skip to main content
10.1145/3210377.3210397acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesspaaConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Dynamic Representations of Sparse Distributed Networks: A Locality-Sensitive Approach

Published:11 July 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

In 1999, Brodal and Fagerberg (BF) gave an algorithm for maintaining a low outdegree orientation of a dynamic uniformly sparse graph. Specifically, for a dynamic graph on n -vertices, with arboricity bounded by α at all times, the BF algorithm supports edge updates in $O(łog n)$ amortized update time, while keeping the maximum outdegree in the graph bounded by $O(α)$. Such an orientation provides a basic data structure for uniformly sparse graphs, which found applications to a plethora of dynamic graph algorithms. A significant weakness of the BF algorithm is the possible temporary blowup of the maximum outdegree, following edge insertions. Although BF eventually reduces all outdegrees to $O(α)$, some vertices may reach an outdegree of $Ømega(n)$ during the process, hence local memory usage at the vertices--an important quality measure in distributed systems--cannot be bounded. We show how to modify the BF algorithm to guarantee that the outdegrees of all vertices are bounded by $O(α)$ at all times, without hurting any of its other properties, and present an efficient distributed implementation of the modified algorithm. This provides the first representation of distributed networks in which the local memory usage at vertices is bounded by the arboricity (which is essentially the average degree of the densest subgraph) rather than the maximum degree. For settings where there is no local memory constraints, one may take the temporary outdegree blowup to the extreme and allow a permanent outdegree blowup. This allows us to address the second significant weakness of the BF algorithm -- its inherently global nature: An insertion of an edge $(u,v)$ may trigger changes in the orientations of edges that are arbitrarily far away from u and v . We suggest an alternative local scheme, which does not guarantee any outdegree bound on the vertices, yet is just as efficient as the BF scheme for some applications. For example, we obtain a local dynamic algorithm for maintaining a maximal matching with sub-logarithmic update time in uniformly sparse networks, providing an exponential improvement over the state-of-the-art in this context.

References

  1. Noga Alon, Ronitt Rubinfeld, Shai Vardi, and Ning Xie. 2012. Space-efficient local computation algorithms. In Proc. 23rd SODA. 1132--1139. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Srinivasa Rao Arikati, Anil Maheshwari, and Christos D. Zaroliagis. 1997. Efficient Computation of Implicit Representations of Sparse Graphs. Discrete Applied Mathematics 78, 1--3 (1997), 1--16. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. S. Assadi, K. Onak, B. Schieber, and S. Solomon. 2018 (to appear). Fully Dynamic Maximal Independent Set with Sublinear Update Time. In Proc. of 50th STOC. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Baruch Awerbuch. 1985. Communication-Time Trade-Offs in Network Synchronization. In Proc. of 4th PODC. 272--276. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. B. Awerbuch, A. Baratz, and D. Peleg. 1990. Cost-sensitive analysis of communication protocols. In Proc. of 9th PODC. 177--187. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. B. Awerbuch, A. Baratz, and D. Peleg. Oct., 1992. Efficient Broadcast and LightWeight Spanners. Technical Report CS92--22, Weizmann Institute (Oct., 1992).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Leonid Barenboim and Michael Elkin. 2010. Sublogarithmic distributed MIS algorithm for sparse graphs using Nash-Williams decomposition. Distributed Computing 22, 5--6 (2010), 363--379.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Leonid Barenboim and Michael Elkin. 2013. Distributed Graph Coloring: Fundamentals and Recent Developments. Morgan & Claypool Publishers. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. G. S. Brodal and R. Fagerberg. 1999. Dynamic Representation of Sparse Graphs. In Proc. of 6th WADS. 342--351. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Keren Censor-Hillel, Elad Haramaty, and Zohar S. Karnin. 2016. Optimal Dynamic Distributed MIS. In Proc. of PODC. 217--226. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Guy Even, Moti Medina, and Dana Ron. 2014. Best of Two Local Models: Local Centralized and Local Distributed Algorithms. CoRR abs/1402.3796 (2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Guy Even, Moti Medina, and Dana Ron. 2015. Distributed Maximum Matching in Bounded Degree Graphs. In Proc. 16th ICDCN. 18. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Mohsen Ghaffari and Hsin-Hao Su. 2017. Distributed Degree Splitting, Edge Coloring, and Orientations. In Proc. of 28th SODA. 2505--2523. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Meng He, Ganggui Tang, and Norbert Zeh. 2014. Orienting Dynamic Graphs, with Applications to Maximal Matchings and Adjacency Queries. In Proc. 25th ISAAC. 128--140.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Haim Kaplan and Shay Solomon. 2018. Representations of Sparse Distributed Networks: A Locality-Sensitive Approach. CoRR abs/1802.09515 (2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Tsvi Kopelowitz, Robert Krauthgamer, Ely Porat, and Shay Solomon. 2014. Orienting Fully Dynamic Graphs with Worst-Case Time Bounds. In Proc. of 41st ICALP. 532--543.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Lukasz Kowalik. 2007. Adjacency queries in dynamic sparse graphs. Inf. Process. Lett. 102, 5 (2007), 191--195. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Z. Lotker, B. Patt-Shamir, and S. Pettie. 2008. Improved distributed approximate matching. In Proc. 20th SPAA. 129--136. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Y. Mansour and S. Vardi. 2013. A Local Computation Approximation Scheme to Maximum Matching. In Proc. 16th APPROX. 260--273.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Ofer Neiman and Shay Solomon. 2013. Simple deterministic algorithms for fully dynamic maximal matching. In Proc. of 45th STOC. 745--754. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Merav Parter, David Peleg, and Shay Solomon. 2016. Local-on-Average Distributed Tasks. In Proc. 27th SODA. 220--239. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. D. Peleg. 2000. Distributed computing: a locality-sensitive approach. SIAM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. David Peleg and Shay Solomon. 2016. Dynamic (1 + ε)-Approximate Matchings: A Density-Sensitive Approach. In Proc. of 27th SODA. 712--729. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. David Peleg and Jeffrey D. Ullman. 1989. An Optimal Synchronizer for the Hypercube. SIAM J. Comput. 18, 4 (1989), 740--747. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. R. Rubinfeld, G. Tamir, S. Vardi, and N. Xie. 2011. Fast Local Computation Algorithms. In Proc. 2nd ICS. 223--238.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Shay Solomon. 2018. Local Algorithms for Bounded Degree Sparsifiers in Sparse Graphs. In Proc. of 9th ITCS. 52:1--52:19.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Jukka Suomela. 2013. Survey of local algorithms. ACM Comput. Surv. 45, 2 (2013), 24. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Dynamic Representations of Sparse Distributed Networks: A Locality-Sensitive Approach

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        SPAA '18: Proceedings of the 30th on Symposium on Parallelism in Algorithms and Architectures
        July 2018
        437 pages
        ISBN:9781450357999
        DOI:10.1145/3210377

        Copyright © 2018 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 11 July 2018

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        SPAA '18 Paper Acceptance Rate36of120submissions,30%Overall Acceptance Rate447of1,461submissions,31%

        Upcoming Conference

        SPAA '24

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader