Search

We extend the theory of locally checkable labeling problems (LCLs) from the classical LOCAL model to a number of other models that have been studied recently, including the quantum-LOCAL model, finitely-dependent processes, non-signaling model, dynamic-LOCAL model, and online-LOCAL model [e.g. STOC 2024, ICALP 2023]. First, we demonstrate the advantage that finitely-dependent processes have over the classical LOCAL model. We show that all LCL problems solvable with locality $O(\log^\star n)$ in the LOCAL model admit a finitely-dependent distribution (with constant locality). In particular, this gives a finitely-dependent coloring for regular trees, answering an open question by Holroyd [2023]. This also introduces a new formal barrier for understanding the distributed quantum advantage: it is not possible to exclude quantum advantage for any LCL in the $\Theta(\log^\star n)$ complexity class by using non-signaling arguments. Second, we put limits on the capabilities of all of these models. To this end, we introduce a model called randomized online-LOCAL, which is strong enough to simulate e.g. SLOCAL and dynamic-LOCAL, and we show that it is also strong enough to simulate any non-signaling distribution and hence any quantum-LOCAL algorithm. We prove the following result for rooted trees: if we can solve an LCL problem with locality $o(\log \log n)$ in the randomized online-LOCAL model, we can solve it with locality $O(\log^\star n)$ in the classical deterministic LOCAL model. Put together, these results show that in rooted trees the set of LCLs that can be solved with locality $O(\log^\star n)$ is the same across all these models: classical deterministic and randomized LOCAL, quantum-LOCAL, non-signaling model, dynamic-LOCAL, and deterministic and randomized online-LOCAL., Comment: 60 pages, 10 figures. This version corrects a mistake in v1

One of the cornerstones of the distributed complexity theory is the derandomization result by Chang, Kopelowitz, and Pettie [FOCS 2016]: any randomized LOCAL algorithm that solves a locally checkable labeling problem (LCL) can be derandomized with at most exponential overhead. The original proof assumes that the number of random bits is bounded by some function of the input size. We give a new, simple proof that does not make any such assumptions - it holds even if the randomized algorithm uses infinitely many bits. While at it, we also broaden the scope of the result so that it is directly applicable far beyond LCL problems.

One of the cornerstones of the distributed complexity theory is the derandomization result by Chang, Kopelowitz, and Pettie [FOCS 2016]: any randomized LOCAL algorithm that solves a locally checkable labeling problem (LCL) can be derandomized with at most exponential overhead. The original proof assumes that the number of random bits is bounded by some function of the input size. We give a new, simple proof that does not make any such assumptions-it holds even if the randomized algorithm uses infinitely many bits. While at it, we also broaden the scope of the result so that it is directly applicable far beyond LCL problems.

Balliu et al. (DISC 2020) classified the hardness of solving binary labeling problems with distributed graph algorithms; in these problems the task is to select a subset of edges in a $2$-colored tree in which white nodes of degree $d$ and black nodes of degree $\delta$ have constraints on the number of selected incident edges. They showed that the deterministic round complexity of any such problem is $O_{d,\delta}(1)$, $\Theta_{d,\delta}(\log n)$, or $\Theta_{d,\delta}(n)$, or the problem is unsolvable. However, their classification only addresses complexity as a function of $n$; here $O_{d,\delta}$ hides constants that may depend on parameters $d$ and $\delta$. In this work we study the complexity of binary labeling problems as a function of all three parameters: $n$, $d$, and $\delta$. To this end, we introduce the family of structurally simple problems, which includes, among others, all binary labeling problems in which cardinality constraints can be represented with a context-free grammar. We classify possible complexities of structurally simple problems. As our main result, we show that if the complexity of a problem falls in the broad class of $\Theta_{d,\delta}(\log n)$, then the complexity for each $d$ and $\delta$ is always either $\Theta(\log_d n)$, $\Theta(\log_\delta n)$, or $\Theta(\log n)$. To prove our upper bounds, we introduce a new, more aggressive version of the rake-and-compress technique that benefits from high-degree nodes.

We give an almost complete characterization of the hardness of $c$-coloring $\chi$-chromatic graphs with distributed algorithms, for a wide range of models of distributed computing. In particular, we show that these problems do not admit any distributed quantum advantage. To do that: 1) We give a new distributed algorithm that finds a $c$-coloring in $\chi$-chromatic graphs in $\tilde{\mathcal{O}}(n^{\frac{1}{\alpha}})$ rounds, with $\alpha = \bigl\lfloor\frac{c-1}{\chi - 1}\bigr\rfloor$. 2) We prove that any distributed algorithm for this problem requires $\Omega(n^{\frac{1}{\alpha}})$ rounds. Our upper bound holds in the classical, deterministic LOCAL model, while the near-matching lower bound holds in the non-signaling model. This model, introduced by Arfaoui and Fraigniaud in 2014, captures all models of distributed graph algorithms that obey physical causality; this includes not only classical deterministic LOCAL and randomized LOCAL but also quantum-LOCAL, even with a pre-shared quantum state. We also show that similar arguments can be used to prove that, e.g., 3-coloring 2-dimensional grids or $c$-coloring trees remain hard problems even for the non-signaling model, and in particular do not admit any quantum advantage. Our lower-bound arguments are purely graph-theoretic at heart; no background on quantum information theory is needed to establish the proofs., Comment: Accepted to STOC 2024

In this work, we give a unifying view of locality in four settings: distributed algorithms, sequential greedy algorithms, dynamic algorithms, and online algorithms. We introduce a new model of computing, called the online-LOCAL model: the adversary reveals the nodes of the input graph one by one, in the same way as in classical online algorithms, but for each new node we get to see its radius-T neighborhood before choosing the output. We compare the online-LOCAL model with three other models: the LOCAL model of distributed computing, where each node produces its output based on its radius-T neighborhood, its sequential counterpart SLOCAL, and the dynamic-LOCAL model, where changes in the dynamic input graph only influence the radius-T neighborhood of the point of change. The SLOCAL and dynamic-LOCAL models are sandwiched between the LOCAL and online-LOCAL models, with LOCAL being the weakest and online-LOCAL the strongest model. In general, all models are distinct, but we study in particular locally checkable labeling problems (LCLs), which is a family of graph problems studied in the context of distributed graph algorithms. We prove that for LCL problems in paths, cycles, and rooted trees, all models are roughly equivalent: the locality of any LCL problem falls in the same broad class - $O(\log^* n)$, $\Theta(\log n)$, or $n^{\Theta(1)}$ - in all four models. In particular, this result enables one to generalize prior lower-bound results from the LOCAL model to all four models, and it also allows one to simulate e.g. dynamic-LOCAL algorithms efficiently in the LOCAL model. We also show that this equivalence does not hold in general bipartite graphs. We provide an online-LOCAL algorithm with locality $O(\log n)$ for the $3$-coloring problem in bipartite graphs - this is a problem with locality $\Omega(n^{1/2})$ in the LOCAL model and $\Omega(n^{1/10})$ in the SLOCAL model.

The sinkless orientation problem plays a key role in understanding the foundations of distributed computing. The problem can be used to separate two fundamental models of distributed graph algorithms, LOCAL and SLOCAL: the locality of sinkless orientation is $\Omega(\log n)$ in the deterministic LOCAL model and $O(\log \log n)$ in the deterministic SLOCAL model. Both of these results are known by prior work, but here we give new simple, self-contained proofs for them., Comment: Parts of this work appeared in DISC 2021 as a brief announcement, under the title "Sinkless orientation is hard also in the supported LOCAL model"