Mobility Matters
Home›Mobile agents on graphs›Exploration›Broadcast by agents in dynamic graphs

Broadcast by agents in dynamic graphs

One agent holds a message; an adversary changes the graph every round, keeping it connected. How many agents are needed so that the message always reaches every agent?

Problem statement and measuresexpand

\(k \ge 2\) agents with distinct identifiers stand on distinct nodes, chosen by an adversary, of a connected undirected graph \(G = (V, E)\) with \(n\) nodes. One agent, the source agent, holds a message; the other \(k - 1\) are ignorant agents. Time runs in synchronous rounds. At the start of every round the adversary chooses the snapshot \(G_t\), any connected spanning subgraph of \(G\) (the dynamic graph is 1-interval connected); every agent then sees \(G_t\) and the position and status of every agent (global visibility), and moves along one edge of \(G_t\) or stays. An ignorant agent that is on the same node as a source agent receives the message and becomes a source agent; no message travels in any other way. Broadcast is solved when every agent holds the message. The question is, for each graph \(G\), the least \(k\) with which the agents solve broadcast against every adversary and every initial placement; time is the number of rounds.

Measures: Agents, the least number \(k\) of agents, the source agent included, with which broadcast is solved against every adversary, in the worst case over the graphs of the setting with \(n\) nodes; Time, rounds until every agent holds the message.

tight near-optimal polynomial gap unknown impossible· rows follow the assumption tree; each cell: best upper bound vs lower bound, and what forces the lower bound
Setting
Agents
Time
Dynamic graph, any topology + connected every round, + undirected, + distinct IDs (eponymous), + local communication, + synchronous, + dispersed start
3 open · 1 results
tight \(n-1\) vs \(n-1\) adversarial edge changes
unknown — vs \(\lceil D/2 \rceil\) distance
Dynamic rings + ring
0 open · 1 results
tight \(3\) vs \(3\) adversarial edge changes
unknown — vs —
Dynamic complete graphs + complete graph
0 open · 1 results
tight \(n-1\) vs \(n-1\) adversarial edge changes
unknown — vs —
Dynamic bipartite graphs + bipartite
0 open · 1 results
tight \(n-3\) vs \(n-3\) adversarial edge changes
unknown — vs —
Dynamic hypercubes + hypercube
1 open · 1 results
tight \(n-3\) vs \(n/2\) adversarial edge changes
unknown — vs —
Dynamic grids + grid
1 open · 1 results
tight \(n-3\) vs \((\sqrt n-1)^2+1\) adversarial edge changes
unknown — vs —
Static graph + static graph, + undirected, + distinct IDs (eponymous), + local communication, + synchronous, + dispersed start
0 open · 1 results
tight \(2\) vs —
tight \(O(D)\) vs \(\lceil D/2 \rceil\) distance

Know a better result, or found a mistake? Suggest a result · Report an error. Accepted contributions are acknowledged.