Paper detail

The Energy Complexity of Las Vegas Leader Election

We consider the time and energy complexities of randomized leader election in a multiple-access channel, where the number of devices $n\geq 2$ is unknown. It is well-known that for polynomial-time randomized leader election algorithms with success probability $1-1/poly(n)$, the optimal energy complexity is $Θ(\log\log^*n)$ if receivers can detect collisions, and $Θ(\log^*n)$ otherwise. Without collision detection, all existing randomized leader election algorithms using $o(\log\log n)$ energy are Monte Carlo in that they may fail with some small probability, and they may consume unbounded energy and never halt when they fail. Though the optimal energy complexity of leader election appears to be settled, it is still an open question to attain the optimal $O(\log^*n)$ energy complexity by an efficient Las Vegas algorithm that never fails. In this paper we address this fundamental question. $\textbf{Separation between Monte Carlo and Las Vegas:}$ Without collision detection, we prove that any Las Vegas leader election algorithm with finite expected time complexity must use $Ω(\log\log n)$ energy, establishing a large separation between Monte Carlo and Las Vegas algorithms. $\textbf{Exponential improvement with sender collision detection:}$ In the setting where senders can detect collisions, we design a new leader election algorithm that finishes in $O(\log^{1+ε}n)$ time and uses $O(ε^{-1}\log\log\log n)$ energy in expectation, showing that sender collision detection helps improve the energy complexity exponentially. $\textbf{Optimal deterministic leader election algorithm:}$ As a side result, via derandomization, we show a new deterministic algorithm that takes $O(n\log(N/n))$ time and $O(\log(N/n))$ energy to elect a leader from $n$ devices, where each device has a unique identifier in $[N]$. This algorithm is time-optimal and energy-optimal.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

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.