Skip to main content

How Good is Weak-Stabilization?

  • Conference paper

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 8255))

Abstract

A weak-stabilizing system is one that guarantees only the possibility of convergence to a correct behavior; i.e., a recovery path may visit an execution cycle before reaching a good behavior. To our knowledge, there has been no work on analyzing the power and performance of weak-stabilizing algorithms. In this paper, we investigate a metric for characterizing the recovery time of weak-stabilizing algorithms. This metric is based on expected mean value of recovery steps for resuming a correct behavior. Our method to evaluate this metric is based on probabilistic state exploration. We show that different weak-stabilizing algorithms perform differently during recovery, because of their structure (e.g., the length and reachability of cycles). We also introduce an automated technique that can improve the performance of implementation of weak-stabilizing algorithms through state encoding.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Beauquier, J., Genolini, C., Kutten, S.: k-stabilization of reactive tasks. In: Proceedings of the 17th ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC), pp. 318–327 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Brandes, U.: On variants of shortest-path betweenness centrality and their generic computation. Social Nnetworks 30(2) (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Devismes, S., Tixeuil, S., Yamashita, M.: Weak vs. self vs. probabilistic stabilization. In: Proceedings of the 28th IEEE International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS), pp. 681–688 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Dijkstra, E.W.: Self-stabilizing systems in spite of distributed control. Communications of the ACM 17(11), 643–644 (1974)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Dolev, S.: Self-stabilization. MIT Press (March 2000)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Dolev, S., Israeli, A., Moran, S.: Uniform dynamic self-stabilizing leader election. IEEE Transactions on Parallel Distributed Systems 8(4), 424–440 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Eades, P., Lin, X., Smyth, W.F.: A fast effective heuristic for the feedback arc set problem. Information Processing Letters (IPL) 47, 319–323 (1993)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Fallahi, N., Bonakdarpour, B., Tixeuil, S.: Rigorous performance evaluation of self-stabilization using probabilistic model checking. In: Proceedings of the 32nd IEEE International Conference on Reliable Distributed Systems, SRDS (to appear 2013)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Gouda, M.G.: The theory of weak stabilization. In: Datta, A.K., Herman, T. (eds.) WSS 2001. LNCS, vol. 2194, p. 114. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Hansson, H., Jonsson, B.: A logic for reasoning about time and reliability. Formal Aspect of Computing (FAOC) 6(5), 512–535 (1994)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Herman, T.: Probabilistic self-stabilization. Information Processing Letters 35(2), 63–67 (1990)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Kwiatkowska, M., Norman, G., Parker, D.: PRISM 4.0: Verification of probabilistic real-time systems. In: Gopalakrishnan, G., Qadeer, S. (eds.) CAV 2011. LNCS, vol. 6806, pp. 585–591. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Tixeuil, S.: Self-stabilizing Algorithms. In: Algorithms and Theory of Computation Handbook, Chapman & Hall/CRC Applied Algorithms and Data Structures, 2nd edn., pp. 26.1–26.45. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group (November 2009)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Vardi, M.Y.: Automatic verification of probabilistic concurrent finite-state programs. In: Proceedings of the 26th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), pp. 327–338 (1985)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Varghese, G., Jayaram, M.: The fault span of crash failures. J. ACM 47(2), 244–293 (2000)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Fallahi, N., Bonakdarpour, B. (2013). How Good is Weak-Stabilization?. In: Higashino, T., Katayama, Y., Masuzawa, T., Potop-Butucaru, M., Yamashita, M. (eds) Stabilization, Safety, and Security of Distributed Systems. SSS 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8255. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-03089-0_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-03089-0_11

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-03088-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-03089-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics