Paper detail

Tree Codes Improve Convergence Rate of Consensus Over Erasure Channels

We study the problem of achieving average consensus between a group of agents over a network with erasure links. In the context of consensus problems, the unreliability of communication links between nodes has been traditionally modeled by allowing the underlying graph to vary with time. In other words, depending on the realization of the link erasures, the underlying graph at each time instant is assumed to be a subgraph of the original graph. Implicit in this model is the assumption that the erasures are symmetric: if at time t the packet from node i to node j is dropped, the same is true for the packet transmitted from node j to node i. However, in practical wireless communication systems this assumption is unreasonable and, due to the lack of symmetry, standard averaging protocols cannot guarantee that the network will reach consensus to the true average. In this paper we explore the use of channel coding to improve the performance of consensus algorithms. For symmetric erasures, we show that, for certain ranges of the system parameters, repetition codes can speed up the convergence rate. For asymmetric erasures we show that tree codes (which have recently been designed for erasure channels) can be used to simulate the performance of the original "unerased" graph. Thus, unlike conventional consensus methods, we can guarantee convergence to the average in the asymmetric case. The price is a slowdown in the convergence rate, relative to the unerased network, which is still often faster than the convergence rate of conventional consensus algorithms over noisy links.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors3 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.