ABSTRACT
We analyse parallel algorithms in the context of exhaustive search over totally ordered sets. Imagine an infinite list of “boxes”, with a “treasure” hidden in one of them, where the boxes’ order reflects the importance of finding the treasure in a given box. At each time step, a search protocol executed by a searcher has the ability to peek into one box, and see whether the treasure is present or not. Clearly, the best strategy of a single searcher would be to open the boxes one by one, in increasing order. Moreover, by equally dividing the workload between them, k searchers can trivially find the treasure k times faster than one searcher. However, this straightforward strategy is very sensitive to failures (e.g., crashes of processors), and overcoming this issue seems to require a large amount of communication. We therefore address the question of designing parallel search algorithms maximizing their speed-up and maintaining high levels of robustness, while minimizing the amount of resources for coordination. Based on the observation that algorithms that avoid communication are inherently robust, we focus our attention on identifying the best running time performance of non-coordinating algorithms. Specifically, we devise non-coordinating algorithms that achieve a speed-up of 9/8 for two searchers, a speed-up of 4/3 for three searchers, and in general, a speed-up of k/4(1+1/k)2 for any k≥ 1 searchers. Thus, asymptotically, the speed-up is only four times worse compared to the case of full coordination. Moreover, these bounds are tight in a strong sense as no non-coordinating search algorithm can achieve better speed-ups. Our algorithms are surprisingly simple and hence applicable. However they are memory intensive and so we suggest a practical, memory efficient version, with a speed-up of (k2 − 1)/4k. That is, it is only a factor of (k+1)/(k−1) slower than the optimal algorithm. Overall, we highlight that, in faulty contexts in which coordination between the searchers is technically difficult to implement, intrusive with respect to privacy, and/or costly in term of resources, it might well be worth giving up on coordination, and simply run our non-coordinating exhaustive search algorithms.
- BOINC. https://boinc.berkeley.edu/.Google Scholar
- N. Alon, C. Avin, M. Koucky, G. Kozma, Z. Lotker, and M. R. Tuttle. Many Random Walks Are Faster Than One. In Proceedings of the Twentieth Annual Symposium on Parallelism in Algorithms and Architectures, SPAA ’08, pages 119–128, New York, NY, USA, 2008. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. Baezayates, J. Culberson, and G. Rawlins. Searching in the Plane. Inf. Comput., 106(2):234–252, Oct. 1993. Google ScholarDigital Library
- C. Cooper, A. M. Frieze, and T. Radzik. Multiple Random Walks in Random Regular Graphs. SIAM J. Discrete Math., 23(4):1738–1761, 2009.Google ScholarDigital Library
- E. D. Demaine, S. P. Fekete, and S. Gal. Online searching with turn cost. Theor. Comput. Sci., 361(2-3):342–355, 2006. Google ScholarDigital Library
- E. DiBenedetto. Real Analysis. Advanced Texts Series. Birkhäuser Boston, 2002.Google ScholarCross Ref
- R. Elsässer and T. Sauerwald. Tight bounds for the cover time of multiple random walks. Theor. Comput. Sci., 412(24):2623–2641, 2011. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Y. Emek, T. Langner, D. Stolz, J. Uitto, and R. Wattenhofer. How many ants does it take to find the food? Theor. Comput. Sci., 608:255–267, 2015. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Y. Emek, T. Langner, J. Uitto, and R. Wattenhofer. Solving the ANTS Problem with Asynchronous Finite State Machines. In Automata, Languages, and Programming - 41st International Colloquium, ICALP 2014, Copenhagen, Denmark, July 8-11, 2014, Proceedings, Part II, pages 471–482, 2014.Google Scholar
- O. Feinerman and A. Korman. Memory Lower Bounds for Randomized Collaborative Search and Implications for Biology. In Distributed Computing - 26th International Symposium, DISC 2012, Salvador, Brazil, October 16-18, 2012. Proceedings, pages 61–75, 2012. Google ScholarDigital Library
- O. Feinerman, A. Korman, Z. Lotker, and J.-S. Sereni. Collaborative search on the plane without communication. In ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, PODC ’12, Funchal, Madeira, Portugal, July 16-18, 2012, pages 77–86, 2012. Google ScholarDigital Library
- H. Finner. A Generalization of Holder’s Inequality and Some Probability Inequalities. The Annals of Probability, 20(4):1893–1901, Oct. 1992.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. JáJá. An Introduction to Parallel Algorithms. Addison-Wesley, 1992. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M.-Y. Kao, J. H. Reif, and S. R. Tate. Searching in an Unknown Environment: An Optimal Randomized Algorithm for the Cow-path Problem. In Proceedings of the Fourth Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, SODA ’93, pages 441–447, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 1993. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. M. Karp, M. E. Saks, and A. Wigderson. On a Search Problem Related to Branch-and-Bound Procedures. In 27th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, Toronto, Canada, 27-29 October 1986, pages 19–28, 1986. Google ScholarDigital Library
- T. Langner, J. Uitto, D. Stolz, and R. Wattenhofer. Fault-Tolerant ANTS. In Distributed Computing - 28th International Symposium, DISC 2014, Austin, TX, USA, October 12-15, 2014. Proceedings, pages 31–45, 2014.Google Scholar
- F. T. Leighton. Introduction to Parallel Algorithms and Architectures: Array, Trees, Hypercubes. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA, USA, 1992. Google ScholarDigital Library
- C. Lenzen, N. A. Lynch, C. C. Newport, and T. Radeva. Trade-offs between selection complexity and performance when searching the plane without communication. In ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, PODC ’14, Paris, France, July 15-18, 2014, pages 252–261, 2014. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Parallel exhaustive search without coordination
Recommendations
Parallel Bayesian Search with No Coordination
Coordinating the actions of agents (e.g., volunteers analyzing radio signals in SETI@home) yields efficient search algorithms. However, such an efficiency is often at the cost of implementing complex coordination mechanisms which may be expensive in ...
Fast feature matching based on r ‐nearest k ‐means searching
Feature matching has been frequently applied in computer vision and pattern recognition. In this paper, the authors propose a fast feature matching algorithm for vector‐based feature. Their algorithm searches r ‐nearest neighborhood clusters for the query ...
Online search with a hint
AbstractWe introduce the study of search problems, in a setting in which the searcher has some information, or hint concerning the hiding target. In particular, we focus on one of the fundamental problems in search theory, namely the linear search ...
Comments