Paper detail

Rumor Spreading in Random Evolving Graphs

Randomized gossip is one of the most popular way of disseminating information in large scale networks. This method is appreciated for its simplicity, robustness, and efficiency. In the &#34;push&#34; protocol, every informed node selects, at every time step (a.k.a. round), one of its neighboring node uniformly at random and forwards the information to this node. This protocol is known to complete information spreading in $O(\log n)$ time steps with high probability (w.h.p.) in several families of $n$-node &#34;static&#34; networks. The Push protocol has also been empirically shown to perform well in practice, and, specifically, to be robust against dynamic topological changes. In this paper, we aim at analyzing the Push protocol in &#34;dynamic&#34; networks. We consider the &#34;edge-Markovian&#34; evolving graph model which captures natural temporal dependencies between the structure of the network at time $t$, and the one at time $t+1$. Precisely, a non-edge appears with probability $p$, while an existing edge dies with probability $q$. In order to fit with real-world traces, we mostly concentrate our study on the case where $p=Ω(1/n)$ and $q$ is constant. We prove that, in this realistic scenario, the Push protocol does perform well, completing information spreading in $O(\log n)$ time steps w.h.p. Note that this performance holds even when the network is, w.h.p., disconnected at every time step (e.g., when $p << (\log n) / n$). Our result provides the first formal argument demonstrating the robustness of the Push protocol against network changes. We also address other ranges of parameters $p$ and $q$ (e.g., $p+q=1$ with arbitrary $p$ and $q$, and $p=1/n$ with arbitrary $q$). Although they do not precisely fit with the measures performed on real-world traces, they can be of independent interest for other settings. The results in these cases confirm the positive impact of dynamism.

preprint2013arXivOpen 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.

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.