Invariant Properties and Bounds on a Finite Time Consensus Algorithm

  • Michel ToulouseEmail author
  • Bùi Quang Minh
  • Quang Tran Minh
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11390)


Finite time consensus algorithms compute consensus values exactly and in a finite number of steps, contrasting with asymptotic consensus algorithms. In the literature, there exists few approaches deriving finite time convergence for discrete consensus algorithms. In this paper we focus on an analysis of finite time convergence based on the observability matrix for consensus networks. We introduce analytical results extending the applicability of network observability theory to consensus and other distributed algorithms. New analytical bounds on the number of steps to compute consensus are provided as well as counterexamples which are disproving a conjecture on the minimum of steps to compute consensus. A polynomial time algorithm is described to calculate empirically the exact number of steps to compute consensus values. We have implemented a consensus-based network intrusion detection system based on the observability matrix approach of consensus networks. This implementation validates empirically our analytical results. We also compare the performance of the finite time consensus with an implementation of the same intrusion detection system using asymptotic consensus. Although the finite time algorithm provides exact solutions, tests show that it needs less iterations to obtain a consensus solution.


Consensus algorithms Finite time convergence Observability theory Distributed computing 



Funding for this project comes from the Professorship Start-Up Support Grant VGU-PSSG-02 of the Vietnamese-German University. The authors thank this institution for supporting this research.


  1. 1.
    Xiao, L., Boyd, S., Kim, S.-J.: Distributed average consensus with least-mean-square deviation. J. Parallel Distrib. Comput. 67(1), 33–46 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Xiao, L., Boyd, S., Lall, S.: A scheme for robust distributed sensor fusion based on average consensus. In: Fourth International Symposium on Information Processing in Sensor Networks, IPSN 2005, April 2005, pp. 63–70 (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Xiao, L., Boyd, S.: Fast linear iterations for distributed averaging. Syst. Control. Lett. 53, 65–78 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wang, X., Li, J., Xing, J., Wang, R., Xie, L., Zhang, X.: A novel finite-time average consensus protocol for multi-agent systems with switching topology. Trans. Inst. Meas. Control. 40(2), 606–614 (2018). Scholar
  5. 5.
    Xiao, F., Wang, L., Chen, T.: Finite-time consensus in networks of integrator-like dynamic agents with directional link failure. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control. 59(3), 756–762 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hui, Q., Haddad, W.M., Bhat, S.P.: Finite-time semistability and consensus for nonlinear dynamical networks. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control. 53(8), 1887–1900 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cortés, J.: Finite-time convergent gradient flows with applications to network consensus. Automatica 42(11), 1993–2000 (2006). Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ko, C.-K., Gao, X.: On matrix factorization and finite-time average-consensus. In: Proceedings of the 48th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC) Held Jointly with 2009 28th Chinese Control Conference, pp. 5798–5803, December 2009Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ko, C.-K.: On matrix factorization and scheduling for finite-time average-consensus. Ph.D. dissertation, California Institute of Technology (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kibangou, A.Y.: Graph Laplacian based matrix design for finite-time distributed average consensus. In: 2012 American Control Conference (ACC), pp. 1901–1906, June 2012Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dung, T.M., Alain, T., Kibangou, Y.: Distributed design of finite-time average consensus protocols. In: IFAC Proceedings Volumes 2013 4th IFAC Workshop on Distributed Estimation and Control in Networked Systems, vol. 46, no. 27, pp. 227–233 (2013). Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sundaram, S., Hadjicostis, C.N.: Finite-time distributed consensus in graphs with time-invariant topologies. In: 2007 American Control Conference, pp. 711–716, July 2007Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yuan, Y., Stan, G.-B., Shi, L., Barahona, M., Goncalves, J.: Decentralised minimum-time consensus. Automatica 49(5), 1227–1235 (2013)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Charalambous, T., Yuan, Y., Yang, T., Pan, W., Hadjicostis, C.N., Johansson, M.: Decentralised minimum-time average consensus in digraphs. In: 52nd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, pp. 2617–2622, December 2013Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sundaram, S., Hadjicostis, C.N.: Distributed consensus and linear functional calculation in networks: an observability perspective. In: 2007 6th International Symposium on Information Processing in Sensor Networks, pp. 99–108, April 2007Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sundaram, S., Hadjicostis, C.N.: Distributed function calculation and consensus using linear iterative strategies. IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 26(4), 650–660 (2008). Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sundaram, S.: Linear Iterative Strategies for Information Dissemination and Processing in Distributed Systems. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (2009).
  18. 18.
    Toulouse, M., Minh, B.Q., Curtis, P.: A consensus based network intrusion detection system. In: 2015 5th International Conference on IT Convergence and Security (ICITCS), pp. 1–6, August 2015Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bauso, D., Giarré, L., Pesenti, R.: Distributed consensus in noncooperative inventory games. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 192(3), 866–878 (2009). Scholar
  20. 20.
    Akyildiz, I.F., Lo, B.F., Balakrishnan, R.: Cooperative spectrum sensing in cognitive radio networks: a survey. Phys. Commun. 4(1), 40–62 (2011). Scholar
  21. 21.
    Li, Z., Yu, F.R., Huang, M.: A cooperative spectrum sensing consensus scheme in cognitive radios. In: IEEE INFOCOM 2009, pp. 2546–2550, April 2009Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Olfati-Saber, R., Murray, R.M.: Consensus problems in networks of agents with switching topology and time-delays. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control. 49(9), 1520–1533 (2004). Scholar
  23. 23.
    Chen, J., Patton, J.R., Zhang, H.-Y.: Design of unknown input observers and robust fault detection filters. Int. J. Control. 63(1), 85–105 (1996)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Isermann, R.: Model-based fault-detection and diagnosis - status and applications. Annu. Rev. Control. 29, 71–85 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Teixeira, A., Sandberg, H., Johansson, K.H.: Networked control systems under cyber attacks with applications to power networks. In: Proceedings of the 2010 American Control Conference, pp. 3690–3696, June 2010Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pasqualetti, F., Bicchi, A., Bullo, F.: Consensus computation in unreliable networks: a system theoretic approach. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control. 57(1), 90–104 (2012)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Pasqualetti, F., Dörfler, F., Bullo, F.: Attack detection and identification in cyber-physical systems. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control. 58(11), 2715–2729 (2013)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Pasqualetti, F., Bicchi, A., Bullo, F.: On the security of linear consensus networks. In: Proceedings of the 48th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC) Held Jointly with 2009 28th Chinese Control Conference, pp. 4894–4901, December 2009Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Silvestre, D., Rosa, P., Cunha, R., Hespanha, J.P., Silvestre, C.: Gossip average consensus in a byzantine environment using stochastic set-valued observers. In: 52nd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, pp. 4373–4378, December 2013Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Pasqualetti, F., Bicchi, A., Bullo, F.: Distributed intrusion detection for secure consensus computations. In: 2007 46th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, pp. 5594–5599, December 2007Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ahlswede, R., Cai, N., Li, S.Y., Yeung, R.W.: Network information flow. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theor. 46(4), 1204–1216 (2000)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ghosh, S., Lee, J.: Optimal synthesis for finite-time consensus under fixed graphs. In: 2011 50th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control and European Control Conference, pp. 2052–2057, December 2011Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ghosh, S., Lee, J.W.: Optimal distributed consensus on unknown undirected graphs. In: 2012 IEEE 51st IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), pp. 2244–2249, December 2012Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Tavallaee, M., Bagheri, E., Lu, W., Ghorbani, A.A.: A detailed analysis of the KDD cup 99 data set. In: 2009 IEEE Symposium on Computational Intelligence for Security and Defense Applications, pp. 1–6, July 2009Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Lippmann, R., Haines, J.W., Fried, D.J., Korba, J., Das, K.: Analysis and results of the 1999 DARPA off-line intrusion detection evaluation. In: Debar, H., Mé, L., Wu, S.F. (eds.) RAID 2000. LNCS, vol. 1907, pp. 162–182. Springer, Heidelberg (2000). Scholar
  36. 36.
    Lippmann, R., et al.: Evaluating intrusion detection systems: the 1998 DARPA off-line intrusion detection evaluation. In: Proceedings of DARPA Information Survivability Conference and Exposition, DISCEX 2000, pp. 12–26 (2000)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Kotenko, I., Doynikova, E.: Selection of countermeasures against network attacks based on dynamical calculation of security metrics. J. Def. Model. Simul. 15(2), 181–204 (2018). Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michel Toulouse
    • 1
    Email author
  • Bùi Quang Minh
    • 1
  • Quang Tran Minh
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceVietnamese-German UniversityBinh Duong New CityVietnam
  2. 2.Ho Chi Minh City University of Technology, VNU-HCMHo Chi Minh CityVietnam

Personalised recommendations