Exact Byzantine consensus problem requires that non-faulty processes reach agreement on a decision (or output) that is in the convex hull of the inputs at the non-faulty processes. It is well-known that exact consensus is impossible in an asynchronous system in presence of faults, and in a synchronous system, n>=3f+1 is tight on the number of processes to achieve exact Byzantine consensus with scalar inputs, in presence of up to f Byzantine faulty processes. Recent work has shown that when the inputs are d-dimensional vectors of reals, n>=max(3f+1,(d+1)f+1) is tight to achieve exact Byzantine consensus in synchronous systems, and n>= (d+2)f+1 for approximate Byzantine consensus in asynchronous systems. Due to the dependence of the lower bound on vector dimension d, the number of processes necessary becomes large when the vector dimension is large. With the hope of reducing the lower bound on n, we consider two relaxed versions of Byzantine vector consensus: k-Relaxed Byzantine vector consensus and (delta,p)-Relaxed Byzantine vector consensus. In k-relaxed consensus, the validity condition requires that the output must be in the convex hull of projection of the inputs onto any subset of k-dimensions of the vectors. For (delta,p)-consensus the validity condition requires that the output must be within distance delta of the convex hull of the inputs of the non-faulty processes, where L_p norm is used as the distance metric. For (delta,p)-consensus, we consider two versions: in one version, delta is a constant, and in the second version, delta is a function of the inputs themselves. We show that for k-relaxed consensus and (delta,p)-consensus with constant delta>=0, the bound on n is identical to the bound stated above for the original vector consensus problem. On the other hand, when delta depends on the inputs, we show that the bound on n is smaller when d>=3.
A more generalized problem called Convex Hull Consensus problem was introduced by Tseng and Vaidya @cite_9 . The tight bounds on number of processes @math is identical to the vector consensus case. Optimal fault resilient algorithms were proposed for asynchronous systems under crash faults @cite_9 and Byzantine faults @cite_0 , respectively.
@cite_0 @cite_9
2147056869 2950382039
Much of the past work on asynchronous approximate Byzantine consensus has assumed scalar inputs at the nodes [4, 8]. Recent work has yielded approximate Byzantine consensus algorithms for the case when the input at each node is a d-dimensional vector, and the nodes must reach consensus on a vector in the convex hull of the input vectors at the fault-free nodes [9, 13]. The d-dimensional vectors can be equivalently viewed as points in the d-dimensional Euclidean space. Thus, the algorithms in [9, 13] require the fault-free nodes to decide on a point in the d-dimensional space. In our recent work [12], we proposed a generalization of the consensus problem, namely Byzantine convex consensus (BCC), which allows the decision to be a convex polytope in the d-dimensional space, such that the decided polytope is within the convex hull of the input vectors at the fault-free nodes. We also presented an asynchronous approximate BCC algorithm. In this paper, we propose a new BCC algorithm with optimal fault-tolerance that also agrees on a convex polytope that is as large as possible under adversarial conditions. Our prior work [12] does not guarantee the optimality of the output polytope. This paper defines a new consensus problem, convex consensus. Similar to vector consensus [13, 20, 19], the input at each process is a d-dimensional vector of reals (or, equivalently, a point in the d-dimensional Euclidean space). However, for convex consensus, the output at each process is a convex polytope contained within the convex hull of the inputs at the fault-free processes. We explore the convex consensus problem under crash faults with incorrect inputs, and present an asynchronous approximate convex consensus algorithm with optimal fault tolerance that reaches consensus on an optimal output polytope. Convex consensus can be used to solve other related problems. For instance, a solution for convex consensus trivially yields a solution for vector consensus. More importantly, convex consensus can potentially be used to solve other more interesting problems, such as convex function optimization [5, 4].