Weak vs. Self vs. Probabilistic Stabilization

被引:2
|
作者
Devismes, Stephane [1 ]
Tixeuil, Sebastien [2 ]
Yamashita, Masafumi [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Grenoble 1, VERMA UMR 5104, Grenoble I, France
[2] Univ Paris 06, Sorbonne Univ, Paris, France
[3] IUF, Paris, France
关键词
Distributed systems; distributed algorithm; fault-tolerance; self-stabilization; weak stabilization; probabilistic self-stabilization; SCHEDULER;
D O I
10.1142/S0129054115500173
中图分类号
TP301 [理论、方法];
学科分类号
081202 ;
摘要
Self-stabilization is a strong property, which guarantees that a distributed system always resumes a correct behavior starting from an arbitrary initial state. Since it is a strong property, some problems cannot have self-stabilizing solutions. Weaker guarantees hence have been later introduced to cope with impossibility results, e.g, probabilistic self stabilization only guarantees probabilistic convergence to a correct, behavior, and weak stabilization only guarantees the possibility of convergence. In this paper, we investigate the relative power of self, probabilistic, and weak stabilization, with respect to the set of problems that can be solved. Weak stabilization is by definition stronger than self stabilization and probabilistic self-stabilization in that precise sense. We first show that weak stabilization allows to solve problems having no self-stabilizing solution. We then show that any finite state deterministic weak stabilizing algorithm to solve a problem under the strongly fair scheduler is always a probabilistic; self-stabilizing algorithm to solve the same problem under the randomized scheduler. Unfortunately, this good property does not hold in general for infinite state algorithms. We however show that for some classes of infinite state algorithms, this property holds. These results hint at more practical use of weak stabilizing algorithms, as they are easier to design and prove their correctness than their self stabilizing and probabilistic self stabilizing counterparts.
引用
收藏
页码:293 / 319
页数:27
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Weak vs. Self vs. Probabilistic Stabilization
    Devismes, Stephane
    Tixeuil, Sebastien
    Yamashita, Masafumi
    [J]. 28TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON DISTRIBUTED COMPUTING SYSTEMS, VOLS 1 AND 2, PROCEEDINGS, 2008, : 681 - +
  • [2] INTENTIONALITY VS. WEAK TEXTUALISM
    Giovagnoli, Raffaela
    [J]. RIVISTA DI ESTETICA, 2012, 52 (02) : 91 - 100
  • [3] Fiscal stabilization vs. passivity
    Bai, Yuting
    Leeper, Eric M.
    [J]. ECONOMICS LETTERS, 2017, 154 : 105 - 108
  • [4] Arthroskopische vs. offene Stabilisierung der SchulterArthroscopic vs. open stabilization of the shoulder
    A. Jäger
    C. Braune
    R. M. O. v. Eisenhart-Rothe
    E. Wiedemann
    [J]. Arthroskopie, 2004, 17 (3) : 171 - 178
  • [5] Weak vs. Strong Quantum Cognition
    Pylkkanen, Paavo
    [J]. ADVANCES IN COGNITIVE NEURODYNAMICS (IV), 2015, : 411 - 418
  • [6] Radical prostatectomy: Retropubic vs. laparoscopic vs. perineal vs. robotic
    不详
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2004, 18 : A125 - A125
  • [7] Information vs. entropy vs. probability
    Orly Shenker
    [J]. European Journal for Philosophy of Science, 2020, 10
  • [8] Nature vs. Nurture vs. NASA
    Nordrum, Amy
    [J]. SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, 2015, 312 (03) : 22 - 22
  • [9] Sterilization vs. disinfection vs. clean
    Alvarado, CJ
    [J]. NURSING CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 1999, 34 (02) : 483 - +
  • [10] FACTS VS. OPINIONS VS. ROBOTS
    Russo, Maria
    [J]. NEW YORK TIMES BOOK REVIEW, 2020, 125 (05): : 18 - 18