In the framework of distributed network computing, it is known that, for every network predicate, each network configuration that satisfies this predicate can be proved using distributed certificates which can be verified locally. However, this requires to leak information about the identities of the nodes in the certificates, which might not be applicable in a context in which privacy is desirable. Unfortunately, it is known that if one insists on certificates independent of the node identities, then not all network predicates can be proved using distributed certificates that can be verified locally. In this paper, we prove that, for every network predicate, there is a distributed protocol satisfying the following two properties: (1) for every network configuration that is legal w.r.t. the predicate, and for any attempt by an adversary to prove the illegality of that configuration using distributed certificates, there is a locally verifiable proof that the adversary is wrong, also using distributed certificates; (2) for every network configuration that is illegal w.r.t. the predicate, there is a proof of that illegality, using distributed certificates, such that no matter the way an adversary assigns its own set of distributed certificates in an attempt to prove the legality of the configuration, the actual illegality of the configuration will be locally detected. In both cases, the certificates are independent of the identities of the nodes. These results are achieved by investigating the so-called local hierarchy of complexity classes in which the certificates do not exploit the node identities. Indeed, we give a characterization of such a hierarchy, which is of its own interest
In @cite_10 , the authors introduced the model investigated in this paper. In particular, they defined and characterized the class @math , which is noting else than @math , that is, the class of languages that have a proof-labeling scheme in which the certificates are depending on the node identities. It is proved that, while @math , randomization helps a lot, as the randomized version @math of @math satisfies @math . It is also proved that, with the oracle #nodes providing each node with the number of nodes in the network, we get @math . Interestingly, it was proved @cite_7 that restricting the verification algorithms for @math to be , that is, enforcing that each node decides the same output for every identity-assignment to the nodes in the network, does not reduce the ability to verify languages. This is summarized by the equality @math where the O'' in @math stands for identity-oblivious. Instead, it was recently proved that restricting the algorithms to be identity-oblivious reduces the ability to decide languages locally, i.e., @math (see @cite_11 ).
@cite_10 @cite_7 @cite_11
1999120866 2123081773 2054573207
A central theme in distributed network algorithms concerns understanding and coping with the issue of locality. Yet despite considerable progress, research efforts in this direction have not yet resulted in a solid basis in the form of a fundamental computational complexity theory for locality. Inspired by sequential complexity theory, we focus on a complexity theory for distributed decision problems. In the context of locality, solving a decision problem requires the processors to independently inspect their local neighborhoods and then collectively decide whether a given global input instance belongs to some specified language. We consider the standard LOCAL model of computation and define LD(t) (for local decision) as the class of decision problems that can be solved in t communication rounds. We first study the intriguing question of whether randomization helps in local distributed computing, and to what extent. Specifically, we define the corresponding randomized class BPLD(t,p,q), containing all languages for which there exists a randomized algorithm that runs in t rounds, accepts correct instances with probability at least p, and rejects incorrect ones with probability at least q. We show that p2 p q = 1 is a threshold for the containment of LD(t) in BPLD(t,p,q). More precisely, we show that there exists a language that does not belong to LD(t) for any t=o(n) but does belong to BPLD(0,p,q) for any p,q ∈ (0,1) such that p2 p q ≤ 1. On the other hand, we show that, restricted to hereditary languages, BPLD(t,p,q)=LD(O(t)), for any function t, and any p, q ∈ (0,1) such that p2 p q > 1. In addition, we investigate the impact of nondeterminism on local decision, and establish several structural results inspired by classical computational complexity theory. Specifically, we show that nondeterminism does help, but that this help is limited, as there exist languages that cannot be decided locally nondeterministically. Perhaps surprisingly, it turns out that it is the combination of randomization with nondeterminism that enables to decide all languages in constant time. Finally, we introduce the notion of local reduction, and establish a couple of completeness results. The issue of identifiers is crucial in distributed computing. Informally, identities are used for tackling two of the fundamental difficulties that are inherent to deterministic distributed computing, namely: (1) symmetry breaking, and (2) topological information gathering. In the context of local computation, i.e., when nodes can gather information only from nodes at bounded distances, some insight regarding the role of identities has been established. For instance, it was shown that, for large classes of construction problems, the role of the identities can be rather small. However, for the identities to play no role, some other kinds of mechanisms for breaking symmetry must be employed, such as edge-labeling or sense of direction. When it comes to local distributed decision problems, the specification of the decision task does not seem to involve symmetry breaking. Therefore, it is expected that, assuming nodes can gather sufficient information about their neighborhood, one could get rid of the identities, without employing extra mechanisms for breaking symmetry. We tackle this question in the framework of the ( LOCAL ) model. Do unique node identifiers help in deciding whether a network G has a prescribed property P? We study this question in the context of distributed local decision, where the objective is to decide whether G has property P by having each node run a constant-time distributed decision algorithm. In a yes-instance all nodes should output yes, while in a no-instance at least one node should output no. Recently, (OPODIS 2012) gave several conditions under which identifiers are not needed, and they conjectured that identifiers are not needed in any decision problem. In the present work, we disprove the conjecture. More than that, we analyse two critical variations of the underlying model of distributed computing: (B): the size of the identifiers is bounded by a function of the size of the input network, (¬B): the identifiers are unbounded, (C): the nodes run a computable algorithm, (¬C): the nodes can compute any, possibly uncomputable function. While it is easy to see that under (¬B, ¬C) identifiers are not needed, we show that under all other combinations there are properties that can be decided locally if and only if identifiers are present.