A central theme in distributed network algorithms concerns understanding and coping with the issue of locality. Inspired by sequential complexity theory, we focus on a complexity theory for distributed decision problems. In the context of locality, solving a decision problem requires the processors to independently inspect their local neighborhoods and then collectively decide whether a given global input instance belongs to some specified language. This paper introduces several classes of distributed decision problems, proves separation among them and presents some complete problems. More specifically, we consider the standard LOCAL model of computation and define LD (for local decision) as the class of decision problems that can be solved in constant number of communication rounds. We first study the intriguing question of whether randomization helps in local distributed computing, and to what extent. Specifically, we define the corresponding randomized class BPLD, and ask whether LD=BPLD. We provide a partial answer to this question by showing that in many cases, randomization does not help for deciding hereditary languages. In addition, we define the notion of local many-one reductions, and introduce the (nondeterministic) class NLD of decision problems for which there exists a certificate that can be verified in constant number of communication rounds. We prove that there exists an NLD-complete problem. We also show that there exist problems not in NLD. On the other hand, we prove that the class NLD#n, which is NLD assuming that each processor can access an oracle that provides the number of nodes in the network, contains all (decidable) languages. For this class we provide a natural complete problem as well.
The question of what can be computed in a constant number of communication rounds was investigated in the seminal work of Naor and Stockmeyer @cite_16 . In particular, that paper considers a subclass of @math , called LCL, which is essentially @math restricted to languages involving graphs of constant maximum degree, and involving processor inputs taken from a set of constant size, and studies the question of how to compute in @math rounds the constructive versions of decision problems in LCL. The paper provides some beautiful general results. In particular, the authors show that if there exists a randomized algorithm that constructs a solution for a problem in LCL in @math rounds, then there is also a deterministic algorithm constructing a solution for this problem in @math rounds. Unfortunately, the proof of this result relies heavily on the definition of LCL. Indeed, the constant bound constraints on the degrees and input sizes allow the authors to cleverly use Ramsey theory. It is thus not clear whether it is possible to extend this result to all languages in @math .
@cite_16
2017345786
The celebrated Time Hierarchy Theorem for Turing machines states, informally, that more problems can be solved given more time. The extent to which a time hierarchy-type theorem holds in the distributed LOCAL model has been open for many years. It is consistent with previous results that all natural problems in the LOCAL model can be classified according to a small constant number of complexities, such as @math , etc. In this paper we establish the first time hierarchy theorem for the LOCAL model and prove that several gaps exist in the LOCAL time hierarchy. 1. We define an infinite set of simple coloring problems called Hierarchical @math -Coloring . A correctly colored graph can be confirmed by simply checking the neighborhood of each vertex, so this problem fits into the class of locally checkable labeling (LCL) problems. However, the complexity of the @math -level Hierarchical @math -Coloring problem is @math , for @math . The upper and lower bounds hold for both general graphs and trees, and for both randomized and deterministic algorithms. 2. Consider any LCL problem on bounded degree trees. We prove an automatic-speedup theorem that states that any randomized @math -time algorithm solving the LCL can be transformed into a deterministic @math -time algorithm. Together with a previous result, this establishes that on trees, there are no natural deterministic complexities in the ranges @math --- @math or @math --- @math . 3. We expose a gap in the randomized time hierarchy on general graphs. Any randomized algorithm that solves an LCL problem in sublogarithmic time can be sped up to run in @math time, which is the complexity of the distributed Lovasz local lemma problem, currently known to be @math and @math . This paper addresses the cornerstone family of in distributed computing, and investigates the curious gap between randomized and deterministic solutions under bandwidth restrictions. Our main contribution is in providing tools for derandomizing solutions to local problems, when the @math nodes can only send @math -bit messages in each round of communication. We combine bounded independence, which we show to be sufficient for some algorithms, with the method of conditional expectations and with additional machinery, to obtain the following results. Our techniques give a deterministic maximal independent set (MIS) algorithm in the CONGEST model, where the communication graph is identical to the input graph, in @math rounds, where @math is the diameter of the graph. The best known running time in terms of @math alone is @math , which is super-polylogarithmic, and requires large messages. For the CONGEST model, the only known previous solution is a coloring-based @math -round algorithm, where @math is the maximal degree in the graph. On the way to obtaining the above, we show that in the model, which allows all-to-all communication, there is a deterministic MIS algorithm that runs in @math rounds. , where @math is the maximum degree. When @math , the bound improves to @math and holds also for @math -coloring. In addition, we deterministically construct a @math -spanner with @math edges in @math rounds. For comparison, in the more stringent CONGEST model, the best deterministic algorithm for constructing a @math -spanner with @math edges runs in @math rounds. We consider the distributed message-passing @math model. In this model a communication network is represented by a graph where vertices host processors, and communication is performed over the edges. Computation proceeds in synchronous rounds. The running time of an algorithm is the number of rounds from the beginning until all vertices terminate. Local computation is free. An algorithm is called local if it terminates within a constant number of rounds. The question of what problems can be computed locally was raised by Naor and Stockmeyer [16] in their seminal paper in STOC'93. Since then the quest for problems with local algorithms, and for problems that cannot be computed locally, has become a central research direction in the field of distributed algorithms [9,11,13,17]. We devise the first local algorithm for an NP-complete problem. Specifically, our randomized algorithm computes, with high probability, an O(n1 2+e ·χ)-coloring within O(1) rounds, where e>0 is an arbitrarily small constant, and χ is the chromatic number of the input graph. (This problem was shown to be NP-complete in [21].) On our way to this result we devise a constant-time algorithm for computing (O(1), O(n1 2+e))-network-decompositions. Network-decompositions were introduced by [1], and are very useful for solving various distributed problems. The best previously-known algorithm for network-decomposition has a polylogarithmic running time (but is applicable for a wider range of parameters) [15]. We also devise a Δ1+e-coloring algorithm for graphs with sufficiently large maximum degree Δ that runs within O(1) rounds. It improves the best previously-known result for this family of graphs, which is O(log*n) [19]. The purpose of this paper is a study of computation that can be done locally in a distributed network, where "locally" means within time (or distance) independent of the size of the network. Locally checkable labeling (LCL) problems are considered, where the legality of a labeling can be checked locally (e.g., coloring). The results include the following: There are nontrivial LCL problems that have local algorithms. There is a variant of the dining philosophers problem that can be solved locally. Randomization cannot make an LCL problem local; i.e., if a problem has a local randomized algorithm then it has a local deterministic algorithm. It is undecidable, in general, whether a given LCL has a local algorithm. However, it is decidable whether a given LCL has an algorithm that operates in a given time @math . Any LCL problem that has a local algorithm has one that is order-invariant (the algorithm depends only on the order of the processor IDs).