Source author record

Carole Delporte-Gallet

Carole Delporte-Gallet appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Distributed, Parallel, and Cluster Computing Data Structures and Algorithms

Catalog footprint

What is connected

6works

2topics

4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Open graph Browse works

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

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

preprint2022arXiv

When Is Recoverable Consensus Harder Than Consensus?

We study the ability of different shared object types to solve recoverable consensus using non-volatile shared memory in a system with crashes and recoveries. In particular, we compare the difficulty of solving recoverable consensus to the difficulty of solving the standard wait-free consensus problem in a system with halting failures. We focus on the model where individual processes may crash and recover and the large class of object types that are equipped with a read operation. We characterize the readable object types that can solve recoverable consensus among a given number of processes. Using this characterization, we show that the number of processes that can solve consensus using a readable type can be larger than the number of processes that can solve recoverable consensus using that type, but only slightly larger.

preprint2016arXiv

Set-Consensus Collections are Decidable

A natural way to measure the power of a distributed-computing model is to characterize the set of tasks that can be solved in it. %the model. In general, however, the question of whether a given task can be solved in a given model is undecidable, even if we only consider the wait-free shared-memory model. In this paper, we address this question for restricted classes of models and tasks. We show that the question of whether a collection $C$ of \emph{$(\ell,j)$-set consensus} objects, for various $\ell$ (the number of processes that can invoke the object) and $j$ (the number of distinct outputs the object returns), can be used by $n$ processes to solve wait-free $k$-set consensus is decidable. Moreover, we provide a simple $O(n^2)$ decision algorithm, based on a dynamic programming solution to the Knapsack optimization problem. We then present an \emph{adaptive} wait-free set-consensus algorithm that, for each set of participating processes, achieves the best level of agreement that is possible to achieve using $C$. Overall, this gives us a complete characterization of a read-write model defined by a collection of set-consensus objects through its \emph{set-consensus power}.

preprint2015arXiv

Beyond One Third Byzantine Failures

The Byzantine agreement problem requires a set of $n$ processes to agree on a value sent by a transmitter, despite a subset of $b$ processes behaving in an arbitrary, i.e. Byzantine, manner and sending corrupted messages to all processes in the system. It is well known that the problem has a solution in a (an eventually) synchronous message passing distributed system iff the number of processes in the Byzantine subset is less than one third of the total number of processes, i.e. iff $n > 3b+1$. The rest of the processes are expected to be correct: they should never deviate from the algorithm assigned to them and send corrupted messages. But what if they still do? We show in this paper that it is possible to solve Byzantine agreement even if, beyond the $ b$ ($< n/3 $) Byzantine processes, some of the other processes also send corrupted messages, as long as they do not send them to all. More specifically, we generalize the classical Byzantine model and consider that Byzantine failures might be partial. In each communication step, some of the processes might send corrupted messages to a subset of the processes. This subset of processes - to which corrupted messages might be sent - could change over time. We compute the exact number of processes that can commit such faults, besides those that commit classical Byzantine failures, while still solving Byzantine agreement. We present a corresponding Byzantine agreement algorithm and prove its optimality by giving resilience and complexity bounds.

preprint2015arXiv

On the Space Complexity of Set Agreement

The $k$-set agreement problem is a generalization of the classical consensus problem in which processes are permitted to output up to $k$ different input values. In a system of $n$ processes, an $m$-obstruction-free solution to the problem requires termination only in executions where the number of processes taking steps is eventually bounded by $m$. This family of progress conditions generalizes wait-freedom ($m=n$) and obstruction-freedom ($m=1$). In this paper, we prove upper and lower bounds on the number of registers required to solve $m$-obstruction-free $k$-set agreement, considering both one-shot and repeated formulations. In particular, we show that repeated $k$ set agreement can be solved using $n+2m-k$ registers and establish a nearly matching lower bound of $n+m-k$.

preprint2012arXiv

Wait-Freedom with Advice

We motivate and propose a new way of thinking about failure detectors which allows us to define, quite surprisingly, what it means to solve a distributed task \emph{wait-free} \emph{using a failure detector}. In our model, the system is composed of \emph{computation} processes that obtain inputs and are supposed to output in a finite number of steps and \emph{synchronization} processes that are subject to failures and can query a failure detector. We assume that, under the condition that \emph{correct} synchronization processes take sufficiently many steps, they provide the computation processes with enough \emph{advice} to solve the given task wait-free: every computation process outputs in a finite number of its own steps, regardless of the behavior of other computation processes. Every task can thus be characterized by the \emph{weakest} failure detector that allows for solving it, and we show that every such failure detector captures a form of set agreement. We then obtain a complete classification of tasks, including ones that evaded comprehensible characterization so far, such as renaming or weak symmetry breaking.

preprint2010arXiv

Algorithms For Extracting Timeliness Graphs

We consider asynchronous message-passing systems in which some links are timely and processes may crash. Each run defines a timeliness graph among correct processes: (p; q) is an edge of the timeliness graph if the link from p to q is timely (that is, there is bound on communication delays from p to q). The main goal of this paper is to approximate this timeliness graph by graphs having some properties (such as being trees, rings, ...). Given a family S of graphs, for runs such that the timeliness graph contains at least one graph in S then using an extraction algorithm, each correct process has to converge to the same graph in S that is, in a precise sense, an approximation of the timeliness graph of the run. For example, if the timeliness graph contains a ring, then using an extraction algorithm, all correct processes eventually converge to the same ring and in this ring all nodes will be correct processes and all links will be timely. We first present a general extraction algorithm and then a more specific extraction algorithm that is communication efficient (i.e., eventually all the messages of the extraction algorithm use only links of the extracted graph).