Skip to main content

On the Necessary Memory to Compute the Plurality in Multi-agent Systems

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Algorithms and Complexity (CIAC 2019)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 11485))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 554 Accesses

Abstract

We consider the Relative-Majority Problem (also known as Plurality), in which, given a multi-agent system where each agent is initially provided an input value out of a set of k possible ones, each agent is required to eventually compute the input value with the highest frequency in the initial configuration. We consider the problem in the general Population Protocols model in which, given an underlying undirected connected graph whose nodes represent the agents, edges are selected by a globally fair scheduler.

The state complexity that is required for solving the Plurality Problem (i.e., the minimum number of memory states that each agent needs to have in order to solve the problem), has been a long-standing open problem. The best protocol so far for the general multi-valued case requires polynomial memory: Salehkaleybar et al. (2015) devised a protocol that solves the problem by employing \(\mathcal O(k 2^k)\) states per agent, and they conjectured their upper bound to be optimal. On the other hand, under the strong assumption that agents initially agree on a total ordering of the initial input values, Gąsieniec et al. (2017), provided an elegant logarithmic-memory plurality protocol.

In this work, we refute Salehkaleybar et al.’s conjecture, by providing a plurality protocol which employs \(\mathcal O(k^{11}) \) states per agent. Central to our result is an ordering protocol which allows to leverage on the plurality protocol by Gąsieniec et al., of independent interest. We also provide a \(\varOmega (k^2)\)-state lower bound on the necessary memory to solve the problem, proving that the Plurality Problem cannot be solved within the mere memory necessary to encode the output.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 74.99
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

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Formally, the globally fair scheduler is not a special case of the weak one since, if the activation of an edge does not lead to a different configuration, it can be ignored under a globally fair scheduler. However, if such useless activations are ignored, it is easy to see that the globally fair scheduler is a special case of the weak one.

References

  1. Angluin, D., Aspnes, J., Diamadi, Z., Fischer, M.J., Peralta, R.: Computation in networks of passively mobile finite-state sensors. Distrib. Comput. 18(4), 235–253 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Angluin, D., Aspnes, J., Eisenstat, D., Ruppert, E.: The computational power of population protocols. Distrib. Comput. 20(4), 279–304 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Aspnes, J., Beauquier, J., Burman, J., Sohier, D.: Time and Space optimal counting in population protocols. In: 20th International Conference on Principles of Distributed Systems (OPODIS 2016), Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), vol. 70, pp. 13:1–13:17. Dagstuhl, Germany (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Beauquier, J., Burman, J., Clavière, S., Sohier, D.: Space-optimal counting in population protocols. In: Moses, Y. (ed.) DISC 2015. LNCS, vol. 9363, pp. 631–646. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-48653-5_42

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Becchetti, L., Clementi, A.E.F., Natale, E., Pasquale, F., Silvestri, R.: Plurality consensus in the gossip model. In: Proceedings of the 26th Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, SODA 2015, pp. 371–390 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Becchetti, L., Clementi, A.E.F., Natale, E., Pasquale, F., Trevisan, L.: Stabilizing consensus with many opinions. In: Proceedings of the 27th Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, SODA 2016, pp. 620–635 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Ben-Shahar, O., Dolev, S., Dolgin, A., Segal, M.: Direction election in flocking swarms. Ad Hoc Netw. 12, 250–258 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Benezit, F., Thiran, P., Vetterli, M.: The distributed multiple voting problem. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Signal Process. 5(4), 791–804 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bénézit, F., Thiran, P., Vetterli, M.: Interval consensus: from quantized gossip to voting. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, ICASSP 2009, pp. 3661–3664 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Boyd, S., Ghosh, A., Prabhakar, B., Shah, D.: Randomized gossip algorithms. IEEE/ACM Trans. Netw. 14(SI), 2508–2530 (2006)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Couzin, I.D., Krause, J., Franks, N.R., Levin, S.A.: Effective leadership and decision-making in animal groups on the move. Nature 433(7025), 513–516 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Levin, D.A., Peres, Y.: Markov Chains and Mixing Times, 1st edn. American Mathematical Society, Providence (2008)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  13. Doty, D.: Timing in chemical reaction networks. In: Proceedings of the 25th Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, SODA 2014, pp. 772–784 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Elsässer, R., Friedetzky, T., Kaaser, D., Mallmann-Trenn, F., Trinker, H.: Brief announcement: rapid asynchronous plurality consensus. In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, PODC 2017, pp. 363–365. ACM, New York (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Ghaffari, M., Lengler, J.: Tight analysis for the 3-majority consensus dynamics. CoRR, abs/1705.05583 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Ghaffari, M., Parter, M.: A polylogarithmic gossip algorithm for plurality consensus. In: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, PODC 2016, pp. 117–126 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Gąsieniec, L., Hamilton, D., Martin, R., Spirakis, P.G., Stachowiak, G.: Deterministic population protocols for exact majority and plurality. In: LIPIcs-Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics, vol. 70 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Gmyr, R., Hinnenthal, K., Kostitsyna, I., Kuhn, F., Rudolph, D., Scheideler, C.: Shape recognition by a finite automaton robot. In: 43rd International Symposium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science (MFCS 2018), Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), vol. 117, pp. 52:1–52:15, Dagstuhl, Germany (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Holzer, M., Kutrib, M.: Descriptional and computational complexity of finite automata-a survey. Inf. Comput. 209(3), 456–470 (2011)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. Ma, Q., Johansson, A., Tero, A., Nakagaki, T., Sumpter, D.J.T.: Current-reinforced random walks for constructing transport networks. J. R. Soc. Interface 10(80), 20120864 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Mertzios, G.B., Nikoletseas, S.E., Raptopoulos, C.L., Spirakis, P.G.: Determining majority in networks with local interactions and very small local memory. Distrib. Comput. 30(1), 1–16 (2017)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  22. Pitoni, V.: Memory management with explicit time in resource-bounded agents. In: Proceedings of the 32nd AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, 2–7 February 2018

    Google Scholar 

  23. Ranjbar-Sahraei, B., Ammar, H.B., Bloembergen, D., Tuyls, K., Weiss, G.: Theory of cooperation in complex social networks. In: Proceedings of the 28th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI 2014, pp. 1471–1477. AAAI Press, Québec City (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Salehkaleybar, S., Sharif-Nassab, A., Golestani, S.J.: Distributed voting/ranking with optimal number of states per node. IEEE Trans. Signal Inf. Process. Netw. 1(4), 259–267 (2015)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  25. Santoro, N.: Design and Analysis of Distributed Algorithms, 1st edn. Wiley, Hoboken (2006)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  26. Sumpter, D.J.T., Krause, J., James, R., Couzin, I.D., Ward, A.J.W.: Consensus decision making by fish. Curr. Biol. 18(22), 1773–1777 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Temkin, O.N., Zeigarnik, A.V., Bonchev, D.G.: Chemical Reaction Networks: A Graph-Theoretical Approach, 1st edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton (1996)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Iliad Ramezani .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Natale, E., Ramezani, I. (2019). On the Necessary Memory to Compute the Plurality in Multi-agent Systems. In: Heggernes, P. (eds) Algorithms and Complexity. CIAC 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11485. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-17402-6_27

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-17402-6_27

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-17401-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-17402-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics