Gradecast is a simple three-round algorithm presented by Feldman and Micali. The current work presents a very simple synchronous algorithm that utilized Gradecast to achieve Byzantine agreement. Two small variations of the presented algorithm lead to improved algorithms for solving the Approximate agreement problem and the Multi-consensus problem. An optimal approximate agreement algorithm was presented by Fekete, which supports up to 1 n Byzantine nodes and has message complexity of O(n k ), where n is the number of nodes and k is the number of rounds. Our solution to the approximate agreement problem is optimal,
In @cite_11 several results are presented. First, for failures there is a solution that tolerates @math and converges to @math within @math rounds. For crash failures, @cite_11 provides a solution tolerating @math that converges to @math within @math rounds. The message complexity of both algorithms is @math . Moreover, @cite_11 shows a lower bound for the case of @math rounds to reach @math convergence.
@cite_11
1976693492 2277973662 1523041988 2099119387
This paper introduces some algorithms to solve crash-failure, failure-by-omission and Byzantine failure versions of the Byzantine Generals or consensus problem, where non-faulty processors need only arrive at values that are close together rather than identical. For each failure model and each value ofS, we give at-resilient algorithm usingS rounds of communication. IfS=t+1, exact agreement is obtained. In the algorithms for the failure-by-omission and Byzantine failure models, each processor attempts to identify the faulty processors and corrects values transmited by them to reduce the amount of disagreement. We also prove lower bounds for each model, to show that each of our algorithms has a convergence rate that is asymptotic to the best possible in that model as the number of processors increases. This paper introduces a parallel and distributed algorithm for solving the following minimization problem with linear constraints: @math minimizef1(x1)+ź+fN(xN)subject toA1x1+ź+ANxN=c,x1źX1,ź,xNźXN,where @math Nź2, @math fi are convex functions, @math Ai are matrices, and @math Xi are feasible sets for variable @math xi. Our algorithm extends the alternating direction method of multipliers (ADMM) and decomposes the original problem into N smaller subproblems and solves them in parallel at each iteration. This paper shows that the classic ADMM can be extended to the N-block Jacobi fashion and preserve convergence in the following two cases: (i) matrices @math Ai are mutually near-orthogonal and have full column-rank, or (ii) proximal terms are added to the N subproblems (but without any assumption on matrices @math Ai). In the latter case, certain proximal terms can let the subproblem be solved in more flexible and efficient ways. We show that @math źxk+1-xkźM2 converges at a rate of o(1 k) where M is a symmetric positive semi-definte matrix. Since the parameters used in the convergence analysis are conservative, we introduce a strategy for automatically tuning the parameters to substantially accelerate our algorithm in practice. We implemented our algorithm (for the case ii above) on Amazon EC2 and tested it on basis pursuit problems with >300 GB of distributed data. This is the first time that successfully solving a compressive sensing problem of such a large scale is reported. A traditional counterexample to a linear-time safety property shows the values of all signals at all times prior to the error. However, some signals may not be critical to causing the failure. A succinct explanation may help human understanding as well as speed up algorithms that have to analyze many such traces. In Bounded Model Checking (BMC), a counterexample is constructed from a satisfying assignment to a Boolean formula, typically in CNF. Modern SAT solvers usually assign values to all variables when the input formula is satisfiable. Deriving minimal satisfying assignments from such complete assignments does not lead to concise explanations of counterexamples because of how CNF formulae are derived from the models. Hence, we formulate the extraction of a succinct counterexample as the problem of finding a minimal assignment that, together with the Boolean formula describing the model, implies an objective. We present a two-stage algorithm for this problem, such that the result of each stage contributes to identify the “interesting” events that cause the failure. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach with an example and with experimental results. We study the performance of a family of randomized parallel coordinate descent methods for minimizing the sum of a nonsmooth and separable convex functions. The problem class includes as a special case L1-regularized L1 regression and the minimization of the exponential loss ("AdaBoost problem"). We assume the input data defining the loss function is contained in a sparse @math matrix @math with at most @math nonzeros in each row. Our methods need @math iterations to find an approximate solution with high probability, where @math is the number of processors and @math for the fastest variant. The notation hides dependence on quantities such as the required accuracy and confidence levels and the distance of the starting iterate from an optimal point. Since @math is a decreasing function of @math , the method needs fewer iterations when more processors are used. Certain variants of our algorithms perform on average only @math arithmetic operations during a single iteration per processor and, because @math decreases when @math does, fewer iterations are needed for sparser problems.