On the Necessary Memory to Compute the Plurality in Multi-Agent Systems

We consider the Relative-Majority Problem (also known as Plurality), in which, given a multi-agent system where each agent is initially provided an input value out of a set of $k$ possible ones, each agent is required to eventually compute the input value with the highest frequency in the initial configuration. We consider the problem in the general Population Protocols model in which, given an underlying undirected connected graph whose nodes represent the agents, edges are selected by a globally fair scheduler. The state complexity that is required for solving the Plurality Problem (i.e., the minimum number of memory states that each agent needs to have in order to solve the problem), has been a long-standing open problem. The best protocol so far for the general multi-valued case requires polynomial memory: Salehkaleybar et al. (2015) devised a protocol that solves the problem by employing $O(k 2^k)$ states per agent, and they conjectured their upper bound to be optimal. On the other hand, under the strong assumption that agents initially agree on a total ordering of the initial input values, Gasieniec et al. (2017), provided an elegant logarithmic-memory plurality protocol. In this work, we refute Salehkaleybar et al.'s conjecture, by providing a plurality protocol which employs $O(k^{11})$ states per agent. Central to our result is an ordering protocol which allows to leverage on the plurality protocol by Gasieniec et al., of independent interest. We also provide a $\Omega(k^2)$-state lower bound on the necessary memory to solve the problem, proving that the Plurality Problem cannot be solved within the mere memory necessary to encode the output.Comment: 14 pages, accepted at CIAC 201

Phase Transition of the 2-Choices Dynamics on Core-Periphery Networks

Consider the following process on a network: Each agent initially holds either opinion blue or red; then, in each round, each agent looks at two random neighbors and, if the two have the same opinion, the agent adopts it. This process is known as the 2-Choices dynamics and is arguably the most basic non-trivial opinion dynamics modeling voting behavior on social networks. Despite its apparent simplicity, 2-Choices has been analytically characterized only on networks with a strong expansion property -- under assumptions on the initial configuration that establish it as a fast majority consensus protocol. In this work, we aim at contributing to the understanding of the 2-Choices dynamics by considering its behavior on a class of networks with core-periphery structure, a well-known topological assumption in social networks. In a nutshell, assume that a densely-connected subset of agents, the core, holds a different opinion from the rest of the network, the periphery. Then, depending on the strength of the cut between the core and the periphery, a phase-transition phenomenon occurs: Either the core's opinion rapidly spreads among the rest of the network, or a metastability phase takes place, in which both opinions coexist in the network for superpolynomial time. The interest of our result is twofold. On the one hand, by looking at the 2-Choices dynamics as a simplistic model of competition among opinions in social networks, our theorem sheds light on the influence of the core on the rest of the network, as a function of the core's connectivity towards the latter. On the other hand, to the best of our knowledge, we provide the first analytical result which shows a heterogeneous behavior of a simple dynamics as a function of structural parameters of the network. Finally, we validate our theoretical predictions with extensive experiments on real networks

On coalescence time in graphs: When is coalescing as fast as meeting?

Coalescing random walks is a fundamental stochastic process, where a set of particles perform independent discrete-time random walks on an undirected graph. Whenever two or more particles meet at a given node, they merge and continue as a single random walk. The coalescence time is defined as the expected time until only one particle remains, starting from one particle at every node. Despite recent progress the coalescence time for graphs such as binary trees, d-dimensional tori, hypercubes and more generally, vertex-transitive graphs, remains unresolved. We provide a powerful toolkit that results in tight bounds for various topologies including the aforementioned ones. The meeting time is defined as the worst-case expected time required for two random walks to arrive at the same node at the same time. As a general result, we establish that for graphs whose meeting time is only marginally larger than the mixing time (a factor of log^2 n), the coalescence time of n random walks equals the meeting time up to constant factors. This upper bound is complemented by the construction of a graph family demonstrating that this result is the best possible up to constant factors. For almost-regular graphs, we bound the coalescence time by the hitting time, resolving the discrete-time variant of a conjecture by Aldous for this class of graphs. Finally, we prove that for any graph the coalescence time is bounded by O(n^3) (which is tight for the Barbell graph); surprisingly even such a basic question about the coalescing time was not answered before this work. By duality, our results give bounds on the voter model and therefore give bounds on the consensus time in arbitrary undirected graphs. We also establish a new bound on the hitting time and cover time of regular graphs, improving and tightening previous results by Broder and Karlin, as well as those by Aldous and Fill