present an unsatisfiable instance such that its functional refutation, i.e., the unique multilinear polynomial agreeing with the inverse of the polynomial over the Boolean cube, has a small multilinear-$\mathsf{NC}^{2}$ circuit. However, any multilinear-$\mathsf{NC}^{1}$ $\mathsf{IPS}$ refutation ($\mathsf{IPS}_{\mathsf{LIN}}$) for it must have superpolynomial size. This result is proved by building on the functional method.

preprint2026arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.