A Near-Optimal Deterministic Distributed Synchronizer
May 10, 2023 Β· Declared Dead Β· π ACM SIGACT-SIGOPS Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Mohsen Ghaffari, Anton Trygub
arXiv ID
2305.06452
Category
cs.DS: Data Structures & Algorithms
Cross-listed
cs.DC
Citations
6
Venue
ACM SIGACT-SIGOPS Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing
Last Checked
4 months ago
Abstract
We provide the first deterministic distributed synchronizer with near-optimal time complexity and message complexity overheads. Concretely, given any distributed algorithm $\mathcal{A}$ that has time complexity $T$ and message complexity $M$ in the synchronous message-passing model (subject to some care in defining the model), the synchronizer provides a distributed algorithm $\mathcal{A}'$ that runs in the asynchronous message-passing model with time complexity $T \cdot poly(\log n)$ and message complexity $(M+m)\cdot poly(\log n)$. Here, $n$ and $m$ denote the number of nodes and edges in the network, respectively. The synchronizer is deterministic in the sense that if algorithm $\mathcal{A}$ is deterministic, then so is algorithm $\mathcal{A}'$. Previously, only a randomized synchronizer with near-optimal overheads was known by seminal results of Awerbuch, Patt-Shamir, Peleg, and Saks [STOC 1992] and Awerbuch and Peleg [FOCS 1990]. We also point out and fix some inaccuracies in these prior works. As concrete applications of our synchronizer, we resolve some longstanding and fundamental open problems in distributed algorithms: we get the first asynchronous deterministic distributed algorithms with near-optimal time and message complexities for leader election, breadth-first search tree, and minimum spanning tree computations: these all have message complexity $\tilde{O}(m)$ message complexity. The former two have $\tilde{O}(D)$ time complexity, where $D$ denotes the network diameter, and the latter has $\tilde{O}(D+\sqrt{n})$ time complexity. All these bounds are optimal up to logarithmic factors. Previously all such near-optimal algorithms were either restricted to the synchronous setting or required randomization.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Data Structures & Algorithms
π
π
The Cartographer
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Route Planning in Transportation Networks
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Near-linear time approximation algorithms for optimal transport via Sinkhorn iteration
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Hierarchical Clustering: Objective Functions and Algorithms
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Graph Isomorphism in Quasipolynomial Time
π
π
The Cartographer
Simulation optimization: A review of algorithms and applications
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted