Paper detail

Positive Aging Admits Fast Asynchronous Plurality Consensus

We study distributed plurality consensus among $n$ nodes, each of which initially holds one of $k$ opinions. The goal is to eventually agree on the initially dominant opinion. We consider an asynchronous communication model in which each node is equipped with a random clock. Whenever the clock of a node ticks, it may open communication channels to a constant number of other nodes, chosen uniformly at random or from a list of constantly many addresses acquired in previous steps. The tick rates and the delays for establishing communication channels (channel delays) follow some probability distribution. Once a channel is established, communication between nodes can be performed instantaneously. We consider distributions for the waiting times between ticks and channel delays that have constant mean and the so-called positive aging property. In this setting, asynchronous plurality consensus is fast: if the initial bias between the largest and second largest opinion is at least $\sqrt{n}\log n$, then after $O(\log\log_αk\cdot\log k+\log\log n)$ time all but a $1/ \text{polylog } n$ fraction of nodes have the initial plurality opinion. Here $α$ denotes the initial ratio between the largest and second largest opinion. After additional $O(\log n)$ steps all nodes have the same opinion w.h.p., and this result is tight. If additionally the distributions satisfy a certain density property, which is common in many well-known distributions, we show that consensus is reached in $O(\log \log_αk + \log \log n)$ time for all but $n/\text{polylog } n$ nodes, w.h.p. This implies that for a large range of initial configurations partial consensus can be reached significantly faster in this asynchronous communication model than in the synchronous setting.

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.