One Step Forward, One Step Back: FLP-Style Proofs and the Round-Reduction Technique for Colorless Tasks

H. Attiya, P. Fraigniaud, A. Paz, S. Rajsbaum
{"title":"One Step Forward, One Step Back: FLP-Style Proofs and the Round-Reduction Technique for Colorless Tasks","authors":"H. Attiya, P. Fraigniaud, A. Paz, S. Rajsbaum","doi":"10.48550/arXiv.2308.04213","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The paper compares two generic techniques for deriving lower bounds and impossibility results in distributed computing. First, we prove a speedup theorem (a-la Brandt, 2019), for wait-free colorless algorithms, aiming at capturing the essence of the seminal round-reduction proof establishing a lower bound on the number of rounds for 3-coloring a cycle (Linial, 1992), and going by backward induction. Second, we consider FLP-style proofs, aiming at capturing the essence of the seminal consensus impossibility proof (Fischer, Lynch, and Paterson, 1985) and using forward induction. We show that despite their very different natures, these two forms of proof are tightly connected. In particular, we show that for every colorless task $\\Pi$, if there is a round-reduction proof establishing the impossibility of solving $\\Pi$ using wait-free colorless algorithms, then there is an FLP-style proof establishing the same impossibility. For 1-dimensional colorless tasks (for an arbitrary number $n\\geq 2$ of processes), we prove that the two proof techniques have exactly the same power, and more importantly, both are complete: if a 1-dimensional colorless task is not wait-free solvable by $n\\geq 2$ processes, then the impossibility can be proved by both proof techniques. Moreover, a round-reduction proof can be automatically derived, and an FLP-style proof can be automatically generated from it. Finally, we illustrate the use of these two techniques by establishing the impossibility of solving any colorless covering task of arbitrary dimension by wait-free algorithms.","PeriodicalId":89463,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the ... International Symposium on High Performance Distributed Computing","volume":"11 1","pages":"4:1-4:23"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the ... International Symposium on High Performance Distributed Computing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2308.04213","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The paper compares two generic techniques for deriving lower bounds and impossibility results in distributed computing. First, we prove a speedup theorem (a-la Brandt, 2019), for wait-free colorless algorithms, aiming at capturing the essence of the seminal round-reduction proof establishing a lower bound on the number of rounds for 3-coloring a cycle (Linial, 1992), and going by backward induction. Second, we consider FLP-style proofs, aiming at capturing the essence of the seminal consensus impossibility proof (Fischer, Lynch, and Paterson, 1985) and using forward induction. We show that despite their very different natures, these two forms of proof are tightly connected. In particular, we show that for every colorless task $\Pi$, if there is a round-reduction proof establishing the impossibility of solving $\Pi$ using wait-free colorless algorithms, then there is an FLP-style proof establishing the same impossibility. For 1-dimensional colorless tasks (for an arbitrary number $n\geq 2$ of processes), we prove that the two proof techniques have exactly the same power, and more importantly, both are complete: if a 1-dimensional colorless task is not wait-free solvable by $n\geq 2$ processes, then the impossibility can be proved by both proof techniques. Moreover, a round-reduction proof can be automatically derived, and an FLP-style proof can be automatically generated from it. Finally, we illustrate the use of these two techniques by establishing the impossibility of solving any colorless covering task of arbitrary dimension by wait-free algorithms.
一步前进,一步后退:flp风格的证明和圆减少技术的无色任务
本文比较了分布式计算中下界和不可能结果的两种通用求导技术。首先,我们证明了无等待无色算法的加速定理(a-la Brandt, 2019),旨在捕捉重要的轮约简证明的本质,建立了一个循环3着色的轮数的下界(Linial, 1992),并通过逆向归纳。其次,我们考虑了flp风格的证明,旨在捕捉开创性共识不可能性证明的本质(Fischer, Lynch, and Paterson, 1985)并使用前向归纳法。我们表明,尽管它们的性质非常不同,这两种形式的证明是紧密联系在一起的。特别地,我们表明,对于每个无色任务$\Pi$,如果有一个圆约简证明建立使用无等待无色算法求解$\Pi$的不可能性,那么就有一个flp风格的证明建立同样的不可能性。对于一维无色任务(对于任意数目的$n\geq 2$过程),我们证明了这两种证明技术具有完全相同的能力,更重要的是,两者都是完备的:如果一个一维无色任务不是由$n\geq 2$过程无等待可解的,那么这两种证明技术都可以证明不可能。并且,可以自动导出一个轮约证明,并由此自动生成一个FLP-style的证明。最后,我们通过建立无等待算法不可能解决任意维度的任何无色覆盖任务来说明这两种技术的使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信