I just got an email saying my page proofs are ready for my paper with Alex Dimakis on mobility in gossip algorithms. If I want to make the paper open access, I have to shell out $3000. I think this is in addition to the $110 per page “voluntary” page charges. Now, I’m on the record as being a fan of Open Access, but $3k is a pretty hefty chunk of change! Has anyone else had experience with this?
January 25, 2012
IEEE page charges for Open Access
Posted by Anand Sarwate under Uncategorized | Tags: gossip, information theory, publishing |[3] Comments
June 18, 2010
ISIT 2010 : gossip and consensus
Posted by Anand Sarwate under Uncategorized | Tags: algorithms, conferences, gossip, ISIT 2010 |[2] Comments
THE MISSING PIECE SYNDROME IN PEER-TO-PEER COMMUNICATION (Bruce Hajek, Ji Zhu; University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign)
This paper proposes a model for peer-to-peer content distribution in a Bit-Torrent-like setup where there is a seed node and everybody wants to get K pieces of a file held by the seed. Users arrive according to a Poisson process and peers randomly collect and transfer (instantaneously) one piece. The paper provides a stability analysis for this system based on queueing. It’s a cool model, and the talk had some rather amusing moments for those who were there…
WEIGHTED GOSSIP: DISTRIBUTED AVERAGING USING NON-DOUBLY STOCHASTIC MATRICES (Florence Bénézit; Ecole Normale Supérieure-INRIA, Vincent Blondel; UC Louvain, Patrick Thiran; Ecole polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne, John Tsitsiklis; Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Martin Vetterli; Ecole polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne)
Florence presented convergence results for an algorithm based on one-way path averaging. Inspired by the Push-Sum protocol of Kempe et al., she described a one-way method in which a node “gives away” a fraction of its estimate and pushes it along a random direction in the network. The receiving node takes some of the value and passes the rest along — It’s kind of like passing a plate of food around a table while keeping a little (or a lot) for yourself. It’s a cool algorithm, and it works really well in experiments. However, the rate of convergence is still an open question — it seems related to the convergence of non-homogeneous Markov chains.
TIGHT BOUNDS FOR ALGEBRAIC GOSSIP ON GRAPHS (Michael Borokhovich, Chen Avin, Zvi Lotker; Ben Gurion University of the Negev)
This paper was more discrete in nature. There are nodes in a network and each has a value in a finite field. They pass linear combinations of their symbols around. The goal for every node to learn all the information, or equivalently to gather a full-rank set of equations. Nodes can communicate according to a graph structure — they presented upper and lower bounds of
where
is the maximum degree in the graph. They also showed the barbell graph is very very slow.
DISTRIBUTED CONSENSUS WITH FINITE MESSAGING (Debashis Dash, Ashutosh Sabharwal; Rice University)
This was on distributed vertex coloring in which each node gets to know something about the colors in its local neighborhood. This is a bit tough (which they prove), but the authors allow themselves a little slack in that they want to minimize the number of defects (nodes with an adjacent node of the same color), rather than make it $0$. A number of algorithms were presented, many of them based on an initial random assignment followed by a refinement step using the local information.
A NEAR-OPTIMAL ALGORITHM FOR NETWORK-CONSTRAINED AVERAGING WITH NOISY LINKS (Nima Noorshams, Martin J. Wainwright; University of California, Berkeley)
This paper was essentially about packing routes in a “gossip along the way” paradigm — if a node wakes up and starts a path (say horizontally), it can also send a message vertically to trigger path-averaging along parallel paths. This gives a two-phase algorithm and the number of rounds ends up looking like the diameter of the graph. However, the number of one-hop messages scales in the same way. Thus the gain is through parallelization.
March 16, 2010
giving no credit where it is not due
Posted by Anand Sarwate under Uncategorized | Tags: algorithms, computer science, gossip, humor |Leave a Comment
Luca pointed to a paper by Chierichetti, Lattanzi, and Panconesi, which has an amusing comment in the last section (I don’t want to spoil it).
The paper itself is interesting, of course. Conductance often appears in bounds on mixing times for Markov chains, but the rumor spreading problem is a bit different than the consensus problems that I have studied in the past. A nice quote from the introduction:
Our long term goal is to characterize a set of necessary and/or suffcient conditions for rumour spreading to be fast in a given network. In this work, we provide a very general suffcient condition — high conductance. Our main motivation comes from the study of social networks. Loosely stated, we are looking after a theorem of the form “Rumour spreading is fast in social networks”. Our result is a good step in this direction because there are reasons to believe that social networks have high conductance.
November 23, 2009
Lazy random walks on the torus via Dirichlet forms
Posted by Anand Sarwate under Uncategorized | Tags: gossip, probability |[2] Comments
One of the simple example graphs I’ve used in some of my research on gossip algorithms has been the 2-dimensional torus with vertices, which looks like a
grid with the top and left edges wrapped around to connect with the bottom and right edges. Every vertex has 4 neighbors. Now imagine a very lazy random walk on this graph in which a random walker moves from vertex
to one of its neighbors with probability
. It’s “well known” that this random walk takes around
steps to mix. That is, if
is the matrix of transition probabilities then
Here is the second largest eigenvalue of
and the relaxation time
is the inverse of the spectral gap of the matrix. One way of characterizing
for reversible Markov chains is via the Dirichlet form. For a function
on the states of the chain define the Dirichlet form
by
In our example the stationary distribution and
for all edges in the graph. We write
if
Define a norm associated with via
Then the characterization is
One question I asked myself today was whether it was “easy” to see what you should choose in the grid example to get the scaling of
. Here’s one choice that gives the correct scaling. We’ll set
to be constant on each column. Assume without loss of generality that
is divisible by 4 and set
. The values for
on the columns will be like two triangles:
Now we can evaluate the norm, noting that there are vertices per column:
This is because the sum of the first squares scales like
and
. Now turning to the Dirichlet form, note that each difference between columns is at most
and there are fewer than
edges for which
. Thus:
Taking the ratio gives the lower bound of as desired.
The first I tried was just equal to +1 on the first half of the columns and -1 on the second half of the columns. This ends up giving a suboptimal bound, because the norm
but in the denominator we get
positive terms. The key is to make all the differences
in the denominator small while keeping the average of
large enough. Even though you sum over
small differences in the denominator, it stays small enough to pay for the
in the numerator.
While doing this calculation, I noticed that the book Markov Chains and Mixing Times is also online — it makes a handy reference and is a little easier to use than my old go-to, the Aldous-Fill book.