Contention resolution without collision detection

Bender, Michael A.; Kopelowitz, Tsvi; Kuszmaul, William; Pettie, Seth

doi:10.1145/3357713.3384305

Cited by 16 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Beside throughput, another important metric when evaluating contention resolution algorithms is the number of channel accesses a node has to make before successfully sending its message (some authors call this the energy complexity). Many existing algorithms (e.g., [6,8]) have (poly-log( )) energy complexity, assuming there are nodes in the system. Nonetheless, somewhat surprisingly, Bender et al [7] show that (log(log * )) channel accesses per node is enough for resolving contention.…”

Section: Theorem 13 (Impossibility Result)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1 Notice that the above definitions of throughput (both the classical one and the ( , )-throughput) do not claim a bound on the number successful transmissions within a time interval. Nonetheless, as Bender et al [8] have pointed out, they could imply such results. To see this, consider an algorithm that achieves ( , )-throughput and an interval of length .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 84%

“…In this paper, we consider the following more concrete setting, which is a standard model used in many papers studying the problem (see, e.g., [6,8]). The shared resource is a multiple-access communication channel, and time is divided into discrete and synchronized slots.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…By contrast, in the absence of collision detection, even without jamming, whether optimal throughput is possible for the vanilla contention resolution problem remains unknown for a long time. Last year, in a breakthrough paper [8], Bender et al showed that such algorithm does exist. Moreover, they have also proved an impossibility result implying constant throughput is impossible when a constant fraction of slots could be jammed.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Throughout this paper, we call a slot active if there is at least one player in the system in that slot. Following classical definition of throughput is adopted from [8]: let be the number of players arriving the system in the first slots, and let be the number of active slots among the first slots, the ℎ ℎ at slot is defined to be / . An algorithm achieves a certain throughput if for all slots the throughput is lower bounded by .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Tight Trade-off in Contention Resolution without Collision Detection

Chen

Jiang

Zheng

2021

Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we consider contention resolution on a multiple-access communication channel. In this problem, a set of nodes arrive over time, each with a message it intends to send. In each time slot, each node may attempt to broadcast its message or remain idle. If a single node broadcasts in a slot, the message is received by all nodes; otherwise, if multiple nodes broadcast simultaneously, a collision occurs and none succeeds. If collision detection is available, nodes can differentiate collision and silence (i.e., no node broadcasts). Performance of contention resolution algorithms is often measured by throughput-the number of successful transmissions within a period of time; whereas robustness is often measured by jamming resistance-a jammed slot always generates a collision. Previous work has shown, with collision detection, optimal constant throughput can be attained, even if a constant fraction of all slots are jammed. The situation when collision detection is not available, however, remains unclear.In a recent breakthrough paper [Bender et al., STOC '20], a crucial case is resolved: constant throughput is possible without collision detection, but only if there is no jamming. Nonetheless, the exact trade-off between the best possible throughput and the severity of jamming remains unknown. In this paper, we address this open question. Specifically, for any level of jamming ranging from none to constant fraction, we prove an upper bound on the best possible throughput, along with an algorithm attaining that bound. An immediate and interesting implication of our result is, when a constant fraction of all slots are jammed, which is the asymptotic worst-case scenario, there still exists an algorithm achieving a decent throughput: Θ( /log ) messages could be successfully transmitted within slots.

show abstract

Section: Theorem 13 (Impossibility Result)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations