Paper detail

Gracefully Degrading Consensus and $k$-Set Agreement in Directed Dynamic Networks

We study distributed agreement in synchronous directed dynamic networks, where an omniscient message adversary controls the availability of communication links. We prove that consensus is impossible under a message adversary that guarantees weak connectivity only, and introduce vertex-stable root components (VSRCs) as a means for circumventing this impossibility: A VSRC(k, d) message adversary guarantees that, eventually, there is an interval of $d$ consecutive rounds where every communication graph contains at most $k$ strongly (dynamic) connected components consisting of the same processes, which have at most outgoing links to the remaining processes. We present a consensus algorithm that works correctly under a VSRC(1, 4H + 2) message adversary, where $H$ is the dynamic causal network diameter. On the other hand, we show that consensus is impossible against a VSRC(1, H - 1) or a VSRC(2, $\infty$) message adversary, revealing that there is not much hope to deal with stronger message adversaries. However, we show that gracefully degrading consensus, which degrades to general $k$-set agreement in case of unfavourable network conditions, is feasible against stronger message adversaries: We provide a $k$-uniform $k$-set agreement algorithm, where the number of system-wide decision values $k$ is not encoded in the algorithm, but rather determined by the actual power of the message adversary in a run: Our algorithm guarantees at most $k$ decision values under a VSRC(n, d) + MAJINF(k) message adversary, which combines VSRC(n, d) (for some small $d$, ensuring termination) with some information flow guarantee MAJINF(k) between certain VSRCs (ensuring $k$-agreement). Our results provide a significant step towards the exact solvability/impossibility border of general $k$-set agreement in directed dynamic networks.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 authors2 topics

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 map preview

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.