Further Algebraic Algorithms in the Congested Clique Model and Applications to Graph-Theoretic Problems

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9888)

Abstract

Censor-Hillel et al. [PODC’15] recently showed how to efficiently implement centralized algebraic algorithms for matrix multiplication in the congested clique model, a model of distributed computing that has received increasing attention in the past few years. This paper develops further algebraic techniques for designing algorithms in this model. We present deterministic and randomized algorithms, in the congested clique model, for efficiently computing multiple independent instances of matrix products, computing the determinant, the rank and the inverse of a matrix, and solving systems of linear equations. As applications of these techniques, we obtain more efficient algorithms for the computation, again in the congested clique model, of the all-pairs shortest paths and the diameter in directed and undirected graphs with small weights, improving over Censor-Hillel et al.’s work. We also obtain algorithms for several other graph-theoretic problems such as computing the number of edges in a maximum matching and the Gallai-Edmonds decomposition of a simple graph, and computing a minimum vertex cover of a bipartite graph.

References

  1. 1.
    Bürgisser, P., Clausen, M., Shokrollahi, M.A.: Algebraic Complexity Theory. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Censor-Hillel, K., Kaski, P., Korhonen, J.H., Lenzen, C., Paz, A., Suomela, J.: Algebraic methods in the congested clique. In: Proceedings of the 34th Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, pp. 143–152 (2015)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cheriyan, J.: Randomized \(\tilde{O}(M(|V|))\) algorithms for problems in matching theory. SIAM J. Comput. 26(6), 1635–1669 (1997)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chu, J.I., Schnitger, G.: Communication complexity of matrix computation over finite fields. Math. Syst. Theor. 28(3), 215–228 (1995)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Csanky, L.: Fast parallel matrix inversion algorithms. In: Proceedings of the 16th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pp. 11–12 (1975)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dolev, D., Lenzen, C., Peled, S.: “Tri, tri again”: finding triangles and small subgraphs in a distributed setting. In: Aguilera, M.K. (ed.) DISC 2012. LNCS, vol. 7611, pp. 195–209. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Drucker, A., Kuhn, F., Oshman, R.: On the power of the congested clique model. In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, pp. 367–376 (2014)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hegeman, J.W., Pandurangan, G., Pemmaraju, S.V., Sardeshmukh, V.B., Scquizzato, M.: Toward optimal bounds in the congested clique: Graph connectivity and MST. In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, pp. 91–100 (2015)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hegeman, J.W., Pemmaraju, S.V.: Lessons from the congested clique applied to mapreduce. In: Halldórsson, M.M. (ed.) SIROCCO 2014. LNCS, vol. 8576, pp. 149–164. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hegeman, J.W., Pemmaraju, S.V., Sardeshmukh, V.B.: Near-constant-time distributed algorithms on a congested clique. In: Kuhn, F. (ed.) DISC 2014. LNCS, vol. 8784, pp. 514–530. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Henzinger, M., Krinninger, S., Nanongkai, D.: A deterministic almost-tight distributed algorithm for approximating single-source shortest paths. In: Proceedings of the 48th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pp. 489–498 (2016)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kaltofen, E., Pan, V.Y.: Processor efficient parallel solution of linear systems over an abstract field. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Annual ACM Symposium on Parallel Algorithms and Architectures, pp. 180–191 (1991)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kaltofen, E., Pan, V.Y.: Processor-efficient parallel solution of linear systems II: the positive characteristic and singular cases (extended abstract). In: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pp. 714–723 (1992)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kaltofen, E., Saunders, B.D.: On Wiedemann’s method of solving sparse linear systems. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Symposium on Applied Algebra, Algebraic Algorithms and Error-Correcting Codes, pp. 29–38 (1991)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Le Gall, F.: Faster algorithms for rectangular matrix multiplication. In: Proceedings of the 53rd Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pp. 514–523 (2012)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Le Gall, F.: Powers of tensors and fast matrix multiplication. In: Proceedings of the 39th International Symposium on Symbolic and Algebraic Computation, pp. 296–303 (2014)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lenzen, C.: Optimal deterministic routing and sorting on the congested clique. In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, pp. 42–50 (2013)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lenzen, C., Wattenhofer, R.: Tight bounds for parallel randomized load balancing: extended abstract. In: Proceedings of the 43rd ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pp. 11–20 (2011)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lotker, Z., Pavlov, E., Patt-Shamir, B., Peleg, D.: MST construction in \(o(\log \log n)\) communication rounds. In: Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual ACM Symposium on Parallelism in Algorithms and Architectures, pp. 94–100 (2003)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lovász, L.: On determinants, matchings, and random algorithms. In: Fundamentals of Computation Theory, pp. 565–574 (1979)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lovász, L., Plummer, M.D.: Matching Theory. American Mathematical Society (2009)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nanongkai, D.: Distributed approximation algorithms for weighted shortest paths. In: Proceedings of the 46th Symposium on Theory of Computing, pp. 565–573 (2014)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Patt-Shamir, B., Teplitsky, M.: The round complexity of distributed sorting: extended abstract. In: Proceedings of the 30th Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, pp. 249–256 (2011)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Peleg, D.: Distributed computing: a locality-sensitive approach. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (2000)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Preparata, F.P., Sarwate, D.V.: An improved parallel processor bound in fast matrix inversion. Inf. Process. Lett. 7(3), 148–150 (1978)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rabin, M.O., Vazirani, V.V.: Maximum matchings in general graphs through randomization. J. Algorithms 10(4), 557–567 (1989)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Seidel, R.: On the all-pairs-shortest-path problem in unweighted undirected graphs. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 51(3), 400–403 (1995)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Shoshan, A., Zwick, U.: All pairs shortest paths in undirected graphs with integer weights. In: Proceedings of the 40th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pp. 605–615 (1999)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Vassilevska Williams, V.: Multiplying matrices faster than coppersmith-winograd. In: Proceedings of the 44th Symposium on Theory of Computing, pp. 887–898 (2012)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Zwick, U.: All pairs shortest paths using bridging sets and rectangular matrix multiplication. J. ACM 49(3), 289–317 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate School of InformaticsKyoto UniversityKyotoJapan

Personalised recommendations