Space-Optimal Majority in Population Protocols

Population protocols are a model of distributed computing, in which $n$ agents with limited local state interact randomly, and cooperate to collectively compute global predicates. An extensive series of papers, across different communities, has examined the computability and complexity characteristics of this model. Majority, or consensus, is a central task, in which agents need to collectively reach a decision as to which one of two states $A$ or $B$ had a higher initial count. Two complexity metrics are important: the time that a protocol requires to stabilize to an output decision, and the state space size that each agent requires. It is known that majority requires $\Omega(\log \log n)$ states per agent to allow for poly-logarithmic time stabilization, and that $O(\log^2 n)$ states are sufficient. Thus, there is an exponential gap between the upper and lower bounds. We address this question. We provide a new lower bound of $\Omega(\log n)$ states for any protocol which stabilizes in $O( n^{1-c} )$ time, for any $c > 0$ constant. This result is conditional on basic monotonicity and output assumptions, satisfied by all known protocols. Technically, it represents a significant departure from previous lower bounds. Instead of relying on dense configurations, we introduce a new surgery technique to construct executions which contradict the correctness of algorithms that stabilize too fast. Subsequently, our lower bound applies to general initial configurations. We give an algorithm for majority which uses $O(\log n)$ states, and stabilizes in $O(\log^2 n)$ time. Central to the algorithm is a new leaderless phase clock, which allows nodes to synchronize in phases of $\Theta(n \log{n})$ consecutive interactions using $O(\log n)$ states per node. We also employ our phase clock to build a leader election algorithm with $O(\log n )$ states, which stabilizes in $O(\log^2 n)$ time

Are Lock-Free Concurrent Algorithms Practically Wait-Free?

Lock-free concurrent algorithms guarantee that some concurrent operation will always make progress in a finite number of steps. Yet programmers prefer to treat concurrent code as if it were wait-free, guaranteeing that all operations always make progress. Unfortunately, designing wait-free algorithms is generally a very complex task, and the resulting algorithms are not always efficient. While obtaining efficient wait-free algorithms has been a long-time goal for the theory community, most non-blocking commercial code is only lock-free. This paper suggests a simple solution to this problem. We show that, for a large class of lock- free algorithms, under scheduling conditions which approximate those found in commercial hardware architectures, lock-free algorithms behave as if they are wait-free. In other words, programmers can keep on designing simple lock-free algorithms instead of complex wait-free ones, and in practice, they will get wait-free progress. Our main contribution is a new way of analyzing a general class of lock-free algorithms under a stochastic scheduler. Our analysis relates the individual performance of processes with the global performance of the system using Markov chain lifting between a complex per-process chain and a simpler system progress chain. We show that lock-free algorithms are not only wait-free with probability 1, but that in fact a general subset of lock-free algorithms can be closely bounded in terms of the average number of steps required until an operation completes. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first attempt to analyze progress conditions, typically stated in relation to a worst case adversary, in a stochastic model capturing their expected asymptotic behavior.Comment: 25 page

Asynchronous Optimization Methods for Efficient Training of Deep Neural Networks with Guarantees

Asynchronous distributed algorithms are a popular way to reduce synchronization costs in large-scale optimization, and in particular for neural network training. However, for nonsmooth and nonconvex objectives, few convergence guarantees exist beyond cases where closed-form proximal operator solutions are available. As most popular contemporary deep neural networks lead to nonsmooth and nonconvex objectives, there is now a pressing need for such convergence guarantees. In this paper, we analyze for the first time the convergence of stochastic asynchronous optimization for this general class of objectives. In particular, we focus on stochastic subgradient methods allowing for block variable partitioning, where the shared-memory-based model is asynchronously updated by concurrent processes. To this end, we first introduce a probabilistic model which captures key features of real asynchronous scheduling between concurrent processes; under this model, we establish convergence with probability one to an invariant set for stochastic subgradient methods with momentum. From the practical perspective, one issue with the family of methods we consider is that it is not efficiently supported by machine learning frameworks, as they mostly focus on distributed data-parallel strategies. To address this, we propose a new implementation strategy for shared-memory based training of deep neural networks, whereby concurrent parameter servers are utilized to train a partitioned but shared model in single- and multi-GPU settings. Based on this implementation, we achieve on average 1.2x speed-up in comparison to state-of-the-art training methods for popular image classification tasks without compromising accuracy

Relaxed Schedulers Can Efficiently Parallelize Iterative Algorithms

There has been significant progress in understanding the parallelism inherent to iterative sequential algorithms: for many classic algorithms, the depth of the dependence structure is now well understood, and scheduling techniques have been developed to exploit this shallow dependence structure for efficient parallel implementations. A related, applied research strand has studied methods by which certain iterative task-based algorithms can be efficiently parallelized via relaxed concurrent priority schedulers. These allow for high concurrency when inserting and removing tasks, at the cost of executing superfluous work due to the relaxed semantics of the scheduler. In this work, we take a step towards unifying these two research directions, by showing that there exists a family of relaxed priority schedulers that can efficiently and deterministically execute classic iterative algorithms such as greedy maximal independent set (MIS) and matching. Our primary result shows that, given a randomized scheduler with an expected relaxation factor of $k$ in terms of the maximum allowed priority inversions on a task, and any graph on $n$ vertices, the scheduler is able to execute greedy MIS with only an additive factor of poly($k$) expected additional iterations compared to an exact (but not scalable) scheduler. This counter-intuitive result demonstrates that the overhead of relaxation when computing MIS is not dependent on the input size or structure of the input graph. Experimental results show that this overhead can be clearly offset by the gain in performance due to the highly scalable scheduler. In sum, we present an efficient method to deterministically parallelize iterative sequential algorithms, with provable runtime guarantees in terms of the number of executed tasks to completion.Comment: PODC 2018, pages 377-386 in proceeding

The Power of Choice in Priority Scheduling

Consider the following random process: we are given $n$ queues, into which elements of increasing labels are inserted uniformly at random. To remove an element, we pick two queues at random, and remove the element of lower label (higher priority) among the two. The cost of a removal is the rank of the label removed, among labels still present in any of the queues, that is, the distance from the optimal choice at each step. Variants of this strategy are prevalent in state-of-the-art concurrent priority queue implementations. Nonetheless, it is not known whether such implementations provide any rank guarantees, even in a sequential model. We answer this question, showing that this strategy provides surprisingly strong guarantees: Although the single-choice process, where we always insert and remove from a single randomly chosen queue, has degrading cost, going to infinity as we increase the number of steps, in the two choice process, the expected rank of a removed element is $O( n )$ while the expected worst-case cost is $O( n \log n )$. These bounds are tight, and hold irrespective of the number of steps for which we run the process. The argument is based on a new technical connection between "heavily loaded" balls-into-bins processes and priority scheduling. Our analytic results inspire a new concurrent priority queue implementation, which improves upon the state of the art in terms of practical performance

GMP*: Well-Tuned Gradual Magnitude Pruning Can Outperform Most BERT-Pruning Methods

We revisit the performance of the classic gradual magnitude pruning (GMP) baseline for large language models, focusing on the classic BERT benchmark on various popular tasks. Despite existing evidence in the literature that GMP performs poorly, we show that a simple and general variant, which we call GMP*, can match and sometimes outperform more complex state-of-the-art methods. Our results provide a simple yet strong baseline for future work, highlight the importance of parameter tuning for baselines, and even improve the performance of the state-of-the-art second-order pruning method in this setting

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

The Transactional Conflict Problem

The transactional conflict problem arises in transactional systems whenever two or more concurrent transactions clash on a data item. While the standard solution to such conflicts is to immediately abort one of the transactions, some practical systems consider the alternative of delaying conflict resolution for a short interval, which may allow one of the transactions to commit. The challenge in the transactional conflict problem is to choose the optimal length of this delay interval so as to minimize the overall running time penalty for the conflicting transactions. In this paper, we propose a family of optimal online algorithms for the transactional conflict problem. Specifically, we consider variants of this problem which arise in different implementations of transactional systems, namely "requestor wins" and "requestor aborts" implementations: in the former, the recipient of a coherence request is aborted, whereas in the latter, it is the requestor which has to abort. Both strategies are implemented by real systems. We show that the requestor aborts case can be reduced to a classic instance of the ski rental problem, while the requestor wins case leads to a new version of this classical problem, for which we derive optimal deterministic and randomized algorithms. Moreover, we prove that, under a simplified adversarial model, our algorithms are constant-competitive with the offline optimum in terms of throughput. We validate our algorithmic results empirically through a hardware simulation of hardware transactional memory (HTM), showing that our algorithms can lead to non-trivial performance improvements for classic concurrent data structures