Paper detail

Randomized Distributed Decision

The paper tackles the power of randomization in the context of locality by analyzing the ability to`boost' the success probability of deciding a distributed language. The main outcome of this analysis is that the distributed computing setting contrasts significantly with the sequential one as far as randomization is concerned. Indeed, we prove that in some cases, the ability to increase the success probability for deciding distributed languages is rather limited. Informally, a (p,q)-decider for a language L is a distributed randomized algorithm which accepts instances in L with probability at least p and rejects instances outside of L with probability at least q. It is known that every hereditary language that can be decided in t rounds by a (p,q)-decider, where p^2+q>1, can actually be decided deterministically in O(t) rounds. In one of our results we give evidence supporting the conjecture that the above statement holds for all distributed languages. This is achieved by considering the restricted case of path topologies. We then turn our attention to the range below the aforementioned threshold, namely, the case where p^2+q\leq1. We define B_k(t) to be the set of all languages decidable in at most t rounds by a (p,q)-decider, where p^{1+1/k}+q>1. It is easy to see that every language is decidable (in zero rounds) by a (p,q)-decider satisfying p+q=1. Hence, the hierarchy B_k provides a spectrum of complexity classes between determinism and complete randomization. We prove that all these classes are separated: for every integer k\geq 1, there exists a language L satisfying L\in B_{k+1}(0) but L\notin B_k(t) for any t=o(n). In addition, we show that B_\infty(t) does not contain all languages, for any t=o(n). Finally, we show that if the inputs can be restricted in certain ways, then the ability to boost the success probability becomes almost null.

preprint2012arXivOpen 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.