Why Extension-Based Proofs Fail

We introduce extension-based proofs, a class of impossibility proofs that includes valency arguments. They are modelled as an interaction between a prover and a protocol. Using proofs based on combinatorial topology, it has been shown that it is impossible to deterministically solve k-set agreement among n > k > 1 processes in a wait-free manner in certain asynchronous models. However, it was unknown whether proofs based on simpler techniques were possible. We show that this impossibility result cannot be obtained for one of these models by an extension-based proof and, hence, extension-based proofs are limited in power.Comment: This version of the paper is for the NIS model. Previous versions of the paper are for the NIIS mode

A Characterization of Consensus Solvability for Closed Message Adversaries

Distributed computations in a synchronous system prone to message loss can be modeled as a game between a (deterministic) distributed algorithm versus an omniscient message adversary. The latter determines, for each round, the directed communication graph that specifies which messages can reach their destination. Message adversary definitions range from oblivious ones, which pick the communication graphs arbitrarily from a given set of candidate graphs, to general message adversaries, which are specified by the set of sequences of communication graphs (called admissible communication patterns) that they may generate. This paper provides a complete characterization of consensus solvability for closed message adversaries, where every inadmissible communication pattern has a finite prefix that makes all (infinite) extensions of this prefix inadmissible. Whereas every oblivious message adversary is closed, there are also closed message adversaries that are not oblivious. We provide a tight non-topological, purely combinatorial characterization theorem, which reduces consensus solvability to a simple condition on prefixes of the communication patterns. Our result not only non-trivially generalizes the known combinatorial characterization of the consensus solvability for oblivious message adversaries by Coulouma, Godard, and Peters (Theor. Comput. Sci., 2015), but also provides the first combinatorial characterization for this important class of message adversaries that is formulated directly on the prefixes of the communication patterns

Tight Bounds for Connectivity and Set Agreement in Byzantine Synchronous Systems

In this paper, we show that the protocol complex of a Byzantine synchronous system can remain $(k - 1)$-connected for up to $\lceil t/k \rceil$ rounds, where $t$ is the maximum number of Byzantine processes, and $t \ge k \ge 1$. This topological property implies that $\lceil t/k \rceil + 1$ rounds are necessary to solve $k$-set agreement in Byzantine synchronous systems, compared to $\lfloor t/k \rfloor + 1$ rounds in synchronous crash-failure systems. We also show that our connectivity bound is tight as we indicate solutions to Byzantine $k$-set agreement in exactly $\lceil t/k \rceil + 1$ synchronous rounds, at least when $n$ is suitably large compared to $t$. In conclusion, we see how Byzantine failures can potentially require one extra round to solve $k$-set agreement, and, for $n$ suitably large compared to $t$, at most that

The Relative Power of Composite Loop Agreement Tasks

Loop agreement is a family of wait-free tasks that includes set agreement and simplex agreement, and was used to prove the undecidability of wait-free solvability of distributed tasks by read/write memory. Herlihy and Rajsbaum defined the algebraic signature of a loop agreement task, which consists of a group and a distinguished element. They used the algebraic signature to characterize the relative power of loop agreement tasks. In particular, they showed that one task implements another exactly when there is a homomorphism between their respective signatures sending one distinguished element to the other. In this paper, we extend the previous result by defining the composition of multiple loop agreement tasks to create a new one with the same combined power. We generalize the original algebraic characterization of relative power to compositions of tasks. In this way, we can think of loop agreement tasks in terms of their basic building blocks. We also investigate a category-theoretic perspective of loop agreement by defining a category of loops, showing that the algebraic signature is a functor, and proving that our definition of task composition is the "correct" one, in a categorical sense.Comment: 18 page

Wait-Free Solvability of Equality Negation Tasks

We introduce a family of tasks for n processes, as a generalization of the two process equality negation task of Lo and Hadzilacos (SICOMP 2000). Each process starts the computation with a private input value taken from a finite set of possible inputs. After communicating with the other processes using immediate snapshots, the process must decide on a binary output value, 0 or 1. The specification of the task is the following: in an execution, if the set of input values is large enough, the processes should agree on the same output; if the set of inputs is small enough, the processes should disagree; and in-between these two cases, any output is allowed. Formally, this specification depends on two threshold parameters k and l, with k<l, indicating when the cardinality of the set of inputs becomes "small" or "large", respectively. We study the solvability of this task depending on those two parameters. First, we show that the task is solvable whenever k+2 <= l. For the remaining cases (l = k+1), we use various combinatorial topology techniques to obtain two impossibility results: the task is unsolvable if either k <= n/2 or n-k is odd. The remaining cases are still open

Strong Equivalence Relations for Iterated Models

The Iterated Immediate Snapshot model (IIS), due to its elegant geometrical representation, has become standard for applying topological reasoning to distributed computing. Its modular structure makes it easier to analyze than the more realistic (non-iterated) read-write Atomic-Snapshot memory model (AS). It is known that AS and IIS are equivalent with respect to \emph{wait-free task} computability: a distributed task is solvable in AS if and only if it solvable in IIS. We observe, however, that this equivalence is not sufficient in order to explore solvability of tasks in \emph{sub-models} of AS (i.e. proper subsets of its runs) or computability of \emph{long-lived} objects, and a stronger equivalence relation is needed. In this paper, we consider \emph{adversarial} sub-models of AS and IIS specified by the sets of processes that can be \emph{correct} in a model run. We show that AS and IIS are equivalent in a strong way: a (possibly long-lived) object is implementable in AS under a given adversary if and only if it is implementable in IIS under the same adversary. %This holds whether the object is one-shot or long-lived. Therefore, the computability of any object in shared memory under an adversarial AS scheduler can be equivalently investigated in IIS