BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Laurent Feuilloley

Laurent Feuilloley contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Distributed, Parallel, and Cluster ComputingData Structures and AlgorithmsDiscrete Mathematicsmath.CO

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
7works
0followers
4topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

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

Published work

7 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Error-Sensitive Proof-Labeling Schemes

Proof-labeling schemes are known mechanisms providing nodes of networks with certificates that can be verified locally by distributed algorithms. Given a boolean predicate on network states, such schemes enable to check whether the predicate is satisfied by the actual state of the network, by having nodes interacting with their neighbors only. Proof-labeling schemes are typically designed for enforcing fault-tolerance, by making sure that if the current state of the network is illegal with respect to some given predicate, then at least one node will detect it. Such a node can raise an alarm, or launch a recovery procedure enabling the system to return to a legal state. In this paper, we introduce error-sensitive proof-labeling schemes. These are proof-labeling schemes which guarantee that the number of nodes detecting illegal states is linearly proportional to the edit-distance between the current state and the set of legal states. By using error-sensitive proof-labeling schemes, states which are far from satisfying the predicate will be detected by many nodes, enabling fast return to legality. We provide a structural characterization of the set of boolean predicates on network states for which there exist error-sensitive proof-labeling schemes. This characterization allows us to show that classical predicates such as, e.g., acyclicity, and leader admit error-sensitive proof-labeling schemes, while others like regular subgraphs don't. We also focus on compact error-sensitive proof-labeling schemes. In particular, we show that the known proof-labeling schemes for spanning tree and minimum spanning tree, using certificates on $O(\log n)$ bits, and on $O\left(\log^2n\right)$ bits, respectively, are error-sensitive, as long as the trees are locally represented by adjacency lists, and not just by parent pointers.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

What can be certified compactly?

Local certification consists in assigning labels (called \emph{certificates}) to the nodes of a network to certify a property of the network or the correctness of a data structure distributed on the network. The verification of this certification must be local: a node typically sees only its neighbors in the network. The main measure of performance of a certification is the size of its certificates. In 2011, Göös and Suomela identified $Θ(\log n)$ as a special certificate size: below this threshold little is possible, and several key properties do have certifications of this type. A certification with such small certificates is now called a \emph{compact local certification}, and it has become the gold standard of the area, similarly to polynomial time for centralized computing. A major question is then to understand which properties have $O(\log n)$ certificates, or in other words: what is the power of compact local certification? Recently, a series of papers have proved that several well-known network properties have compact local certifications: planarity, bounded-genus, etc. But one would like to have more general results, \emph{i.e.} meta-theorems. In the analogue setting of polynomial-time centralized algorithms, a very fruitful approach has been to prove that restricted types of problems can be solved in polynomial time in graphs with restricted structures. These problems are typically those that can be expressed in some logic, and the graph structures are whose with bounded width or depth parameters. We take a similar approach and prove the first meta-theorems for local certification. (See the abstract of the pdf for more details.)

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Compact Distributed Certification of Planar Graphs

Naor, Parter, and Yogev (SODA 2020) have recently demonstrated the existence of a \emph{distributed interactive proof} for planarity (i.e., for certifying that a network is planar), using a sophisticated generic technique for constructing distributed IP protocols based on sequential IP protocols. The interactive proof for planarity is based on a distributed certification of the correct execution of any given sequential linear-time algorithm for planarity testing. It involves three interactions between the prover and the randomized distributed verifier (i.e., it is a \dMAM\/ protocol), and uses small certificates, on $O(\log n)$ bits in $n$-node networks. We show that a single interaction from the prover suffices, and randomization is unecessary, by providing an explicit description of a \emph{proof-labeling scheme} for planarity, still using certificates on just $O(\log n)$ bits. We also show that there are no proof-labeling schemes -- in fact, even no \emph{locally checkable proofs} -- for planarity using certificates on $o(\log n)$ bits.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Graph classes and forbidden patterns on three vertices

This paper deals with graph classes characterization and recognition. A popular way to characterize a graph class is to list a minimal set of forbidden induced subgraphs. Unfortunately this strategy usually does not lead to an efficient recognition algorithm. On the other hand, many graph classes can be efficiently recognized by techniques based on some interesting orderings of the nodes, such as the ones given by traversals. We study specifically graph classes that have an ordering avoiding some ordered structures. More precisely, we consider what we call patterns on three nodes, and the recognition complexity of the associated classes. In this domain, there are two key previous works. Damashke started the study of the classes defined by forbidden patterns, a set that contains interval, chordal and bipartite graphs among others. On the algorithmic side, Hell, Mohar and Rafiey proved that any class defined by a set of forbidden patterns can be recognized in polynomial time. We improve on these two works, by characterizing systematically all the classes defined sets of forbidden patterns (on three nodes), and proving that among the 23 different classes (up to complementation) that we find, 21 can actually be recognized in linear time. Beyond this result, we consider that this type of characterization is very useful, leads to a rich structure of classes, and generates a lot of open questions worth investigating.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Local Certification of Graphs with Bounded Genus

Naor, Parter, and Yogev [SODA 2020] recently designed a compiler for automatically translating standard centralized interactive protocols to distributed interactive protocols, as introduced by Kol, Oshman, and Saxena [PODC 2018]. In particular, by using this compiler, every linear-time algorithm for deciding the membership to some fixed graph class can be translated into a $\mathsf{dMAM}(O(\log n))$ protocol for this class, that is, a distributed interactive protocol with $O(\log n)$-bit proof size in $n$-node graphs, and three interactions between the (centralizer) computationally-unbounded but non-trustable prover Merlin, and the (decentralized) randomized computationally-limited verifier Arthur. As a corollary, there is a $\mathsf{dMAM}(O(\log n))$ protocol for the class of planar graphs, as well as for the class of graphs with bounded genus. We show that there exists a distributed interactive protocol for the class of graphs with bounded genus performing just a single interaction, from the prover to the verifier, yet preserving proof size of $O(\log n)$ bits. This result also holds for the class of graphs with bounded demi-genus, that is, graphs that can be embedded on a non-orientable surface of bounded genus. The interactive protocols described in this paper are actually proof-labeling schemes, i.e., a subclass of interactive protocols, previously introduced by Korman, Kutten, and Peleg [PODC 2005]. In particular, these schemes do not require any randomization from the verifier, and the proofs may often be computed a priori, at low cost, by the nodes themselves. Our results thus extend the recent proof-labeling scheme for planar graphs by Feuilloley et al. [PODC 2020], to graphs of bounded genus, and to graphs of bounded demigenus.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Note on distributed certification of minimum spanning trees

A distributed proof (also known as local certification, or proof-labeling scheme) is a mechanism to certify that the solution to a graph problem is correct. It takes the form of an assignment of labels to the nodes, that can be checked locally. There exists such a proof for the minimum spanning tree problem, using $O(\log n \log W)$ bit labels (where $n$ is the number of nodes in the graph, and $W$ is the largest weight of an edge). This is due to Korman and Kutten who describe it in concise and formal manner in [Korman and Kutten 07]. In this note, we propose a more intuitive description of the result, as well as a gentle introduction to the problem.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Redundancy in Distributed Proofs

Distributed proofs are mechanisms enabling the nodes of a network to collectivity and efficiently check the correctness of Boolean predicates on the structure of the network, or on data-structures distributed over the nodes (e.g., spanning trees or routing tables). We consider mechanisms consisting of two components: a \emph{prover} assigning a \emph{certificate} to each node, and a distributed algorithm called \emph{verifier} that is in charge of verifying the distributed proof formed by the collection of all certificates. In this paper, we show that many network predicates have distributed proofs offering a high level of redundancy, explicitly or implicitly. We use this remarkable property of distributed proofs for establishing perfect tradeoffs between the \emph{size of the certificate} stored at every node, and the \emph{number of rounds} of the verification protocol. If we allow every node to communicate to distance at most $t$, one might expect that the certificate sizes can be reduced by a multiplicative factor of at least~$t$. In trees, cycles and grids, we show that such tradeoffs can be established for \emph{all} network predicates, i.e., it is always possible to linearly decrease the certificate size. In arbitrary graphs, we show that any part of the certificates common to all nodes can be evenly redistributed among these nodes, achieving even a better tradeoff: this common part of the certificate can be reduced by the size of a smallest ball of radius $t$ in the network. In addition to these general results, we establish several upper and lower bounds on the certificate sizes used for distributed proofs for spanning trees, minimum-weight spanning trees, diameter, additive and multiplicative spanners, and more, improving and generalizing previous results from the literature.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access