MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367183818 · doi:10.3390/a16050222

Asynchronous Gathering in a Dangerous Ring

2023· article· en· W4367183818 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAlgorithms · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptimization and Search Problems
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
FundersGruppo Nazionale per il Calcolo ScientificoNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversità di PisaIstituto Nazionale di Alta Matematica "Francesco Severi"
KeywordsRendezvousAsynchronous communicationComputer scienceNode (physics)Mathematical proofRing (chemistry)ConstructiveSet (abstract data type)Mobile agentA priori and a posterioriRing networkProcess (computing)Distributed computingComputer networkMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Consider a set of k identical asynchronous mobile agents located in an anonymous ring of n nodes. The classical Gather (or Rendezvous) problem requires all agents to meet at the same node, not a priori decided, within a finite amount of time. This problem has been studied assuming that the network is safe for the agents. In this paper, we consider the presence in the ring of a stationary process located at a node that disables any incoming agent without leaving any trace. Such a dangerous node is known in the literature as a black hole, and the determination of its location has been extensively investigated. The presence of the black hole makes it deterministically unfeasible for all agents to gather. So, the research concern is to determine how many agents can gather and under what conditions. In this paper we establish a complete characterization of the conditions under which the problem can be solved. In particular, we determine the maximum number of agents that can be guaranteed to gather in the same location depending on whether k or n is unknown (at least one must be known). These results are tight: in each case, gathering with one more agent is deterministically unfeasible. All our possibility proofs are constructive: we provide mobile agent algorithms that allow the agents to gather within a predefined distance under the specified conditions. The analysis of the time costs of these algorithms show that they are optimal. Our gathering algorithm for the case of unknown k is also a solution for the black hole location problem. Interestingly, its bounded time complexity is Θ(n); this is a significant improvement over the existing O(nlogn) bounded time complexity.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.947
Threshold uncertainty score0.471

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.249 · 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