Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2504.01856

Improved Bounds for Coin Flipping, Leader Election, and Random Selection

Abstract

Random selection, leader election, and collective coin flipping are fundamental tasks in fault-tolerant distributed computing. We study these problems in the full-information model where despite decades of study, key gaps remain in our understanding of the trade-offs between round complexity, communication per player in each round, and adversarial resilience. We make progress by proving improved bounds for these problems. We first show that any $k$-round coin flipping protocol over $\ell$ players, each player sending one bit per round, can be biased by $O(\ell/\log^{(k)}(\ell))$ bad players. We obtain a similar lower bound for leader election. This strengthens prior best bounds [RSZ, SICOMP 2002] of $O(\ell/\log^{(2k-1)}(\ell))$ for coin flipping protocols and $O(\ell/\log^{(2k+1)}(\ell))$ for leader election protocols. Our result implies that any (1-bit per player) protocol tolerating linear fraction of bad players requires at least $\log^* \ell$ rounds, showing existing protocols [RZ, JCSS 2001; F, FOCS 1999] are near-optimal. We next initiate the study of one-round, (1-bit per player) random selection. For all $m\ge (\log(\ell))^2$, we obtain an optimal protocol (a first in the full information model for any task): We construct a protocol resilient to $O(\ell / m)$ bad players that outputs $m$ uniform random bits. And, we show that any protocol that outputs $m$ uniform random bits can be corrupted using $O(\ell / m)$ bad players. This also implies a one-round leader election protocol resilient to $\ell / (\log \ell)^2$ bad players, improving the prior best protocol [RZ, JCSS 2001] which was resilient to $\ell / (\log \ell)^3$ bad players. Our resilience matches that of the best one-round coin flipping protocol by Ajtai & Linial. To obtain our lower bound, we introduce multi-output influence, an extension of influence of boolean functions to the multi-output setting.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Eshan Chattopadhyay, Mohit Gurumukhani, Noam Ringach, Rocco A. Servedio. 2026-04-28. Improved Bounds for Coin Flipping, Leader Election, and Random Selection. https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.01856

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Improved Algorithms for the Remote Point Problem

The Remote Point Problem (RPP) is an algorithmic problem that asks, given a linear subspace $L \subseteq \mathbb{F}^n$ of dimension $k$, to deterministically find a vector $v \in \mathbb{F}^n$ far in Hamming distance from $L$. This problem was introduced by Alon, Panigrahy and Yekhanin [APY09], motivated in part by the matrix rigidity approach for proving circuit lower bounds. An algorithm is said to achieve remoteness $d$ if it finds a vector $v$ whose Hamming distance from $L$ is at least $d$. We observe that over the rational numbers, the problem admits a deterministic polynomial-time algorithm that achieves optimal remoteness $n-k$. Over finite fields, we obtain a (modest) improvement of a result of Alon, Panigrahy and Yekhanin [APY09], and give an algorithm that achieves remoteness $Ω\left(\frac{n}{\max\{k, \log n\}} \log n\right)$.

cs.CC

Bit-counting complexity classes

We define bit-counting complexity classes whose membership depends on the binary profile of the number of accepting paths of non-deterministic polynomial time Turing machines. We study the relationship between this new family of complexity classes and the classical complexity classes. We prove that the complexity class ${\bf PP}$ is contained in our comparison based bit-counting complexity classes ${\bf B_{|0|=|1|}P}$, ${\bf B_{|0|<|1|}P}$ and ${\bf B_{|0|>|1|}P}$. We then show that the comparison based bit-counting complexity classes and the complexity class ${\bf PP}$ are Turing equivalent, that is ${\bf P}^{\bf PP} = {\bf P}^{{\bf B_{|0|=|1|}P}}={\bf P}^{{\bf B_{|0|>|1|}P}}={\bf P}^{{\bf B_{|0|<|1|}P}}$. We then prove that the complexity classes ${\bf NP}$ and ${\bf CoNP}$ are contained in both of our parity based bit-counting complexity classes ${\bf B_{|0| \oplus}P}$ and ${\bf B_{|1| \oplus}P}$. We also show that the Turing closures of the parity based bit-counting complexity classes coincide, that is ${\bf P}^{{\bf B_{|0|\oplus}P}}={\bf P}^{{\bf B_{|1|\oplus}P}}$. We do this by proving that when either parity based bit-counting complexity class is provided as an oracle for a polynomial time Turing machine, then it can simulate the other one, that is ${\bf B_{|1| \oplus}P}\subseteq {\bf P}^{{\bf B_{|0| \oplus}P}}$ and ${\bf B_{|0| \oplus}P}\subseteq {\bf P}^{{\bf B_{|1| \oplus}P}}$.

cs.CC

Geometric Complexity Theory and Graph Isomorphism

We investigate ideas from the Geometric Complexity Theory approach to separating complexity classes (Mulmuley & Sohoni, SIAM J. Comput., 2001) in the setting of graph isomorphism. This provides us a playground of finite combinatorial objects on which to explore these techniques. We seek to separate non-isomorphic pairs of graphs using vector spaces of polynomials that are set-wise invariant under permutations (so-called separating modules). We characterize the power of this method for distinguishing graphs under several different complexity measures: - We show that separating modules of "support-degree" $k$ are equivalent in power to the counts of $O(k)$-vertex subgraphs. - We show that separating modules of symmetric algebraic circuit size $n^{Θ(k)}$ are equivalent to $Θ(k)$-dimensional Weisfeiler-Leman. This generalizes and strengthens the result of Dawar & Wilsenach (CSL '18; ICALP '20; ACM Trans. Comput. Log., 2022; Theory Comput., 2025). - When considering only the representation-theoretic multiplicities of separating modules, we show that two graphs are separated by multiplicities if and only if their automorphism groups have different multiplicity of cycle types (cycle index). The latter result is notable in the analogy with GCT, as it is the only result we are aware of in which the multiplicity approach to separating isomorphism types of objects has been given an "intrinsic" characterization in terms of the objects themselves. We show that for graphs, multiplicity obstructions are stronger than occurrence obstructions. We also connect support size (from the study of WL) to complexity measures on $S_n$ (Dafni, Filmus, Lifshitz, Lindzey, & Vinyals, ITCS '21); as well as connections between invariant polynomials, the Graph Reconstruction Conjectures, and Forman's "invariants of finite type" (Adv. Math., 2004).

cs.CC