No Arabic abstract
Consider any locally checkable labeling problem $Pi$ in rooted regular trees: there is a finite set of labels $Sigma$, and for each label $x in Sigma$ we specify what are permitted label combinations of the children for an internal node of label $x$ (the leaf nodes are unconstrained). This formalism is expressive enough to capture many classic problems studied in distributed computing, including vertex coloring, edge coloring, and maximal independent set. We show that the distributed computational complexity of any such problem $Pi$ falls in one of the following classes: it is $O(1)$, $Theta(log^* n)$, $Theta(log n)$, or $n^{Theta(1)}$ rounds in trees with $n$ nodes (and all of these classes are nonempty). We show that the complexity of any given problem is the same in all four standard models of distributed graph algorithms: deterministic $mathsf{LOCAL}$, randomized $mathsf{LOCAL}$, deterministic $mathsf{CONGEST}$, and randomized $mathsf{CONGEST}$ model. In particular, we show that randomness does not help in this setting, and the complexity class $Theta(log log n)$ does not exist (while it does exist in the broader setting of general trees). We also show how to systematically determine the complexity class of any such problem $Pi$, i.e., whether $Pi$ takes $O(1)$, $Theta(log^* n)$, $Theta(log n)$, or $n^{Theta(1)}$ rounds. While the algorithm may take exponential time in the size of the description of $Pi$, it is nevertheless practical: we provide a freely available implementation of the classifier algorithm, and it is fast enough to classify many problems of interest.
Locally checkable labeling problems (LCLs) are distributed graph problems in which a solution is globally feasible if it is locally feasible in all constant-radius neighborhoods. Vertex colorings, maximal independent sets, and maximal matchings are examples of LCLs. On the one hand, it is known that some LCLs benefit exponentially from randomness---for example, any deterministic distributed algorithm that finds a sinkless orientation requires $Theta(log n)$ rounds in the LOCAL model, while the randomized complexity of the problem is $Theta(log log n)$ rounds. On the other hand, there are also many LCLs in which randomness is useless. Previously, it was not known if there are any LCLs that benefit from randomness, but only subexponentially. We show that such problems exist: for example, there is an LCL with deterministic complexity $Theta(log^2 n)$ rounds and randomized complexity $Theta(log n log log n)$ rounds.
A rich line of work has been addressing the computational complexity of locally checkable labelings (LCLs), illustrating the landscape of possible complexities. In this paper, we study the landscape of LCL complexities under bandwidth restrictions. Our main results are twofold. First, we show that on trees, the CONGEST complexity of an LCL problem is asymptotically equal to its complexity in the LOCAL model. An analog statement for general (non-LCL) problems is known to be false. Second, we show that for general graphs this equivalence does not hold, by providing an LCL problem for which we show that it can be solved in $O(log n)$ rounds in the LOCAL model, but requires $tilde{Omega}(n^{1/2})$ rounds in the CONGEST model.
We find a formula to compute the number of the generators, which generate the $n$-filtered space of Hopf algebra of rooted trees, i.e. the number of equivalent classes of rooted trees with weight $n$. Applying Hopf algebra of rooted trees, we show that the analogue of Andruskiewitsch and Schneiders Conjecture is not true. The Hopf algebra of rooted trees and the enveloping algebra of the Lie algebra of rooted trees are two important examples of Hopf algebras. We give their representation and show that they have not any nonzero integrals. We structure their graded Drinfeld doubles and show that they are local quasitriangular Hopf algebras.
We introduce some natural families of distributions on rooted binary ranked plane trees with a view toward unifying ideas from various fields, including macroevolution, epidemiology, computational group theory, search algorithms and other fields. In the process we introduce the notions of split-exchangeability and plane-invariance of a general Markov splitting model in order to readily obtain probabilities over various equivalence classes of trees that arise in statistics, phylogenetics, epidemiology and group theory.
We address questions of logic and expressibility in the context of random rooted trees. Infiniteness of a rooted tree is not expressible as a first order sentence, but is expressible as an existential monadic second order sentence (EMSO). On the other hand, finiteness is not expressible as an EMSO. For a broad class of random tree models, including Galton-Watson trees with offspring distributions that have full support, we prove the stronger statement that finiteness does not agree up to a null set with any EMSO. We construct a finite tree and a non-null set of infinite trees that cannot be distinguished from each other by any EMSO of given parameters. This is proved via set-pebble Ehrenfeucht games (where an initial colouring round is followed by a given number of pebble rounds).