This paper is a continuation of dag-like proof compression research initiated in [9]. We investigate proof compression phenomenon in a particular, most transparent case of propositional DNF Logic. We define and analyze a very efficient semi-analytic sequent calculus SEQ*0 for propositional DNF. The efficiency is achieved by adding two special rules CQ and CS; the latter rule is a variant of the weakened substitution rule WS from [9], while the former one being specially designed for DNF sequents. We show that (...) dag-like SEQ*0 has good deterministic proof search strategy. Furthermore, we expose six examples showing that dag-like deducibility in SEQ*0 admits exponential-size proof compression, as compared to familiar proof systems like cutfree sequent calculi, resolution and cutting plane proof systems. (shrink)

The paper proves refined feasibility properties for the disjunction property of intuitionistic propositional logic. We prove that it is possible to eliminate all cuts from an intuitionistic proof, propositional or first-order, without increasing the Horn closure of the proof. We obtain a polynomial time, interactive, realizability algorithm for propositional intuitionistic proofs. The feasibility of the disjunction property is proved for sequents containing Harrop formulas. Under hardness assumptions for NP and for factoring, it is shown that the intuitionistic propositional calculus does (...) not always have polynomial size proofs and that the classical propositional calculus provides a superpolynomial speedup over the intuitionistic propositional calculus. The disjunction property for intuitionistic propositional logic is proved to be P-hard by a reduction to the circuit value problem. (shrink)

The paper considers a commonly used axiomatization of the classical propositional logic and studies how different axiom schemata in this system contribute to proof complexity of the logic. The existence of a polynomial bound on proof complexity of every statement provable in this logic is a well-known open question.The axiomatization consists of three schemata. We show that any statement provable using unrestricted number of axioms from the first of the three schemata and polynomially-bounded in size set of axioms from the (...) other schemata, has a polynomially-bounded proof complexity. In addition, it is also established, that any statement, provable using unrestricted number of axioms from the remaining two schemata and polynomially-bounded in size set of axioms from the first scheme, also has a polynomially-bounded proof complexity. (shrink)