Communication in Networks with Random Dependent Faults

  • Evangelos Kranakis
  • Michel Paquette
  • Andrzej Pelc
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4708)


The aim of this paper is to study communication in networks where nodes fail in a random dependent way. In order to capture fault dependencies, we introduce the neighborhood fault model, where damaging events, called spots, occur randomly and independently with probability p at nodes of a network, and cause faults in the given node and all of its neighbors. Faults at distance at most 2 become dependent in this model and are positively correlated. We investigate the impact of spot probability on feasibility and time of communication in the fault-free part of the network. We show a network which supports fast communication with high probability, if p ≤ 1/clogn. We also show that communication is not feasible with high probability in most classes of networks, for constant spot probabilities. For smaller spot probabilities, high probability communication is supported even by bounded degree networks. It is shown that the torus supports communication with high probability when p decreases faster than 1/n 1/2, and does not when p ∈ 1/O(n 1/2). Furthermore, a network built of tori is designed, with the same fault-tolerance properties and additionally supporting fast communication. We show, however, that networks of degree bounded by a constant d do not support communication with high probability, if p ∈ 1/O(n 1/d ). While communication in networks with independent faults was widely studied, this is the first analytic paper which investigates network communication for random dependent faults.


Fault-tolerance dependent faults communication crash faults network connectivity 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Bienstock, D.: Broadcasting with random faults. Discr. Appl. Math. 20, 1–7 (1988)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chlebus, B.S., Diks, K., Pelc, A.: Sparse networks supporting efficient reliable broadcasting. Nordic Journal of Computing 1, 332–345 (1994)zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chlebus, B.S., Diks, K., Pelc, A.: Reliable broadcasting in hypercubes with random link and node failures. Comb., Prob. and Computing 5, 337–350 (1996)zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Paquette, M., Pelc, A.: Fast broadcasting with byzantine faults. International Journal of Foundations of Computer Science 17(6), 1423–1439 (2006)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pelc, A.: Fault-tolerant broadcasting and gossiping in communication networks. Networks 28(6), 143–156 (1996)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ganesan, D., Govindan, R., Shenker, S., Estrin, D.: Highly-resilient, energy-efficient multipath routing in wireless sensor networks. ACM SIGMOBILE Mobile Computing and Communications Review 5(4), 11–25 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Thottan, M., Ji, C.: Using network fault predictions to enable IP traffic management. J. Network Syst. Manage 9(3), 327–346 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yajnik, M., Kurose, J., Towsley, D.: Packet loss correlation in the MBone multicast network. Proceedings of IEEE Global Internet (May 27, 1996)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Stapper, C.H.: On yield, fault distributions and clustering of particles. IBM Journal of Research and Development 30(3), 326–338 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Meyer, F.J., Pradhan, D.K.: Modeling defect spatial distribution. IEEE Trans. Computers 38(4), 538–546 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Warren, W.: The center-satellite concept as a basis for ecological sampling. Stat. Ecol. 2, 87–118 (1971)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Blough, D.M., Pelc, A.: A clustered failure model for the memory array reconfiguration problem. IEEE Trans. Computers 42(5), 518–528 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Meyer, F.J., Park, N.: Predicting defect-tolerant yield in the embedded core context. IEEE Trans. Computers 52(11), 1470–1479 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Choi, A., Park, N., Meyer, F.J., Lombardi, F., Piuri, V.: Reliability measurement of fault-tolerant onboard memory system under fault clustering. In: Proceedings of 19th Instrumentation and Measurement Technology Conference, 2002. IMTC, vol. 2, pp. 1161–1166. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2002)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yu, F., Tsai, C.H., Huang, Y.W., Lee, D.T., Lin, H.Y., Kuo, S.Y.: Efficient exact spare allocation via boolean satisfiability. In: 20th IEEE Int. Symp. on Defect and Fault Tolerance in VLSI Systems (DFT 2005), pp. 361–370. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Evangelos Kranakis
    • 1
  • Michel Paquette
    • 1
  • Andrzej Pelc
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Computer Science, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, K1S 5B6Canada
  2. 2.Département d’informatique et d’ingénierie, Université du Québec en Outaouais. Gatineau, Québec, J8X 3X7Canada

Personalised recommendations