Multiple Random Walks and Interacting Particle Systems

  • Colin Cooper
  • Alan Frieze
  • Tomasz Radzik
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5556)


We study properties of multiple random walks on a graph under various assumptions of interaction between the particles. To give precise results, we make our analysis for random regular graphs. The cover time of a random walk on a random r-regular graph was studied in [6], where it was shown with high probability (whp), that for r ≥ 3 the cover time is asymptotic to θ r n ln n, where θ r  = (r − 1)/(r − 2). In this paper we prove the following (whp) results. For k independent walks on a random regular graph G, the cover time C G (k) is asymptotic to C G /k, where C G is the cover time of a single walk. For most starting positions, the expected number of steps before any of the walks meet is \(\theta_r n/\binom{k}{2}\). If the walks can communicate when meeting at a vertex, we show that, for most starting positions, the expected time for k walks to broadcast a single piece of information to each other is asymptotic to 2θ r n (ln k)/k, as k,n → ∞.

We also establish properties of walks where there are two types of particles, predator and prey, or where particles interact when they meet at a vertex by coalescing, or by annihilating each other. For example, the expected extinction time of k explosive particles (k even) tends to (2ln 2) θ r n as k→ ∞.

The case of n coalescing particles, where one particle is initially located at each vertex, corresponds to a voter model defined as follows: Initially each vertex has a distinct opinion, and at each step each vertex changes its opinion to that of a random neighbour. The expected time for a unique opinion to emerge is the expected time for all the particles to coalesce, which is asymptotic to 2 θ r n.

Combining results from the predator-prey and multiple random walk models allows us to compare expected detection time in the following cops and robbers scenarios: both the predator and the prey move randomly, the prey moves randomly and the predators stay fixed, the predators move randomly and the prey stays fixed. In all cases, with k predators and ℓ prey the expected detection time is θ r H n/k, where H is the ℓ-th harmonic number.


Random Walk Voter Model Cover Time Interact Particle System Small Positive Constant 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Aldous, D.: Some inequalities for reversible Markov chains. J. London Math. Soc. 25(2), 564–576 (1982)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aldous, D., Fill, J.: Reversible Markov Chains and Random Walks on Graphs. Monograph in preparation,
  3. 3.
    Aleliunas, R., Karp, R.M., Lipton, R.J., Lovász, L., Rackoff, C.: Random Walks, Universal Traversal Sequences, and the Complexity of Maze Problems. In: Proceedings of the 20th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pp. 218–223 (1979)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Alon, N., Avin, C., Kouchý, M., Kozma, G., Lotker, Z., Tuttle, M.: Many random walks are faster then one. In: Proceedings of the 20th Annual ACM Symposium on Parallelism in Algorithms and Architectures, pp. 119–128 (2008)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Broder, A., Karlin, A., Raghavan, A., Upfal, E.: Trading space for time in undirected s-t connectivity. In: Proceedings of the 21st Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pp. 543–549 (1989)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cooper, C., Frieze, A.M.: The cover time of random regular graphs. SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics 18, 728–740 (2005)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cooper, C., Frieze, A.M.: The cover time of the preferential attachment graph. Journal of Combinatorial Theory Series B 97(2), 269–290 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cooper, C., Frieze, A.M.: The cover time of the giant component of a random graph. Random Structures and Algorithms 32, 401–439 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cooper, C., Frieze, A.M., Radzik, T.: Multiple random walks in random regular graphs (2008),
  10. 10.
    Feige, U.: A tight upper bound for the cover time of random walks on graphs. Random Structures and Algorithms 6, 51–54 (1995)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Feige, U.: A tight lower bound for the cover time of random walks on graphs. Random Structures and Algorithms 6, 433–438 (1995)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Feller, W.: An Introduction to Probability Theory, 2nd edn., vol. I. Wiley, Chichester (1960)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Friedman, J.: A proof of Alon’s second eignevalue conjecture. Memoirs of the A.M.S. (to appear)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Liggett, T.M.: Interacting Particle Systems. Springer, Heidelberg (1985)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lovász, L.: Random walks on graphs: a survey. In: Bolyai Society Mathematical Studies, Combinatorics, Paul Erdös is Eighty, Keszthely, Hungary, vol. 2, pp. 1–46 (1993)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sinclair, A.: Improved bounds for mixing rates of Markov chains and multicommodity flow. Combinatorics, Probability and Computing 1, 351–370 (1992)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Colin Cooper
    • 1
  • Alan Frieze
    • 2
  • Tomasz Radzik
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceKing’s College LondonLondonUK
  2. 2.Department of Mathematical SciencesCarnegie Mellon UniversityPittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations