skip to main content
research-article

Near-Optimal Time–Energy Tradeoffs for Deterministic Leader Election

Published:26 September 2023Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

We consider the energy complexity of the leader election problem in the single-hop radio network model, where each device v has a unique identifier ID(v) ∈{ 1, 2, ⋖ , N} . Energy is a scarce resource for small battery-powered devices. For such devices, most of the energy is often spent on communication, not on computation. To approximate the actual energy cost, the energy complexity of an algorithm is defined as the maximum over all devices of the number of time slots where the device transmits or listens.

Much progress has been made in understanding the energy complexity of leader election in radio networks, but very little is known about the tradeoff between time and energy. Chang et al. [STOC 2017] showed that the optimal deterministic energy complexity of leader election is Θ (log log N) if each device can simultaneously transmit and listen but still leaving the problem of determining the optimal time complexity under any given energy constraint.

  • Time–energy tradeoff: For any k ≥ log log N, we show that a leader among at most n devices can be elected deterministically in O(k ċ n1+ε) + O(k ċ N1/k) time and O(k) energy if each device can simultaneously transmit and listen, where ε > 0 is any small constant. This improves upon the previous O(N)-time O(log log N)-energy algorithm by Chang et al. [STOC 2017]. We provide lower bounds to show that the time–energy tradeoff of our algorithm is near-optimal.

  • Dense instances: For the dense instances where the number of devices is n = Θ (N), we design a deterministic leader election algorithm using only O(1) energy. This improves upon the O(log* N)-energy algorithm by Jurdziński, Kutyłowski, and Zatopiański [PODC 2002] and the O(α (N))-energy algorithm by Chang et al. [STOC 2017]. More specifically, we show that the optimal deterministic energy complexity of leader election is \(\Theta (\max \lbrace 1, \log \tfrac{N}{n}\rbrace)\) if each device cannot simultaneously transmit and listen, and it is \(Θ (\max \lbrace 1, \log \log \tfrac{N}{n}\rbrace)\) if each device can simultaneously transmit and listen.

REFERENCES

  1. [1] Alon Noga, Bar-Noy Amotz, Linial Nathan, and Peleg David. 1991. A lower bound for radio broadcast. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 43, 2 (1991), 290298.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. [2] Andriambolamalala Ny Aina and Ravelomanana Vlady. 2020. Transmitting once to elect a leader on wireless networks. In Proceedings of the 14th Latin American Symposium on Theoretical Informatics (LATIN’20). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 439450.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. [3] Augustine John, Jr William K. Moses, and Pandurangan Gopal. 2022. Brief announcement: Distributed MST computation in the sleeping model: Awake-optimal algorithms and lower bounds. Proceedings of the 2022 ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC’22, Salerno, Italy), Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, 51–53. Distributed MST computation in the sleeping model: Awake-optimal algorithms and lower bounds. arXiv:2204.08385. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2204.08385Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. [4] Bar-Yehuda Reuven, Goldreich Oded, and Itai Alon. 1991. Efficient emulation of single-hop radio network with collision detection on multi-hop radio network with no collision detection. Distrib. Comput. 5, 2 (1991), 6771.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. [5] Bar-Yehuda Reuven, Goldreich Oded, and Itai Alon. 1992. On the time-complexity of broadcast in multi-hop radio networks: An exponential gap between determinism and randomization. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 45, 1 (1992), 104126.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. [6] Barenboim Leonid and Maimon Tzalik. 2021. Deterministic logarithmic completeness in the distributed sleeping model. In Proceedings of the 35th International Symposium on Distributed Computing (DISC’21),Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Gilbert Seth (Ed.), Vol. 209. Schloss Dagstuhl–Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, Dagstuhl, Germany, 10:1–10:19. DOI:Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. [7] Bender Michael A., Farach-Colton Martin, He Simai, Kuszmaul Bradley C., and Leiserson Charles E.. 2005. Adversarial contention resolution for simple channels. In Proceedings of the 17th Annual ACM Symposium on Parallelism in Algorithms and Architectures (SPAA’05). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, 325332. DOI:Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. [8] Bender Michael A., Kopelowitz Tsvi, Pettie Seth, and Young Maxwell. 2016. Contention resolution with log-logstar channel accesses. In Proceedings of the 48th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, 499508. DOI:Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. [9] Capetanakis J.. 1979. Tree algorithms for packet broadcast channels. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 25, 5 (1979), 505515.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. [10] Chang Yi-Jun, Dani Varsha, Hayes Thomas P., He Qizheng, Li Wenzheng, and Pettie Seth. 2018. The energy complexity of broadcast. In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC’18). ACM, 95104. DOI:Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. [11] Chang Yi-Jun, Kopelowitz Tsvi, Pettie Seth, Wang Ruosong, and Zhan Wei. 2019. Exponential separations in the energy complexity of leader election. ACM Trans. Algor. 15, 4, Article 49 (Oct.2019), 31 pages. DOI:Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. [12] Chang Yi-Jun, Dani Varsha, Hayes Thomas P., and Pettie Seth. 2020. The energy complexity of BFS in radio networks. In Proceedings of the 39th Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC’20). ACM, 273282. DOI:Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. [13] Chang Yi-Jun and Jiang Shunhua. 2022. The energy complexity of las vegas leader election. In Proceedings of the 34th ACM Symposium on Parallelism in Algorithms and Architectures. 7586.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. [14] Chatterjee Soumyottam, Gmyr Robert, and Pandurangan Gopal. 2020. Sleeping is efficient: MIS in \(O(1)\)-rounds node-averaged awake complexity. In Proceedings of the 39th Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC’20). ACM, 99108. DOI:Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. [15] Chlebus Bogdan S.. 2001. Randomized communication in radio networks. Combin. Optim. Dordrecht 9, 1 (2001), 401456.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. [16] Chlebus Bogdan S., Kowalski Dariusz R., and Rokicki Mariusz A.. 2012. Adversarial queuing on the multiple access channel. ACM Trans. Algor. 8, 1 (2012), 131.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. [17] Clementi A. E. F., Monti A., and Silvestri R.. 2003. Distributed broadcast in radio networks of unknown topology. Theor. Comput. Sci. 302, 1 (2003), 337364.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. [18] Czumaj Artur and Davies Peter. 2017. Exploiting spontaneous transmissions for broadcasting and leader election in radio networks. In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC’17). 312. DOI:Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. [19] Czumaj Artur and Rytter Wojciech. 2006. Broadcasting algorithms in radio networks with unknown topology. J. Algor. 60, 2 (2006), 115143. DOI:Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. [20] Dani Varsha, Gupta Aayush, Hayes Thomas P., and Pettie Seth. 2023. Wake up and join me! An energy-efficient algorithm for maximal matching in radio networks. Distributed Computing 36, 3 (2023), 373–384. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. [21] Marco Gianluca De and Kowalski Dariusz R.. 2015. Fast nonadaptive deterministic algorithm for conflict resolution in a dynamic multiple-access channel. SIAM J. Comput. 44, 3 (2015), 868888.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. [22] Marco Gianluca De, Kowalski Dariusz R., and Stachowiak Grzegorz. 2019. Deterministic contention resolution on a shared channel. In Proceedings of the IEEE 39th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS’19). IEEE, 472482.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. [23] Marco Gianluca De, Kowalski Dariusz R, and Stachowiak Grzegorz. 2021. Deterministic contention resolution without collision detection: Throughput vs energy. In Proceedings of the IEEE 41st International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS’21). IEEE, 10091019.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. [24] Marco Gianluca De and Stachowiak Grzegorz. 2017. Asynchronous shared channel. In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing. 391400.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. [25] Dufoulon Fabien, Jr William K. Moses, and Pandurangan Gopal. 2023. Distributed MIS in O(Log Log n) awake complexity. Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC’23, Orlando, FL, USA), Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, 135–145. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. [26] Farach-Colton Martín, Fernandes Rohan J., and Mosteiro Miguel A.. 2006. Lower bounds for clear transmissions in radio networks. In Proceedings of the 7th Latin American Symposium on Theoretical Informatics (LATIN’06). 447454. DOI:Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. [27] Gallager Robert. 1985. A perspective on multiaccess channels. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 31, 2 (1985), 124142.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. [28] Ghaffari Mohsen and Haeupler Bernhard. 2013. Near optimal leader election in multi-hop radio networks. In Proceedings of the 24th Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA’13). 748766.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. [29] Ghaffari Mohsen and Portmann Julian. 2022. Average awake complexity of MIS and matching. In Proceedings of the 34th ACM Symposium on Parallelism in Algorithms and Architectures (SPAA’22). 4555.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. [30] Goldberg Leslie Ann, Mackenzie Philip D, Paterson Mike, and Srinivasan Aravind. 2000. Contention resolution with constant expected delay. J. ACM 47, 6 (2000), 10481096.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. [31] Greenberg Albert G., Flajolet Philippe, and Ladner Richard E.. 1987. Estimating the multiplicities of conflicts to speed their resolution in multiple access channels. J. ACM 34, 2 (1987), 289325.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. [32] Greenberg Albert G. and Landner Richard E.. 1983. Estimating the multiplicities of conflicts in multiple access channels. In Proceedings of the 24th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (SFCS’83). IEEE, 383392.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. [33] Greenberg A. G. and Winograd S.. 1985. A lower bound on the time needed in the worst case to resolve conflicts deterministically in multiple access channels. J. ACM 32, 3 (1985), 589596.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. [34] Haeupler Bernhard and Wajc David. 2016. A faster distributed radio broadcast primitive. In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC’16). ACM, 361370.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. [35] Hastad Johan, Leighton Tom, and Rogoff Brian. 1987. Analysis of backoff protocols for multiple access channels. In Proceedings of the 19th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. 241253.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. [36] Hayes J. F.. 1978. An adaptive technique for local distribution. IEEE Trans. Commun. 26, 8 (1978), 11781186.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. [37] Jurdziński Tomasz, Kutyłowski Mirosław, and Zatopiański Jan. 2002. Efficient algorithms for leader election in radio networks. In Proceedings of the 21st Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC’02). 5157. DOI:Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. [38] Jurdziński Tomasz, Kutyłowski Mirosław, and Zatopiański Jan. 2003. Weak communication in single-hop radio networks: Adjusting algorithms to industrial standards. Concurr. Comput.: Pract. Exp. 15, 11–12 (2003), 11171131.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  39. [39] Jurdziński Tomasz and Stachowiak Grzegorz. 2005. Probabilistic algorithms for the wake-up problem in single-hop radio networks. Theory Comput. Syst. 38, 3 (2005), 347367.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. [40] Komlós János and Greenberg Albert. 1985. An asymptotically fast nonadaptive algorithm for conflict resolution in multiple-access channels. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 31, 2 (1985), 302306.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. [41] Kowalski Dariusz R.. 2005. On selection problem in radio networks. In Proceedings of the 24th Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing. 158166.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. [42] Kowalski Dariusz R. and Pelc Andrzej. 2005. Broadcasting in undirected ad hoc radio networks. Distrib. Comput. 18, 1 (2005), 4357. DOI:Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. [43] Kushilevitz Eyal and Mansour Yishay. 1998. An \(\Omega (D\log (N/D))\) lower bound for broadcast in radio networks. SIAM J. Comput. 27, 3 (1998), 702712. DOI:Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. [44] Metcalfe R. M. and Boggs D. R.. 1976. Ethernet: Distributed packet switching for local computer networks. Commun. ACM 19, 7 (1976), 395404.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. [45] Mosteiro Miguel A, Anta Antonio Fernandez, and Munoz Jorge Ramon. 2011. Unbounded contention resolution in multiple-access channels. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual ACM SIGACT-SIGOPS Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing. 211212.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. [46] Nakano Koji and Olariu Stephan. 2000. Randomized leader election protocols in radio networks with no collision detection. In International Symposium on Algorithms and Computation (ISAAC’00). Springer, 362373.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. [47] Nakano Koji and Olariu Stephan. 2002. Uniform leader election protocols for radio networks. IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst. 13, 5 (2002), 516526.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. [48] Newport Calvin. 2014. Radio network lower bounds made easy. In Proceedings of the 28th International Symposium on Distributed Computing (DISC’14). 258272. DOI:Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  49. [49] Raghavan Prabhakar and Upfal Eli. 1995. Stochastic contention resolution with short delays. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. 229237.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  50. [50] Tsybakov B. S. and Mikhailov V. A.. 1978. Free synchronous packet access in a broadcast channel with feedback. Probl. Peredachi Inf. 14, 4 (1978), 3259.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. [51] Willard Dan E.. 1986. Log-logarithmic selection resolution protocols in a multiple access channel. SIAM J. Comput. 15, 2 (1986), 468477. DOI:Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Near-Optimal Time–Energy Tradeoffs for Deterministic Leader Election

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    • Published in

      cover image ACM Transactions on Algorithms
      ACM Transactions on Algorithms  Volume 19, Issue 4
      October 2023
      255 pages
      ISSN:1549-6325
      EISSN:1549-6333
      DOI:10.1145/3614237
      • Editor:
      • Edith Cohen
      Issue’s Table of Contents

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 26 September 2023
      • Online AM: 10 August 2023
      • Accepted: 2 August 2023
      • Revised: 11 July 2023
      • Received: 26 February 2022
      Published in talg Volume 19, Issue 4

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
    • Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)90
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)5

      Other Metrics

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Full Text

    View this article in Full Text.

    View Full Text