Local MST computation with short advice

We use the recently introduced advising scheme framework for measuring the difficulty of locally distributively computing a Minimum Spanning Tree (MST). An (m,t)-advising scheme for a distributed problem P is a way, for every possible input I of P, to provide an "advice" (i.e., a bit string) about I to each node so that: (1) the maximum size of the advices is at most m bits, and (2) the problem P can be solved distributively in at most t rounds using the advices as inputs. In case of MST, the output returned by each node of a weighted graph G is the edge leading to its parent in some rooted MST T of G. Clearly, there is a trivial (log n,0)-advising scheme for MST (each node is given the local port number of the edge leading to the root of some MST T), and it is known that any (0,t)-advising scheme satisfies t ≥ Ω (√n). Our main result is the construction of an (O(1),O(log n))-advising scheme for MST. That is, by only giving a constant number of bits of advice to each node, one can decrease exponentially the distributed computation time of MST in arbitrary graph, compared to algorithms dealing with the problem in absence of any a priori information. We also consider the average size of the advices. On the one hand, we show that any (m,0)-advising scheme for MST gives advices of average size Ω(log n). On the other hand we design an (m,1)-advising scheme for MST with advices of constant average size, that is one round is enough to decrease the average size of the advices from log(n) to constant.

[1]  Moni Naor,et al.  What can be computed locally? , 1993, STOC.

[2]  David Peleg,et al.  Distributed Computing: A Locality-Sensitive Approach , 1987 .

[3]  David Peleg,et al.  A near-tight lower bound on the time complexity of distributed MST construction , 1999, 40th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (Cat. No.99CB37039).

[4]  Baruch Awerbuch,et al.  Optimal distributed algorithms for minimum weight spanning tree, counting, leader election, and related problems , 1987, STOC.

[5]  Boaz Patt-Shamir,et al.  MST construction in O(log log n) communication rounds , 2003, SPAA '03.

[6]  Nathan Linial,et al.  Locality in Distributed Graph Algorithms , 1992, SIAM J. Comput..

[7]  Roger Wattenhofer,et al.  What cannot be computed locally! , 2004, PODC '04.

[8]  Eli Gafni,et al.  Improvements in the time complexity of two message-optimal election algorithms , 1985, PODC '85.

[9]  Michael Elkin,et al.  A faster distributed protocol for constructing a minimum spanning tree , 2004, SODA '04.

[10]  Boaz Patt-Shamir,et al.  Distributed MST for constant diameter graphs , 2001, PODC '01.

[11]  Shay Kutten,et al.  Proof labeling schemes , 2005, PODC '05.

[12]  Reuven Cohen,et al.  Label-guided graph exploration by a finite automaton , 2005, TALG.

[13]  Michael Elkin,et al.  Unconditional lower bounds on the time-approximation tradeoffs for the distributed minimum spanning tree problem , 2004, STOC '04.

[14]  Moti Yung,et al.  Memory-Efficient Self Stabilizing Protocols for General Networks , 1990, WDAG.

[15]  Reuven Cohen,et al.  Labeling Schemes for Tree Representation , 2005, IWDC.

[16]  Pierre A. Humblet,et al.  A Distributed Algorithm for Minimum-Weight Spanning Trees , 1983, TOPL.

[17]  Shay Kutten,et al.  Distributed verification of minimum spanning trees , 2006, PODC '06.

[18]  Francis Y. L. Chin,et al.  An almost linear time and O(nlogn+e) Messages distributed algorithm for minimum-weight spanning trees , 1985, 26th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (sfcs 1985).

[19]  Andrzej Pelc,et al.  Oracle size: a new measure of difficulty for communication tasks , 2006, PODC '06.

[20]  Ronald L. Rivest,et al.  Introduction to Algorithms , 1990 .

[21]  Andrzej Pelc,et al.  Tree Exploration with an Oracle , 2006, MFCS.