Brief Announcement: Distributed Download from an External Data Source in Asynchronous Faulty Settings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The distributed Data Retrieval (DR) model consists of k peers connected by a complete peer-to-peer communication network, and a trusted external data source that stores an array X of n bits (n ≫ k). Up to β k of the peers might fail in any execution (for β ∈ [0, 1)). Peers can obtain the information either by inexpensive messages passed among themselves or through expensive queries to the source array X. In the DR model, we focus on designing protocols that minimize the number of queries performed by any nonfaulty peer (a measure referred to as query complexity) while maximizing the resilience parameter β. The Download problem requires each nonfaulty peer to correctly learn the entire array X. Earlier work on this problem focused on synchronous communication networks and established several deterministic and randomized upper and lower bounds. Our work is the first to extend the study of distributed data retrieval to asynchronous communication networks. We address the Download problem under both the Byzantine and crash failure models. We present query-optimal deterministic solutions in an asynchronous model that can tolerate any fixed fraction β < 1 of crash faults. In the Byzantine failure model, it is known that deterministic protocols incur a query complexity of Ω(n) per peer, even under synchrony. We extend this lower bound to randomized protocols in the asynchronous model for β ≥ 1/2, and further show that for β < 1/2, a randomized protocol exists with near-optimal query complexity. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work to address the Download problem in asynchronous communication networks.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".