Agreement between Two Different Scoring Procedures for Goal Attainment Scaling is Low

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the agreement between a patient's therapist and an independent assessor in scoring goal attainment by a patient. METHODS: Data were obtained on hospital patients with neurological disorders participating in a randomized trial. The patients' therapists set 2-4 goals using a goal attainment scaling method. Six weeks later attainment was scored by: (i) the treating therapists; and (ii) an independent assessor unfamiliar with the patient, using a semi-structured interview method with direct assessment as appropriate. RESULTS: A total of 112 goals in 29 neurological patients were used. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC(A,k) = 0.478) and limits of agreement (-1.52 +/- 24.54) showed poor agreement between the two scoring procedures. There was no systematic bias. CONCLUSION: The agreement between the patients' therapists scoring the goals and the independent assessor was low, signifying a large difference between the two scoring procedures. Efforts should be made to improve the reproducibility of goal attainment scaling before it is to be used as an outcome measure in blinded randomized controlled trials

The Contest Between Simplicity and Efficiency in Asynchronous Byzantine Agreement

In the wake of the decisive impossibility result of Fischer, Lynch, and Paterson for deterministic consensus protocols in the aynchronous model with just one failure, Ben-Or and Bracha demonstrated that the problem could be solved with randomness, even for Byzantine failures. Both protocols are natural and intuitive to verify, and Bracha's achieves optimal resilience. However, the expected running time of these protocols is exponential in general. Recently, Kapron, Kempe, King, Saia, and Sanwalani presented the first efficient Byzantine agreement algorithm in the asynchronous, full information model, running in polylogarithmic time. Their algorithm is Monte Carlo and drastically departs from the simple structure of Ben-Or and Bracha's Las Vegas algorithms. In this paper, we begin an investigation of the question: to what extent is this departure necessary? Might there be a much simpler and intuitive Las Vegas protocol that runs in expected polynomial time? We will show that the exponential running time of Ben-Or and Bracha's algorithms is no mere accident of their specific details, but rather an unavoidable consequence of their general symmetry and round structure. We define a natural class of "fully symmetric round protocols" for solving Byzantine agreement in an asynchronous setting and show that any such protocol can be forced to run in expected exponential time by an adversary in the full information model. We assume the adversary controls $t$ Byzantine processors for $t = cn$, where $c$ is an arbitrary positive constant $< 1/3$. We view our result as a step toward identifying the level of complexity required for a polynomial-time algorithm in this setting, and also as a guide in the search for new efficient algorithms.Comment: 21 page

On the Round Complexity of Randomized Byzantine Agreement

We prove lower bounds on the round complexity of randomized Byzantine agreement (BA) protocols, bounding the halting probability of such protocols after one and two rounds. In particular, we prove that: 1) BA protocols resilient against n/3 [resp., n/4] corruptions terminate (under attack) at the end of the first round with probability at most o(1) [resp., 1/2+ o(1)]. 2) BA protocols resilient against n/4 corruptions terminate at the end of the second round with probability at most 1-Theta(1). 3) For a large class of protocols (including all BA protocols used in practice) and under a plausible combinatorial conjecture, BA protocols resilient against n/3 [resp., n/4] corruptions terminate at the end of the second round with probability at most o(1) [resp., 1/2 + o(1)]. The above bounds hold even when the parties use a trusted setup phase, e.g., a public-key infrastructure (PKI). The third bound essentially matches the recent protocol of Micali (ITCS\u2717) that tolerates up to n/3 corruptions and terminates at the end of the third round with constant probability

Fast Deterministic Consensus in a Noisy Environment

It is well known that the consensus problem cannot be solved deterministically in an asynchronous environment, but that randomized solutions are possible. We propose a new model, called noisy scheduling, in which an adversarial schedule is perturbed randomly, and show that in this model randomness in the environment can substitute for randomness in the algorithm. In particular, we show that a simplified, deterministic version of Chandra's wait-free shared-memory consensus algorithm (PODC, 1996, pp. 166-175) solves consensus in time at most logarithmic in the number of active processes. The proof of termination is based on showing that a race between independent delayed renewal processes produces a winner quickly. In addition, we show that the protocol finishes in constant time using quantum and priority-based scheduling on a uniprocessor, suggesting that it is robust against the choice of model over a wide range.Comment: Typographical errors fixe

Robust Leader Election in a Fast-Changing World

We consider the problem of electing a leader among nodes in a highly dynamic network where the adversary has unbounded capacity to insert and remove nodes (including the leader) from the network and change connectivity at will. We present a randomized Las Vegas algorithm that (re)elects a leader in O(D\log n) rounds with high probability, where D is a bound on the dynamic diameter of the network and n is the maximum number of nodes in the network at any point in time. We assume a model of broadcast-based communication where a node can send only 1 message of O(\log n) bits per round and is not aware of the receivers in advance. Thus, our results also apply to mobile wireless ad-hoc networks, improving over the optimal (for deterministic algorithms) O(Dn) solution presented at FOMC 2011. We show that our algorithm is optimal by proving that any randomized Las Vegas algorithm takes at least omega(D\log n) rounds to elect a leader with high probability, which shows that our algorithm yields the best possible (up to constants) termination time.Comment: In Proceedings FOMC 2013, arXiv:1310.459