MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2542809591 · doi:10.1109/allerton.2008.4797581

Rates of convergence for greedy gossip with eavesdropping

2008· article· en· W2542809591 on OpenAlexaff
Deniz Üstebay, Boris N. Oreshkin, Mark Coates, Michael Rabbat

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Control Multi-Agent Systems
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGossipEavesdroppingGossip protocolNetwork topologyComputer scienceConvergence (economics)Greedy algorithmNode (physics)Wireless sensor networkWireless networkRate of convergenceWirelessTopology (electrical circuits)Computer networkAlgorithmMathematicsChannel (broadcasting)TelecommunicationsCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Greedy gossip with eavesdropping (GGE) is a randomized gossip algorithm that exploits the broadcast nature of wireless communications to converge rapidly on grid-like network topologies without requiring that nodes know their geographic locations. When a node decides to gossip, rather than choosing one of its neighbors randomly, it greedily chooses to gossip with the neighbor whose values are most different from its own. We assume that all transmissions are wireless broadcasts so that nodes can keep track of their neighbors' values by eavesdropping on their communications. We have previously proved that GGE converges to the average consensus on connected network topologies. In this paper we study the rate of convergence of GGE, a non-trivial task due to the greedy, data-driven nature of the algorithm. We demonstrate that GGE outperforms standard randomized gossip, and we characterize the rate of convergence in terms of a topology-dependent constant analogous to the second-largest eigenvalue characterization for previous randomized gossip algorithms. Simulations demonstrate that the convergence rate of GGE is superior to existing average consensus algorithms such as geographic gossip.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.089
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.089
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.213 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDistributed Control Multi-Agent SystemsFrench-language works237,207