Scholarlink

<p>We provide a complete characterization of the solvability/impossibility of deterministic stabilizing consensus in virtually any computing model with benign process and communication faults using point-set topology. Relying on the topologies for infinite executions introduced by Nowak, Schmid and Winkler (JACM, 2024) for terminating consensus, we show that semi-open decision sets and semi-continuous decision functions as introduced by Levin (AMM, 1963) are the appropriate means for this characterization: Unlike the continuous decision functions for terminating consensus, semi-continuous functions do not require the inverse image of an open set to be open and hence allow to map a connected space to a disconnected one. We also show that multi-valued stabilizing consensus with weak and strong validity are equivalent, as is the case for terminating consensus. By applying our results to (variants of) all the known possibilities/impossibilities for stabilizing consensus, we easily provide a topological explanation of these results.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

A topological characterization of stabilizing consensus

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年6月22日

查看全文
  • Ulrich Schmid,
  • Stephan Felber,
  • Hugo Rincon Galeana

摘要

We provide a complete characterization of the solvability/impossibility of deterministic stabilizing consensus in virtually any computing model with benign process and communication faults using point-set topology. Relying on the topologies for infinite executions introduced by Nowak, Schmid and Winkler (JACM, 2024) for terminating consensus, we show that semi-open decision sets and semi-continuous decision functions as introduced by Levin (AMM, 1963) are the appropriate means for this characterization: Unlike the continuous decision functions for terminating consensus, semi-continuous functions do not require the inverse image of an open set to be open and hence allow to map a connected space to a disconnected one. We also show that multi-valued stabilizing consensus with weak and strong validity are equivalent, as is the case for terminating consensus. By applying our results to (variants of) all the known possibilities/impossibilities for stabilizing consensus, we easily provide a topological explanation of these results.