We propose a novel, generic definition of probabilistic schedulers for population protocols. We then identify the consistent probabilistic schedulers, and prove that any consistent scheduler that assigns a non-zero probability to any transition i → j, where i and j are configurations satisfying i ≠ j, is fair with probability 1. This is a new theoretical framework that aims to simplify proving specific probabilistic schedulers fair. In this paper we propose two new schedulers, the State Scheduler and the Transition Function Scheduler. Both possess the significant capability of being protocol-aware, i.e. they can assign transition probabilities based on information concerning the underlying protocol. By using our framework we prove that the proposed schedulers, and also the Random Scheduler that was defined by Angluin et al. [2], are all fair with probability 1. Finally, we define and study equivalence between schedulers w.r.t. performance and correctness and prove that there exist fair probabilistic schedulers that are not equivalent w.r.t. to performance and others that are not equivalent w.r.t. correctness. © 2009 Springer-Verlag.

Not all fair probabilistic schedulers are equivalent / Chatzigiannakis, Ioannis; Dolev, S.; Fekete, S. P.; Michail, O.; Spirakis, P. G.. - STAMPA. - 5923 LNCS:(2009), pp. 33-47. (Intervento presentato al convegno 13th International Conference Principles of Distributed Systems tenutosi a Nimes; France nel December 15-18, 2009) [10.1007/978-3-642-10877-8_5].

Not all fair probabilistic schedulers are equivalent

CHATZIGIANNAKIS, IOANNIS;
2009

Abstract

We propose a novel, generic definition of probabilistic schedulers for population protocols. We then identify the consistent probabilistic schedulers, and prove that any consistent scheduler that assigns a non-zero probability to any transition i → j, where i and j are configurations satisfying i ≠ j, is fair with probability 1. This is a new theoretical framework that aims to simplify proving specific probabilistic schedulers fair. In this paper we propose two new schedulers, the State Scheduler and the Transition Function Scheduler. Both possess the significant capability of being protocol-aware, i.e. they can assign transition probabilities based on information concerning the underlying protocol. By using our framework we prove that the proposed schedulers, and also the Random Scheduler that was defined by Angluin et al. [2], are all fair with probability 1. Finally, we define and study equivalence between schedulers w.r.t. performance and correctness and prove that there exist fair probabilistic schedulers that are not equivalent w.r.t. to performance and others that are not equivalent w.r.t. correctness. © 2009 Springer-Verlag.
2009
13th International Conference Principles of Distributed Systems
Communicating automata; Fair scheduler; Fairness
04 Pubblicazione in atti di convegno::04b Atto di convegno in volume
Not all fair probabilistic schedulers are equivalent / Chatzigiannakis, Ioannis; Dolev, S.; Fekete, S. P.; Michail, O.; Spirakis, P. G.. - STAMPA. - 5923 LNCS:(2009), pp. 33-47. (Intervento presentato al convegno 13th International Conference Principles of Distributed Systems tenutosi a Nimes; France nel December 15-18, 2009) [10.1007/978-3-642-10877-8_5].
File allegati a questo prodotto
File Dimensione Formato  
ve_2009_11573-914540.pdf

solo gestori archivio

Tipologia: Versione editoriale (versione pubblicata con il layout dell'editore)
Licenza: Tutti i diritti riservati (All rights reserved)
Dimensione 14.21 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
14.21 MB Adobe PDF   Contatta l'autore

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11573/914540
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 18
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 16
social impact