MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4207079208 · doi:10.1145/3491003.3491012

Antipaxos: Taking Interactive Consistency to the Next Level

2022· article· en· W4207079208 on OpenAlexaff
Chunyu Mao, Wojciech Golab, Bernard Wong

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed systems and fault tolerance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLivenessComputer scienceScalabilityDistributed computingLatency (audio)Consistency (knowledge bases)Cloud computingCrashProtocol (science)Path (computing)Eventual consistencyQuantum Byzantine agreementByzantine fault toleranceTheoretical computer scienceComputer networkFault toleranceData consistencyConsistency modelOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Classical consensus protocols, such as Paxos, limit system scalability due to a single leader. This paper introduces a leaderless protocol, called Antipaxos, that reaches agreement on multiple proposals with a fast path solution in the failure-free case, and falls back on a slow path to handle other cases. We first formalize a new agreement problem, termed as k-Interactive Consistency. Then, we present two algorithms to solve this problem under the crash failure model and Byzantine failure model, respectively. We prove the safety and liveness of the proposed algorithms, and present an experimental evaluation of their performance in the Amazon cloud. Antipaxos solves the k-Interactive Consistency problem for two distinct k values under different conditions. The experiments show that our algorithms achieve not only lower execution latency but also higher peak throughput in the failure-free case when deployed in a geo-distributed environment, as compared to one of the state-of-the-art protocols, Egalitarian Paxos (EPaxos). Furthermore, both the crash-tolerant and Byzantine-tolerant designs reach agreement on n batches of proposals with Θ(n2) messages. This leads to the linear complexity of each batch in one consensus cycle, rather than a single batch of proposals per cycle in conventional solutions.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score0.378

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDistributed systems and fault toleranceFrench-language works237,207