Advertisement

Achieving Self-Stabilization in a Distributed System Using Evolutionary Strategies

  • Dwight Deugo
  • Franz Oppacher

Abstract

In this paper we present a genetic self-stabilization protocol for the canonical distributed problem of leader election. A self-stabilizing distributed system is one that can be started in any global state, and, during its execution, will eventually reach a legitimate global state(s) and henceforth remain there, maintaining its integrity without any kind of outside intervention. Current self-stabilizing systems either program the stabilizing feature into their protocols, or they use randomized protocols and special processors to stabilize the system. We believe that self-stabilization should be an emergent property of a distributed system, and, by transforming a distributed problem to a model of evolution, which is inherently self-stabilizing, we demonstrate how the emergence of self-stabilization can be achieved. We attempt to achieve more than just solving a problem with a distributed genetic algorithm: we take a distributed problem and show how analogies from evolution can be used to solve it.

Keywords

Genetic Algorithm Fitness Function Global State Leader Election Complete Network 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    Lamport L., ‘Time, Clocks and the Ordering of Events in a Distributed System’, Communications of the ACM, V:21, N:7, 558–565, 1978.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Gallager R.G., Humblet P.A., and Spira P.M., ‘A Distributed Algorithm for Minimum-Weight Spanning Trees’, ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 5, 2, 66–77, 1983.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    Dijkstra E.W., ‘Self Stabilizing Systems in Spite of Distributed Control’, Communications of the ACM, 17, 11, 643–644, 1974.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    Brown G.M., Gouda M.G., and Wu C.L., ‘A Self-Stabilizing Token System’, Proceedings of the Twentieth Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 218–223, 1987.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Burns J.E., ‘Self-Stabilizing Rings Without Daemons’, Technical Report GIT-ICS-87/36, Georgia Institute of Technology, 1987.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Dolev S., Israeli A., and Moran S., ‘Self Stabilization of Dynamic Systems Assuming Only Read/Write Atomicity’, Proceedings of the Ninth Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computation, 103-118, 1990.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Israeli A., and Jalfon M.,’ self Stabilizing Ring Orientation’, Proceedings of the 4’th International Workshop on Distributed Algorithms, 1990.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Korach E., Moran, S. and Zaks S., ‘Tight Lower and Upper Bounds for Some Distributed Algorithms for Complete Network of Processors’, Proceedings of the 3rd Annual ACM Symposium of Principles of Distributed Computing, 199-207, 1984.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Korach E., Kutten S., and Moran S., ‘A Modular Technique for the Design of Efficient Distributed Leader Finding Algorithms’, ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 12, 1, 84–101, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    Tanese R., ‘Distributed Genetic Algorithms’, Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, Morgan Kaufmann, 434-439, 1989.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Goldberg D.E., ‘Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization, and Machine Learning’, Addison-Wesley, 1989.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    Deugo D.L. and Oppacher F., ‘Explicitly Schema-Based Genetic Algorithms’, Proceedings of the Ninth Biennial Conference of the Canadian Society for Computational Studies of Intelligence, 46-53, 1992.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Whitley D., Starkweather T., and Fuquay D., ‘Scheduling Problems and Traveling Salesmen: The Genetic Edge Recombination Operator’, Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, Morgan Kaufmann, 133-140, 1989.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    De Jong K. and Spears W., ‘Using Genetic Algorithms to Solve NP-Complete Problems’, Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, Morgan Kaufmann, 124-132, 1989.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Deugo D.L. and Oppacher F., ‘Improving the Quality of Case Memory Using Genetic Techniques’, Proceedings of the Eight Biennial Conference of the Canadian Society for Computational Studies of Intelligence, Morgan-Kaufmann, 161-168, 1990.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    Cohoon J.P., Martin W.N., and Richards D.S., ‘A Multi-Population Genetic Algorithm for Solving the Kpartition Problem on Hyper-Cubes’, Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, Morgan Kaufmann, 244-249, 1991.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    Gorges-Schleuter M., ‘ASPARAGOS: An Asynchronous Parallel Genetic Optimization Strategy’, Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, Morgan Kaufmann, 422-427, 1989.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    Manderick B. and Spiessens P., ‘Fine-Grained Parallel Genetic Algorithms’, Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, Morgan Kaufmann, 428-433, 1989.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    Syswerda, G., ‘Uniform Crossover in Genetic Algorithms’, Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Genetic Algorithms, Morgan Kaufmann, 2-9, 1989.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    Chang J., Gonnet G., and Rotem D., ‘On the Costs of Self-Stabilization’, Information Processing Letters, Vol. 24, 311–316, 1987.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag/Wien 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dwight Deugo
    • 1
  • Franz Oppacher
    • 1
  1. 1.Intelligent Systems Research Group School of Computer ScienceCarleton UniversityOttawaCanada

Personalised recommendations