skip to main content
10.1145/2611462.2611493acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagespodcConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

On the power of the congested clique model

Published: 15 July 2014 Publication History

Abstract

We study the computation power of the congested clique, a model of distributed computation where n players communicate with each other over a complete network in order to compute some function of their inputs. The number of bits that can be sent on any edge in a round is bounded by a parameter b We consider two versions of the model: in the first, the players communicate by unicast, allowing them to send a different message on each of their links in one round; in the second, the players communicate by broadcast, sending one message to all their neighbors.
It is known that the unicast version of the model is quite powerful; to date, no lower bounds for this model are known. In this paper we provide a partial explanation by showing that the unicast congested clique can simulate powerful classes of bounded-depth circuits, implying that even slightly super-constant lower bounds for the congested clique would give new lower bounds in circuit complexity. Moreover, under a widely-believed conjecture on matrix multiplication, the triangle detection problem, studied in [8], can be solved in O(nε) time for any ε > 0.
The broadcast version of the congested clique is the well-known multi-party shared-blackboard model of communication complexity (with number-in-hand input). This version is more amenable to lower bounds, and in this paper we show that the subgraph detection problem studied in [8] requires polynomially many rounds for several classes of subgraphs. We also give upper bounds for the subgraph detection problem, and relate the hardness of triangle detection in the broadcast congested clique to the communication complexity of set disjointness in the 3-party number-on-forehead model.

References

[1]
N. Alon, Y. Matias, and M. Szegedy. The space complexity of approximating the frequency moments. J. Comput. and Syst. Sciences, 58(1):137--147, 1999.
[2]
F. Becker, M. Matamala, N. Nisse, I. Rapaport, K. Suchan, and I. Todinca. Adding a referee to an interconnection network: What can(not) be computed in one round. In Proc. 25th Int. Symp. on Parallel and Dist. Processing (IPDPS), pages 508--514, 2011.
[3]
Y. Birk, N. Linial, and R. Meshulam. On the uniform-traffic capacity of single-hop interconnections employing shared directional multichannels. IEEE Trans. on Information Theory, 39(1):186--191, 1993.
[4]
J. A. Bondy and M. Simonovits. Cycles of even length in graphs. J. Comb. Theory B, 16:97--105, 1974.
[5]
P. Bürgisser, M. Clausen, and M. A. Shokrollahi. Algebraic complexity theory, volume 315 of Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften. Springer, 1997.
[6]
A. Chattopadhyay, N. Goyal, P. Pudlák, and D. Thérien. Lower bounds for circuits with MOD_m gates. In Proc. 47th Symp. on Found. of Comp. Science (FOCS), pages 709--718, 2006.
[7]
S. Dobzinski, N. Nisan, and S. Oren. Economic efficiency requires interaction. CoRR, abs/1311.4721, 2013.
[8]
D. Dolev, C. Lenzen, and S. Peled. "Tri, tri agai": Finding triangles and small subgraphs in a distributed setting - (extended abstract). In Proc. 25th Symp. on Distr. Comp. (DISC), pages 195--209, 2012.
[9]
M. Elkin. Unconditional lower bounds on the time-approximation tradeoffs for the distributed minimum spanning tree problem. In Proc. 36th Symp. on Theory of Comp. (STOC), pages 331--340, 2004.
[10]
P. Erdös. Extremal problems in graph theory. Theory of Graphs and its Applications, pages 29--36, 1985.
[11]
P. Erdös and M. Simonovits. Compactness results in extremal graph theory. Combinatorica, 2(3):275--288, 1982.
[12]
S. Frischknecht, S. Holzer, and R. Wattenhofer. Networks cannot compute their diameter in sublinear time. In Proc. 23rd Symp. on Discrete Alg. (SODA), pages 1150--1162, 2012.
[13]
M. Ghaffari and F. Kuhn. Distributed minimum cut approximation. In Proc. 26th Symp. on Distributed Comp. (DISC), pages 1--15, 2013.
[14]
O. Goldreich and A. Warning. Secure multi-party computation. unpublished manuscript, 1998.
[15]
S. Gollakota and D. Katabi. Zigzag decoding: combating hidden terminals in wireless networks. In Proc. SIGCOMM, pages 159--170, 2008.
[16]
A. Hajnal, W. Maass, P. Pudlák, M. Szegedy, and G. Turán. Threshold circuits of bounded depth. J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 46(2):129--154, 1993.
[17]
K. A. Hansen and M. Koucký. A new characterization of ACC0 and probabilistic CC0. Computational Complexity, 19(2):211--234, 2010.
[18]
J. Håstad and M. Goldmann. On the power of small-depth threshold circuits. Computational Complexity, 1:113--129, 1991.
[19]
J. Håstad and A. Wigderson. Simple analysis of graph tests for linearity and PCP. Random Struct. Algorithms, 22(2):139--160, 2003.
[20]
S. Holzer and R. Wattenhofer. Optimal distributed all pairs shortest paths and applications. In Proc. 31st Symp. on Principles of Distr. Comp. (PODC), pages 355--364, 2012.
[21]
R. Impagliazzo, R. Paturi, and M. E. Saks. Size-depth tradeoffs for threshold circuits. SIAM J. Comput., 26(3):693--707, 1997.
[22]
A. Itai and M. Rodeh. Finding a minimum circuit in a graph. SIAM J. Comput., 7(4):413--423, 1978.
[23]
A. Kipnis and B. Patt-Shamir. On the complexity of distributed stable matching with small messages. Distributed Computing, 23(3):151--161, 2010.
[24]
M. Koucký, P. Pudlák, and D. Thérien. Bounded-depth circuits: separating wires from gates. In Proc. 37th Symp. on Theory of Comp. (STOC), pages 257--265, 2005.
[25]
T. Kövári, V. T. Sós, and P. Turán. On a problem of K. Zarankiewicz. Colloq. Math., 3:50--57, 1954.
[26]
F. Kuhn and R. Oshman. The complexity of data aggregation in directed networks. In Proc. 25th Symp. on Distr. Comp. (DISC), pages 416--431, 2011.
[27]
E. Kushilevitz and N. Nisan. Communication complexity. Cambridge University Press, 1997.
[28]
C. Lenzen. Optimal deterministic routing and sorting on the congested clique. In Proc. 32nd Symp. on Principles of Distr. Comp. (PODC), pages 42--50, 2013.
[29]
C. Lenzen and R. Wattenhofer. Tight bounds for parallel randomized load balancing: extended abstract. In Proc. 43rd Symp. on Theory of Comp. (STOC), pages 11--20, 2011.
[30]
Z. Lotker, E. Pavlov, B. Patt-Shamir, and D. Peleg. MST construction in O(łogłog n) communication rounds. In Proc. 15th Symp. on Parallelism in Alg. and Architectures (SPAA), pages 94--100, 2003.
[31]
I. Parberry and G. Schnitger. Parallel computation with threshold functions. J. Comput. Syst. Sciences, 36(3):278--302, 1988.
[32]
B. Patt-Shamir and M. Teplitsky. The round complexity of distributed sorting: extended abstract. In Proc. 30th Symp. on Principles of Distr. Comp. (PODC), pages 249--256, 2011.
[33]
D. Peleg. Distributed Computing: A Locality-sensitive Approach. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, 2000.
[34]
D. Peleg and V. Rubinovich. A near-tight lower bound on the time complexity of distributed MST construction. SIAM J. Comput., 30(5):1427--1442, 1999.
[35]
M. Puatraşcu and R. Williams. On the possibility of faster SAT algorithms. In Proc. 21st Symp. on Discrete Algorithms (SODA), pages 1065--1075, 2010.
[36]
A. A. Razborov. Lower bounds for the size of circuits of bounded depth with basis (łand,øplus). Mathematical Notes of the Academy of Science of the USSR, 41(4):333--338, 1987.
[37]
A. A. Razborov and A. Wigderson. nΩ(łog n) lower bounds on the size of depth-3 threshold circuits with AND gates at the bottom. Inf. Process. Lett., 45(6):303--307, 1993.
[38]
I. Z. Ruzsa and E. Szemerédi. Triple systems with no six points carrying three triangles. Combinatorica, 1976.
[39]
A. D. Sarma, S. Holzer, L. Kor, A. Korman, D. Nanongkai, G. Pandurangan, D. Peleg, and R. Wattenhofer. Distributed verification and hardness of distributed approximation. SIAM J. Comput., 41(5):1235--1265, 2012.
[40]
A. A. Sherstov. Separating AC0 from depth-2 majority circuits. SIAM J. Comput., 38(6):2113--2129, 2009.
[41]
A. A. Sherstov. Communication lower bounds using directional derivatives. In Proc. 45th Symp. on Theory of Comp. (STOC), pages 921--930, 2013.
[42]
K.-Y. Siu, V. P. Roychowdhury, and T. Kailath. Computing with almost optimal size neural networks. In Proc. Adv. in Neural Inf. Proc. Sys. (NIPS), pages 19--26, 1992.
[43]
R. Smolensky. Algebraic methods in the theory of lower bounds for boolean circuit complexity. In Proc. 19th Symp. on Theory of Comp. (STOC), pages 77--82, 1987.
[44]
A. Tehrani, A. Dimakis, and M. Neely. Sigsag: Iterative detection through soft message-passing. IEEE J. of Selected Topics in Signal Proc., 5(8):1512--1523, 2011.
[45]
R. Williams. A new algorithm for optimal 2-constraint satisfaction and its implications. Theor. Comput. Sci., 348(2--3):357--365, 2005.
[46]
R. Williams. Nonuniform acc circuit lower bounds. J. ACM, 61(1):2, 2014.

Cited By

View all

Index Terms

  1. On the power of the congested clique model

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image ACM Conferences
      PODC '14: Proceedings of the 2014 ACM symposium on Principles of distributed computing
      July 2014
      444 pages
      ISBN:9781450329446
      DOI:10.1145/2611462
      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Sponsors

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      Published: 15 July 2014

      Permissions

      Request permissions for this article.

      Check for updates

      Author Tags

      1. congested clique
      2. lower bounds
      3. subgraph detection

      Qualifiers

      • Research-article

      Conference

      PODC '14
      Sponsor:

      Acceptance Rates

      PODC '14 Paper Acceptance Rate 39 of 141 submissions, 28%;
      Overall Acceptance Rate 740 of 2,477 submissions, 30%

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)51
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)3
      Reflects downloads up to 03 Jan 2025

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      Cited By

      View all

      View Options

      Login options

      View options

      PDF

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      Media

      Figures

      Other

      Tables

      Share

      Share

      Share this Publication link

      Share on social media