Skip to main content

Message Lower Bounds via Efficient Network Synchronization

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 9988))

Abstract

We present a uniform approach to derive message-time tradeoffs and message lower bounds for synchronous distributed computations using results from communication complexity theory.

Since the models used in the classical theory of communication complexity are inherently asynchronous, lower bounds do not directly apply in a synchronous setting. To address this issue, we show a general result called Synchronous Simulation Theorem (SST) which allows to obtain message lower bounds for synchronous distributed computations by leveraging lower bounds on communication complexity. The SST is a by-product of a new efficient synchronizer for complete networks, called \(\sigma \), which has simulation overheads that are only logarithmic in the number of synchronous rounds with respect to both time and message complexity in the CONGEST model. The \(\sigma \) synchronizer is particularly efficient in simulating synchronous algorithms that employ silence. In particular, a curious property of this synchronizer, which sets it apart from its predecessors, is that it is time-compressing, and hence in some cases it may result in a simulation that is faster than the original execution.

While the SST gives near-optimal message lower bounds up to large values of the number of allowed synchronous rounds r (usually polynomial in the size of the network), it fails to provide meaningful bounds when a very large number of rounds is allowed. To complement the bounds provided by the SST, we then derive message lower bounds for the synchronous message-passing model that are unconditional, that is, independent of r, via direct reductions from multi-party communication complexity.

We apply our approach to show (almost) tight message-time tradeoffs and message lower bounds for several fundamental problems in the synchronous message-passing model of distributed computation. These include sorting, matrix multiplication, and many graph problems. All these lower bounds hold for any distributed algorithms, including randomized Monte Carlo algorithms.

G. Pandurangan—Supported, in part, by NSF grants CCF-1527867 and CCF-1540512.

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 EPUB and 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

Notes

  1. 1.

    We use \(\sigma \) as it is the first letter in the Greek word which means “silence”.

  2. 2.

    Throughout this paper, the notation \(\tilde{\varOmega }\) hides polylogarithmic factors in k and n, i.e., \({\tilde{\varOmega }}(f(n,k))\) denotes \(\varOmega (f(n,k)/({\text {polylog}}n {\text {polylog}}k))\).

References

  1. Afek, Y., Gafni, E.: Time and message bounds for election in synchronous and asynchronous complete networks. SIAM J. Comput. 20(2), 376–394 (1991)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Avin, C., Borokhovich, M., Lotker, Z., Peleg, D.: Distributed computing on core-periphery networks: axiom-based design. In: Esparza, J., Fraigniaud, P., Husfeldt, T., Koutsoupias, E. (eds.) ICALP 2014. LNCS, vol. 8573, pp. 399–410. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). doi:10.1007/978-3-662-43951-7_34

    Google Scholar 

  3. Awerbuch, B.: Complexity of network synchronization. J. ACM 32(4), 804–823 (1985)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Awerbuch, B., Goldreich, O., Peleg, D., Vainish, R.: A trade-off between information and communication in broadcast protocols. J. ACM 37(2), 238–256 (1990)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Awerbuch, B., Peleg, D.: Network synchronization with polylogarithmic overhead. In: Proceedings of the 31st Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), pp. 514–522 (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Sarma, A.D., Holzer, S., Kor, L., Korman, A., Nanongkai, D., Pandurangan, G., Peleg, D., Wattenhofer, R.: Distributed verification and hardness of distributed approximation. SIAM J. Comput. 41(5), 1235–1265 (2012)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Dolev, D., Feder, T.: Determinism vs. nondeterminism in multiparty communication complexity. SIAM J. Comput. 21(5), 889–895 (1992)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Drucker, A., Kuhn, F., Oshman, R.: On the power of the congested clique model. In: Proceedings of the 33rd ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC), pp. 367–376 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Elkin, M.: An unconditional lower bound on the time-approximation trade-off for the distributed minimum spanning tree problem. SIAM J. Comput. 36(2), 433–456 (2006)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Ellen, F., Oshman, R., Pitassi, T., Vaikuntanathan, V.: Brief announcement: private channel models in multi-party communication complexity. In: Proceedings of the 27th International Symposium on Distributed Computing (DISC), pp. 575–576 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Frischknecht, S., Holzer, S., Wattenhofer, R.: Networks cannot compute their diameter in sublinear time. In: Proceedings of the 23rd Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA), pp. 1150–1162 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Gallager, R.G., Humblet, P.A., Spira, P.M.: A distributed algorithm for minimum-weight spanning trees. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 5(1), 66–77 (1983)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Hegeman, J.W., Pandurangan, G., Pemmaraju, S.V., Sardeshmukh, V.B., Scquizzato, M.: Toward optimal bounds in the congested clique: graph connectivity and MST. In: Proceedings of the 2015 ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC), pp. 91–100 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Impagliazzo, R., Williams, R.: Communication complexity with synchronized clocks. In: Proceedings of the 25th Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity (CCC), pp. 259–269 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Klauck, H., Nanongkai, D., Pandurangan, G., Robinson, P.: Distributed computation of large-scale graph problems. In: Proceedings of the 26th Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA), pp. 391–410 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Kor, L., Korman, A., Peleg, D.: Tight bounds for distributed minimum-weight spanning tree verification. Theor. Comput. Syst. 53(2), 318–340 (2013)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Korach, E., Moran, S., Zaks, S.: The optimality of distributive constructions of minimum weight and degree restricted spanning trees in a complete network of processors. SIAM J. Comput. 16(2), 231–236 (1987)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Korach, E., Moran, S., Zaks, S.: Optimal lower bounds for some distributed algorithms for a complete network of processors. Theor. Comput. Sci. 64(1), 125–132 (1989)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Kushilevitz, E., Nisan, N.: Communication Complexity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1997)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Kutten, S., Pandurangan, G., Peleg, D., Robinson, P., Trehan, A.: On the complexity of universal leader election. J. ACM 62(1), 7:1–7:27 (2015)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Kutten, S., Pandurangan, G., Peleg, D., Robinson, P., Trehan, A.: Sublinear bounds for randomized leader election. Theor. Comput. Sci. 561, 134–143 (2015)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Lenzen, C.: Optimal deterministic routing and sorting on the congested clique. In: Proceedings of the 2013 ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC), pp. 42–50 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Lotker, Z., Patt-Shamir, B., Pavlov, E., Peleg, D.: Minimum-weight spanning tree construction in \({O}(\log \log n)\) communication rounds. SIAM J. Comput. 35(1), 120–131 (2005)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Lynch, N.A.: Distributed Algorithms. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco (1996)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. Nanongkai, D., Sarma, A.D., Pandurangan, G.: A tight unconditional lower bound on distributed randomwalk computation. In: Proceedings of the 30th ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC), pp. 257–266 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Oshman, R.: Communication complexity lower bounds in distributed message-passing. In: Halldórsson, M.M. (ed.) SIROCCO 2014. LNCS, vol. 8576, pp. 14–17. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-09620-9_2

    Google Scholar 

  27. Pandurangan, G., Robinson, P., Scquizzato, M.: Fast distributed algorithms for connectivity and MST in large graphs. In: Proceedings of the 28th ACM Symposium on Parallelism in Algorithms and Architectures (SPAA), pp. 429–438 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Pandurangan, G., Robinson, P., Scquizzato, M.: A time- and message-optimal distributed algorithm for minimum spanning trees. CoRR, abs/1607.06883 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Peleg, D.: Distributed Computing: A Locality-Sensitive Approach. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia (2000)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. Peleg, D., Rubinovich, V.: A near-tight lower bound on the time complexity of distributed minimum-weight spanning tree construction. SIAM J. Comput. 30(5), 1427–1442 (2000)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  31. Peleg, D., Ullman, J.D.: An optimal synchronizer for the hypercube. SIAM J. Comput. 18(4), 740–747 (1989)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Santoro, N.: Design and Analysis of Distributed Algorithms. Wiley, Hoboken (2006)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. Schneider, J., Wattenhofer, R.: Trading bit, message, and time complexity of distributed algorithms. In: Peleg, D. (ed.) DISC 2011. LNCS, vol. 6950, pp. 51–65. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-24100-0_4

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  34. Tel, G.: Introduction to Distributed Algorithms, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2001)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  35. Tiwari, P.: Lower bounds on communication complexity in distributed computer networks. J. ACM 34(4), 921–938 (1987)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  36. Van Gucht, D., Williams, R., Woodruff, D.P., Zhang, Q.: The communication complexity of distributed set-joins with applications to matrix multiplication. In: Proceedings of the 34th ACM Symposium on Principles of Database Systems (PODS), pp. 199–212 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Woodruff, D.P., Zhang, Q.: When distributed computation is communication expensive. Distrib. Comput. (to appear)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Yao, AC.-C.: Some complexity questions related to distributive computing. In: Proceedings of the 11th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), pp. 209–213 (1979)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Gopal Pandurangan , David Peleg or Michele Scquizzato .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper

Pandurangan, G., Peleg, D., Scquizzato, M. (2016). Message Lower Bounds via Efficient Network Synchronization. In: Suomela, J. (eds) Structural Information and Communication Complexity. SIROCCO 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9988. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48314-6_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48314-6_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-48313-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-48314-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics