Deterministic Leader Election in Anonymous Radio Networks
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Leader election is a fundamental task in distributed computing. It is a symmetry breaking problem, calling for one node of the network to become the leader , and for all other nodes to become non-leaders . We consider leader election in anonymous radio networks modeled as simple undirected connected graphs. Nodes communicate in synchronous rounds. In each round, a node can either transmit a message to all its neighbours, or stay silent and listen. A node v hears a message from a neighbour w in a given round if v listens in this round and if w is its only neighbour transmitting in this round. If v listens in a round in which more than one neighbour transmits, then v hears noise that is different from any message and different from silence. We assume that nodes are identical (anonymous) and execute the same deterministic algorithm. Under this scenario, symmetry can be broken only in one way: by different wake-up times of the nodes. In which situations is it possible to break symmetry and elect a leader using time as symmetry breaker? In order to answer this question, we consider configurations . A configuration is the underlying graph with nodes tagged by non-negative integers with the following meaning. A node can either wake up spontaneously in the round shown on its tag, according to some global clock, or can be woken up hearing a message sent by one of its already awoken neighbours. The local clock of a node starts at its wakeup and nodes do not have access to the global clock determining their tags. A configuration is feasible if there exists a distributed algorithm that elects a leader for this configuration. Our main result is a complete algorithmic characterization of feasible configurations. More precisely, we design a centralized decision algorithm, working in polynomial time, whose input is a configuration and which decides if the configuration is feasible. Using this algorithm we also provide a dedicated deterministic distributed leader election algorithm for each feasible configuration that elects a leader for this configuration in time O ( n 2 σ, where n is the number of nodes and σ is the difference between the largest and smallest tag of the configuration. We then ask the question whether there exists a universal deterministic distributed algorithm electing a leader for all feasible configurations. The answer turns out to be no, and we show that such a universal algorithm cannot exist even for the class of 4-node feasible configurations. We also prove that a distributed version of our decision algorithm cannot exist.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle