Paper detail

Distributed Testing of Graph Isomorphism in the CONGEST model

In this paper we study the problem of testing graph isomorphism (GI) in the CONGEST distributed model. In this setting we test whether the distributive network, $G_U$, is isomorphic to $G_K$ which is given as an input to all the nodes in the network, or alternatively, only to a single node. We first consider the decision variant of the problem in which the algorithm distinguishes $G_U$ and $G_K$ which are isomorphic from $G_U$ and $G_K$ which are not isomorphic. We provide a randomized algorithm with $O(n)$ rounds for the setting in which $G_K$ is given only to a single node. We prove that for this setting the number of rounds of any deterministic algorithm is $\tildeΩ(n^2)$ rounds, where $n$ denotes the number of nodes, which implies a separation between the randomized and the deterministic complexities of deciding GI. We then consider the \emph{property testing} variant of the problem, where the algorithm is only required to distinguish the case that $G_U$ and $G_K$ are isomorphic from the case that $G_U$ and $G_K$ are \emph{far} from being isomorphic (according to some predetermined distance measure). We show that every algorithm requires $Ω(D)$ rounds, where $D$ denotes the diameter of the network. This lower bound holds even if all the nodes are given $G_K$ as an input, and even if the message size is unbounded. We provide a randomized algorithm with an almost matching round complexity of $O(D+(ε^{-1}\log n)^2)$ rounds that is suitable for dense graphs. We also show that with the same number of rounds it is possible that each node outputs its mapping according to a bijection which is an \emph{approximated} isomorphism. We conclude with simple simulation arguments that allow us to obtain essentially tight algorithms with round complexity $\tilde{O}(D)$ for special families of sparse graphs.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.