skip to main content
10.1145/3465084.3467918acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagespodcConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Decision Power of Weak Asynchronous Models of Distributed Computing

Published:23 July 2021Publication History

ABSTRACT

Esparza and Reiter have recently conducted a systematic comparative study of models of distributed computing consisting of a network of identical finite-state automata that cooperate to decide if the underlying graph of the network satisfies a given property. The study classifies models according to four criteria, and shows that twenty-four initially possible combinations collapse into seven equivalence classes with respect to their decision power, i.e. the properties that the automata of each class can decide. However, Esparza and Reiter only show (proper) inclusions between the classes, and so do not characterise their decision power. In this paper we do so for labelling properties, i.e. properties that depend only on the labels of the nodes, but not on the structure of the graph. In particular, majority (whether more nodes carry label a than b) is a labelling property. Our results show that only one of the seven equivalence classes identified by Esparza and Reiter can decide majority for arbitrary networks. We then study the expressive power of the classes on bounded-degree networks, and show that three classes can. In particular, we present an algorithm for majority that works for all bounded-degree networks under adversarial schedulers, i.e. even if the scheduler must only satisfy that every node makes a move infinitely often, and prove that no such algorithm can work for arbitrary networks.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

PODC21-fp135.mp4

mp4

53 MB

References

  1. Yehuda Afek, Noga Alon, Ziv Bar-Joseph, Alejandro Cornejo, Bernhard Haeupler, and Fabian Kuhn. 2013. Beeping a maximal independent set. Distributed Comput., Vol. 26, 4 (2013), 195--208.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Dana Angluin. 1980. Local and Global Properties in Networks of Processors (Extended Abstract). In STOC. ACM, 82--93.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Dana Angluin, James Aspnes, Melody Chan, Michael J Fischer, Hong Jiang, and René Peralta. 2005. Stably computable properties of network graphs. In International Conference on Distributed Computing in Sensor Systems. Springer, 63--74.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Dana Angluin, James Aspnes, Zoë Diamadi, Michael J. Fischer, and René Peralta. 2006. Computation in networks of passively mobile finite-state sensors. Distributed Computing, Vol. 18, 4 (2006), 235--253.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Dana Angluin, James Aspnes, and David Eisenstat. 2008. Fast computation by population protocols with a leader. Distributed Comput., Vol. 21, 3 (2008), 183--199.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Dana Angluin, James Aspnes, David Eisenstat, and Eric Ruppert. 2007. The computational power of population protocols. Distributed Comput., Vol. 20, 4 (2007), 279--304.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. James Aspnes. 2017. Clocked Population Protocols. In Proc. ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC). 431--440.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Baruch Awerbuch. 1985. Complexity of Network Synchronization. J. ACM, Vol. 32, 4 (1985), 804--823. https://doi.org/10.1145/4221.4227Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Petra Berenbrink, Robert Elsässer, Tom Friedetzky, Dominik Kaaser, Peter Kling, and Tomasz Radzik. 2018. A Population Protocol for Exact Majority with O(log5/3 n) Stabilization Time and Theta(log n) States. In DISC (LIPIcs, Vol. 121). Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 10:1--10:18.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Andreas Bilke, Colin Cooper, Robert Elsässer, and Tomasz Radzik. 2017. Brief Announcement: Population Protocols for Leader Election and Exact Majority with O(log(^mbox2 ) n) States and O(log(2) n) Convergence Time. In PODC. ACM, 451--453.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Michael Blondin, Javier Esparza, and Stefan Jaax. 2019. Expressive Power of Broadcast Consensus Protocols. In CONCUR (LIPIcs, Vol. 140). Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 31:1--31:16.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Olivier Bournez and Jonas Lefèvre. 2013. Population Protocols on Graphs: A Hierarchy. In UCNC (Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 7956). Springer, 31--42.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Ioannis Chatzigiannakis, Othon Michail, Stavros Nikolaou, and Paul G. Spirakis. 2013. The computational power of simple protocols for self-awareness on graphs. Theor. Comput. Sci., Vol. 512 (2013), 98--118.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Alejandro Cornejo and Fabian Kuhn. 2010. Deploying Wireless Networks with Beeps. In DISC (Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 6343). Springer, 148--162.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Philipp Czerner, Roland Guttenberg, Martin Helfrich, and Javier Esparza. 2021. Decision Power of Weak Asynchronous Models of Distributed Computing. CoRR, Vol. abs/2102.11630 (2021). arxiv: 2102.11630 https://arxiv.org/abs/2102.11630Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Yuval Emek and Roger Wattenhofer. 2013. Stone age distributed computing. In PODC. ACM, 137--146.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Javier Esparza and Fabian Reiter. 2020. A Classification of Weak Asynchronous Models of Distributed Computing. In CONCUR (LIPIcs, Vol. 171). Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 10:1--10:16.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Ofer Feinerman and Amos Korman. 2013. Theoretical Distributed Computing Meets Biology: A Review. In ICDCIT (Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 7753). Springer, 1--18.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Nissim Francez. 1986. Fairness. Springer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Rachid Guerraoui and Eric Ruppert. 2009. Names Trump Malice: Tiny Mobile Agents Can Tolerate Byzantine Failures. In ICALP (2) (Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 5556). Springer, 484--495.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Lauri Hella, Matti Järvisalo, Antti Kuusisto, Juhana Laurinharju, Tuomo Lempiäinen, Kerkko Luosto, Jukka Suomela, and Jonni Virtema. 2015. Weak models of distributed computing, with connections to modal logic. Distributed Computing, Vol. 28, 1 (2015), 31--53.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Adrian Kosowski and Przemyslaw Uznanski. 2018. Brief Announcement: Population Protocols Are Fast. In PODC. ACM, 475--477.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Fabian Kuhn, Nancy A. Lynch, and Rotem Oshman. 2010. Distributed computation in dynamic networks. In STOC. ACM, 513--522.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Daniel Lehmann, Amir Pnueli, and Jonathan Stavi. 1981. Impartiality, Justice and Fairness: The Ethics of Concurrent Termination. In ICALP (Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 115). Springer, 264--277.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Nancy A. Lynch. 1996. Distributed Algorithms .Morgan Kaufmann.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Othon Michail, Ioannis Chatzigiannakis, and Paul G. Spirakis. 2011. Mediated population protocols. Theor. Comput. Sci., Vol. 412, 22 (2011), 2434--2450.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Othon Michail and Paul G. Spirakis. 2015. Terminating population protocols via some minimal global knowledge assumptions. J. Parallel Distributed Comput., Vol. 81--82 (2015), 1--10.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Saket Navlakha and Ziv Bar-Joseph. 2015. Distributed information processing in biological and computational systems. Commun. ACM, Vol. 58, 1 (2015), 94--102.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Fabian Reiter. 2017. Asynchronous Distributed Automata: A Characterization of the Modal Mu-Fragment. In ICALP (LIPIcs, Vol. 80). Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 100:1--100:14.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. David Soloveichik, Matthew Cook, Erik Winfree, and Jehoshua Bruck. 2008. Computation with finite stochastic chemical reaction networks. Natural Computing, Vol. 7, 4 (2008), 615--633.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Decision Power of Weak Asynchronous Models of Distributed Computing

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      PODC'21: Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing
      July 2021
      590 pages
      ISBN:9781450385480
      DOI:10.1145/3465084

      Copyright © 2021 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 23 July 2021

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate740of2,477submissions,30%

      Upcoming Conference

      PODC '24
    • Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)12
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

      Other Metrics

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader