Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Detailed Answer
Quick Answer
Concise responses based on abstracts only
Detailed Answer
Well-researched responses based on abstracts and relevant paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 37 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 41 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 10 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 15 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 84 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 198 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 448 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4 31 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

An Exponential Separation Between Randomized and Deterministic Complexity in the LOCAL Model (1602.08166v2)

Published 26 Feb 2016 in cs.CC, cs.DC, and cs.DS

Abstract: Over the past 30 years numerous algorithms have been designed for symmetry breaking problems in the LOCAL model, such as maximal matching, MIS, vertex coloring, and edge-coloring. For most problems the best randomized algorithm is at least exponentially faster than the best deterministic algorithm. In this paper we prove that these exponential gaps are necessary and establish connections between the deterministic and randomized complexities in the LOCAL model. Each result has a very compelling take-away message: 1. Fast $\Delta$-coloring of trees requires random bits: Building on the recent lower bounds of Brandt et al., we prove that the randomized complexity of $\Delta$-coloring a tree with maximum degree $\Delta\ge 55$ is $\Theta(\log_\Delta\log n)$, whereas its deterministic complexity is $\Theta(\log_\Delta n)$ for any $\Delta\ge 3$. This also establishes a large separation between the deterministic complexity of $\Delta$-coloring and $(\Delta+1)$-coloring trees. 2. Randomized lower bounds imply deterministic lower bounds: We prove that any deterministic algorithm for a natural class of problems that runs in $O(1)+o(\log_\Delta n)$ rounds can be transformed to run in $O(\logn-\log^\Delta+1)$ rounds. If the transformed algorithm violates a lower bound (even allowing randomization), then one can conclude that the problem requires $\Omega(\log_\Delta n)$ time deterministically. 3. Deterministic lower bounds imply randomized lower bounds: We prove that the randomized complexity of any natural problem on instances of size $n$ is at least its deterministic complexity on instances of size $\sqrt{\log n}$. This shows that a deterministic $\Omega(\log_\Delta n)$ lower bound for any problem implies a randomized $\Omega(\log_\Delta\log n)$ lower bound. It also illustrates that the graph shattering technique is absolutely essential to the LOCAL model.

Citations (150)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Lightbulb On Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.