Error-Sensitive Proof-Labeling Schemes

Proof-labeling schemes are known mechanisms providing nodes of networks with certificates that can be verified locally by distributed algorithms. Given a boolean predicate on network states, such schemes enable to check whether the predicate is satisfied by the actual state of the network, by having nodes interacting with their neighbors only. Proof-labeling schemes are typically designed for enforcing fault-tolerance, by making sure that if the current state of the network is illegal with respect to some given predicate, then at least one node will detect it. Such a node can raise an alarm, or launch a recovery procedure enabling the system to return to a legal state. In this paper, we introduce error-sensitive proof-labeling schemes. These are proof-labeling schemes which guarantee that the number of nodes detecting illegal states is linearly proportional to the edit-distance between the current state and the set of legal states. By using error-sensitive proof-labeling schemes, states which are far from satisfying the predicate will be detected by many nodes, enabling fast return to legality. We provide a structural characterization of the set of boolean predicates on network states for which there exist error-sensitive proof-labeling schemes. This characterization allows us to show that classical predicates such as, e.g., acyclicity, and leader admit error-sensitive proof-labeling schemes, while others like regular subgraphs don't. We also focus on compact error-sensitive proof-labeling schemes. In particular, we show that the known proof-labeling schemes for spanning tree and minimum spanning tree, using certificates on $O(\log n)$ bits, and on $O\left(\log^2n\right)$ bits, respectively, are error-sensitive, as long as the trees are locally represented by adjacency lists, and not just by parent pointers.

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

[2]  Pierre Fraigniaud,et al.  Space-Optimal Time-Efficient Silent Self-Stabilizing Constructions of Constrained Spanning Trees , 2015, 2015 IEEE 35th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems.

[3]  Boaz Patt-Shamir,et al.  Self-stabilization by local checking and correction , 1991, [1991] Proceedings 32nd Annual Symposium of Foundations of Computer Science.

[4]  Moti Yung,et al.  The Local Detection Paradigm and Its Application to Self-Stabilization , 1997, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[5]  László Lovász,et al.  Non-Deterministic Graph Property Testing , 2012, Combinatorics, Probability and Computing.

[6]  Toshimitsu Masuzawa,et al.  Fast and compact self-stabilizing verification, computation, and fault detection of an MST , 2011, PODC '11.

[7]  M. Kaufmann What Can Be Computed Locally ? , 2003 .

[8]  Oded Goldreich A Brief Introduction to Property Testing , 2010, Property Testing.

[9]  Oded Goldreich,et al.  Introduction to Testing Graph Properties , 2010, Property Testing.

[10]  Boaz Patt-Shamir,et al.  Distributed discovery of large near-cliques , 2011, Distributed Computing.

[11]  Moti Medina,et al.  Non-local Probes Do Not Help with Many Graph Problems , 2016, DISC.

[12]  Pierre Fraigniaud,et al.  Survey of Distributed Decision , 2016, Bull. EATCS.

[13]  Boaz Patt-Shamir,et al.  On Proof-Labeling Schemes versus Silent Self-stabilizing Algorithms , 2014, SSS.

[14]  Eldar Fischer,et al.  Fast distributed algorithms for testing graph properties , 2016, Distributed Computing.

[15]  Pierre Fraigniaud,et al.  Towards a complexity theory for local distributed computing , 2013, JACM.

[16]  Shay Kutten,et al.  Distributed verification of minimum spanning trees , 2007, Distributed Computing.

[17]  Sébastien Tixeuil,et al.  Transient fault detectors , 1998, Distributed Computing.

[18]  Oded Goldreich A Brief Introduction to Property Testing , 2011, Studies in Complexity and Cryptography.

[19]  Dana Ron,et al.  Best of Two Local Models: Local Centralized and Local Distributed Algorithms , 2014, ArXiv.

[20]  Ron Rothblum,et al.  Non-interactive proofs of proximity , 2015, computational complexity.

[21]  Dana Ron,et al.  On Approximating the Minimum Vertex Cover in Sublinear Time and the Connection to Distributed Algorithms , 2007, Electron. Colloquium Comput. Complex..

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

[23]  Mika Göös,et al.  Locally Checkable Proofs in Distributed Computing , 2016, Theory Comput..

[24]  Boaz Patt-Shamir,et al.  Time optimal self-stabilizing synchronization , 1993, STOC.

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

[26]  Yehuda Afek,et al.  Local Stabilizer , 2002, J. Parallel Distributed Comput..

[27]  David Peleg,et al.  Tight Bounds For Distributed MST Verification , 2011, STACS.

[28]  Ivan Rapaport,et al.  Distributed Testing of Excluded Subgraphs , 2016, DISC.