Dynamic size counting in population protocols

Abstract

The population protocol model describes a network of anonymous agents that interact asynchronously in pairs chosen at random. Each agent starts in the same initial state s. We introduce the *dynamic size counting* problem: approximately counting the number of agents in the presence of an adversary who at any time can remove any number of agents or add any number of new agents in state s. A valid solution requires that after each addition/removal event, resulting in population size n, with high probability each agent "quickly" computes the same constant-factor estimate of the value 2 n (how quickly is called the *convergence* time), which remains the output of every agent for as long as possible (the *holding* time). Since the adversary can remove agents, the holding time is necessarily finite: even after the adversary stops altering the population, it is impossible to *stabilize* to an output that never again changes. We first show that a protocol solves the dynamic size counting problem if and only if it solves the *loosely-stabilizing counting* problem: that of estimating n in a *fixed-size* population, but where the adversary can initialize each agent in an arbitrary state, with the same convergence time and holding time. We then show a protocol solving the loosely-stabilizing counting problem with the following guarantees: if the population size is n, M is the largest initial estimate of n, and s is the maximum integer initially stored in any field of the agents' memory, we have expected convergence time O( n + M), expected polynomial holding time, and expected memory usage of O(2 (s) + ( n)2) bits. Interpreted as a dynamic size counting protocol, when changing from population size nprev to nnext, the convergence time is O( nnext + nprev).

0

Turn this paper into a lesson

ArcXiv compiles a structured reading guide from this paper's metadata: plain-English importance, contributions, prerequisite concepts, which sections to read first, flashcards, and a quiz. Grounded in the abstract, never invented.

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion.

Loading comments…