Book•
Distributed Graph Coloring: Fundamentals and Recent Developments
01 Aug 2013-
TL;DR: The objective of this monograph is to provide a treatise on theoretical foundations of distributed symmetry breaking in the message-passing model of distributed computing and to stimulate further progress in this exciting area.
Abstract: The focus of this monograph is on symmetry breaking problems in the message-passing model of distributed computing. In this model a communication network is represented by a n-vertex graph G = (V,E), whose vertices host autonomous processors. The processors communicate over the edges of G in discrete rounds. The goal is to devise algorithms that use as few rounds as possible. A typical symmetry-breaking problem is the problem of graph coloring. Denote by [delta] the maximum degree of G. While coloring G with [delta]+ 1 colors is trivial in the centralized setting, the problem becomes much more challenging in the distributed one. One can also compromise on the number of colors, if this allows for more efficient algorithms. Other typical symmetry-breaking problems are the problems of computing a maximal independent set (MIS) and a maximal matching (MM). The study of these problems dates back to the very early days of distributed computing. The founding fathers of distributed computing laid firm foundations for the area of distributed symmetry breaking already in the eighties. In particular, they showed that all these problems can be solved in randomized logarithmic time. Also, Linial showed that an O([delta]2)-coloring can be solved very efficiently deterministically. However, fundamental questions were left open for decades. In particular, it is not known if the MIS or the ([delta] + 1)-coloring can be solved in deterministic polylogarithmic time. Moreover, until recently it was not known if in deterministic polylogarithmic time one can color a graph with significantly fewer than [delta]2 colors. Additionally, it was open (and still open to some extent) if one can have sublogarithmic randomized algorithms for the symmetry breaking problems. Recently, significant progress was achieved in the study of these questions. More efficient deterministic and randomized ([delta] + 1)-coloring algorithms were achieved. Deterministic [delta]1 + o(1)-coloring algorithms with polylogarithmic running time were devised. Improved (and often sublogarithmic-time) randomized algorithms were devised. Drastically improved lower bounds were given. Wide families of graphs in which these problems are solvable much faster than on general graphs were identified. The objective of our monograph is to cover most of these developments, and as a result to provide a treatise on theoretical foundations of distributed symmetry breaking in the message-passing model. We hope that our monograph will stimulate further progress in this exciting area. Table of Contents: Acknowledgments / Introduction / Basics of Graph Theory / Basic Distributed Graph Coloring Algorithns / Lower Bounds / Forest-Decomposition Algorithms and Applications / Defective Coloring / Arbdefective Coloring / Edge-Coloring and Maximal Matching / Network Decompositions / Introduction to Distributed Randomized Algorithms / Conclusion and Open Questions / Bibliography / Authors' Biographies
Citations
More filters
••
[...]
TL;DR: Some of the major results in random graphs and some of the more challenging open problems are reviewed, including those related to the WWW.
Abstract: We will review some of the major results in random graphs and some of the more challenging open problems. We will cover algorithmic and structural questions. We will touch on newer models, including those related to the WWW.
7,116 citations
••
TL;DR: Stephen J. Hartley first provides a complete explanation of the features of Java necessary to write concurrent programs, including topics such as exception handling, interfaces, and packages, and takes a different approach than most Java references.
Abstract: Stephen J. Hartley Oxford University Press, New York, 1998, 260 pp. ISBN 0-19-511315-2, $45.00 Concurrent Programming is a thorough treatment of Java multi-threaded programming for both a stand-alone and distributed environment. Designed mostly for students in concurrent or parallel programming classes, the text is also an excellent reference for the practicing professional developing multi-threaded programs or applets. Hartley first provides a complete explanation of the features of Java necessary to write concurrent programs, including topics such as exception handling, interfaces, and packages. He then gives the reader a solid background to write multi-threaded programs and also presents the problems introduced when writing concurrent programs—namely race conditions, mutual exclusion, and deadlock. Hartley also provides several software solutions that do not require the use of common process and thread mechanisms. Once the groundwork is laid for writing concurrent programs, Hartley then takes a different approach than most Java references. Rather than presenting how Java handles mutual exclusion with the synchronized keyword (although it is covered later), he first looks at semaphore-based solutions to classic concurrent problems such as bounded-buffer, readers-writers, and the dining philosophers. Hartley also uses the same approach to develop Java classes for monitors and message passing. This unique approach to introducing concurrency allows the readers to both understand how Java threads are synchronized and how the basic synchronization mechanism can be used to construct more abstract tools such as semaphores. If there is a shortcoming with the text it is with the lack of sufficient coverage of remote method invocation (RMI), although there is a section covering RMI. This is quite understandable as RMI is a fairly recent phenomenon with the Java community. Also, the classes that Hartley provides could easily implement RMI rather than sockets to handle communication. The strengths of the book include its ease in reading, several examples at the end of chapters, a package similar to Xtango that provides algorithm animation, and a supportive web site by the author (see www.mcs.drexel.edu/~shartley/ConcProgJava/index.html ) including compressed source code. As Java becomes more dominant on the server side of multi-tier applications, writing thread-safe concurrent applications becomes even more important. Concurrent Programming is a strong step towards teaching students and professionals such skills. Greg Gagne, Westminster College of Salt Lake City Salt Lake City, Utah
587 citations
••
TL;DR: In this article, the authors studied the randomized complexity of four fundamental symmetry-breaking problems on graphs: computing maximal independent sets, maximal matchings, vertex colorings, and ruling sets.
Abstract: Symmetry-breaking problems are among the most well studied in the field of distributed computing and yet the most fundamental questions about their complexity remain open. In this article we work in the LOCAL model (where the input graph and underlying distributed network are identical) and study the randomized complexity of four fundamental symmetry-breaking problems on graphs: computing MISs (maximal independent sets), maximal matchings, vertex colorings, and ruling sets. A small sample of our results includes the following: —An MIS algorithm running in O(log2Δ + 2o(√log log n)) time, where Δ is the maximum degree. This is the first MIS algorithm to improve on the 1986 algorithms of Luby and Alon, Babai, and Itai, when log n L Δ L 2√log n, and comes close to the Ω(log Δ / log log Δ lower bound of Kuhn, Moscibroda, and Wattenhofer. —A maximal matching algorithm running in O(log Δ + log 4log n) time. This is the first significant improvement to the 1986 algorithm of Israeli and Itai. Moreover, its dependence on Δ is nearly optimal. —A (Δ + 1)-coloring algorithm requiring O(log Δ + 2o(√log log n) time, improving on an O(log Δ + √log n)-time algorithm of Schneider and Wattenhofer. —A method for reducing symmetry-breaking problems in low arboricity/degeneracy graphs to low-degree graphs. (Roughly speaking, the arboricity or degeneracy of a graph bounds the density of any subgraph.) Corollaries of this reduction include an O(√log n)-time maximal matching algorithm for graphs with arboricity up to 2√log n and an O(log 2/3n)-time MIS algorithm for graphs with arboricity up to 2(log n)1/3. Each of our algorithms is based on a simple but powerful technique for reducing a randomized symmetry-breaking task to a corresponding deterministic one on a poly(log n)-size graph.
284 citations
••
TL;DR: The first polylogarithmic lower bound on such local computation for (optimization) problems including minimum vertex cover, minimum (connected) dominating set, maximum matching, maximal independent set, and maximal matching is given.
Abstract: The question of what can be computed, and how efficiently, is at the core of computer science. Not surprisingly, in distributed systems and networking research, an equally fundamental question is what can be computed in a distributed fashion. More precisely, if nodes of a network must base their decision on information in their local neighborhood only, how well can they compute or approximate a global (optimization) problem? In this paper we give the first polylogarithmic lower bound on such local computation for (optimization) problems including minimum vertex cover, minimum (connected) dominating set, maximum matching, maximal independent set, and maximal matching. In addition, we present a new distributed algorithm for solving general covering and packing linear programs. For some problems this algorithm is tight with the lower bounds, whereas for others it is a distributed approximation scheme. Together, our lower and upper bounds establish the local computability and approximability of a large class of problems, characterizing how much local information is required to solve these tasks.
177 citations
References
More filters
••
TL;DR: The work of Dantzig, Fulkerson, Hoffman, Edmonds, Lawler and other pioneers on network flows, matching and matroids acquainted me with the elegant and efficient algorithms that were sometimes possible.
Abstract: Throughout the 1960s I worked on combinatorial optimization problems including logic circuit design with Paul Roth and assembly line balancing and the traveling salesman problem with Mike Held. These experiences made me aware that seemingly simple discrete optimization problems could hold the seeds of combinatorial explosions. The work of Dantzig, Fulkerson, Hoffman, Edmonds, Lawler and other pioneers on network flows, matching and matroids acquainted me with the elegant and efficient algorithms that were sometimes possible. Jack Edmonds’ papers and a few key discussions with him drew my attention to the crucial distinction between polynomial-time and superpolynomial-time solvability. I was also influenced by Jack’s emphasis on min-max theorems as a tool for fast verification of optimal solutions, which foreshadowed Steve Cook’s definition of the complexity class NP. Another influence was George Dantzig’s suggestion that integer programming could serve as a universal format for combinatorial optimization problems.
8,644 citations
01 Jan 1972
TL;DR: Throughout the 1960s I worked on combinatorial optimization problems including logic circuit design with Paul Roth and assembly line balancing and the traveling salesman problem with Mike Held, which made me aware of the importance of distinction between polynomial-time and superpolynomial-time solvability.
Abstract: Throughout the 1960s I worked on combinatorial optimization problems including logic circuit design with Paul Roth and assembly line balancing and the traveling salesman problem with Mike Held. These experiences made me aware that seemingly simple discrete optimization problems could hold the seeds of combinatorial explosions. The work of Dantzig, Fulkerson, Hoffman, Edmonds, Lawler and other pioneers on network flows, matching and matroids acquainted me with the elegant and efficient algorithms that were sometimes possible. Jack Edmonds’ papers and a few key discussions with him drew my attention to the crucial distinction between polynomial-time and superpolynomial-time solvability. I was also influenced by Jack’s emphasis on min-max theorems as a tool for fast verification of optimal solutions, which foreshadowed Steve Cook’s definition of the complexity class NP. Another influence was George Dantzig’s suggestion that integer programming could serve as a universal format for combinatorial optimization problems.
7,714 citations