arXiv ScienceSearch

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

CVP Is NP-Complete for Principal Cyclotomic Ideals

We prove that exact Euclidean decision-CVP is $\mathsf{NP}$-complete on the coefficient lattices of nonzero principal ideals in the power-of-two cyclotomic rings $R_d:=\mathbb{Z}[y]/(y^d+1)$. Our deterministic reduction from Exact Cover by 3-Sets (X3C) produces a target and a squared threshold $Δ$ such that the closest squared distance is exactly $Δ$ in YES instances and at least $Δ+4$ in NO instances. This also implies $\mathsf{NP}$-hardness of exact search-CVP under polynomial-time Turing reductions. We also transfer the resulting principal-ideal CVP instances to full-rank principal ideals of the cyclic quotient ring $\mathbb{Z}[X]/(X^D-1)$, where $D:=2d$. Their coefficient lattices are invariant under cyclic coordinate shifts. The lift preserves principality and multiplies corresponding squared distances by eight. Thus, on principal cyclic ideal lattices, exact decision-CVP is $\mathsf{NP}$-complete and exact search-CVP is $\mathsf{NP}$-hard. We also obtain uniformly computable fixed cyclotomic and cyclic families in which only the target and threshold depend on the X3C collection. Consequently, a polynomial-time solution to exact decision-CVPP on either family would imply $\mathsf{NP}\subseteq\mathsf{P}/\mathrm{poly}$ and collapse the polynomial hierarchy to $Σ_2^{\mathsf{P}}$. To our knowledge, the cyclic results answer Micciancio's questions of whether exact decision-CVP is $\mathsf{NP}$-hard on cyclic lattices and on a fixed family of cyclic lattices, even when restricted to full-rank principal cyclic ideals. Finally, under the coefficient embedding, we prove that exact decision-module-SIVP is $\mathsf{NP}$-complete on free rank-two modules over the same cyclotomic rings.

cs.CC

Fooling Thresholds of Halfspaces

We initiate the study of constructing explicit pseudorandom generators for thresholds of halfspaces with seed length polylogarithmic in the number of halfspaces. This class of functions lies at the frontier of circuit complexity [CTW26]. We show that the generator designed by O'Donnell, Servedio, and Tan for polytopes [OST22] also fools this broader class. To analyze the generator, we develop a threshold-specific smooth approximation framework based on a Bentkus-type mollifier. We prove derivative bounds for this mollifier and also establish a Boolean anticoncentration theorem for thresholds of halfspaces via a random thinning argument. These ingredients imply that the generator $δ$-fools every $k$-out-of-$m$ threshold of $m$ halfspaces over $\{-1,1\}^n$ with seed length $\widetilde{O}(κ^{6+2\varepsilon}\log^{6+2\varepsilon}\!m\cdotδ^{-(2+2\varepsilon)}\log n)$, for any arbitrarily small constant $\varepsilon>0$, where $κ=\min\{k,m-k+1\}$. The random thinning argument also yields bounds on the noise sensitivity and Gaussian surface area for thresholds of halfspaces, leading to learning algorithms under both the uniform and Gaussian distributions.

cs.CC

An Oracle Separating Conjectures about Incompleteness in the Finite Domain

Pudlák [Pud17] lists several major conjectures from the field of proof complexity and asks for oracles that separate corresponding relativized conjectures. Among these conjectures are: - $\mathsf{DisjNP}$: The class of all disjoint NP-pairs does not have many-one complete elements. - $\mathsf{SAT}$: NP does not contain many-one complete sets that have P-optimal proof systems. - $\mathsf{UP}$: UP does not have many-one complete problems. - $\mathsf{NP}\cap\mathsf{coNP}$: $\text{NP}\cap\text{coNP}$ does not have many-one complete problems. As one answer to this question, we construct an oracle relative to which $\mathsf{DisjNP}$, $\neg \mathsf{SAT}$, $\mathsf{UP}$, and $\mathsf{NP}\cap\mathsf{coNP}$ hold, i.e., there is no relativizable proof for the implication $\mathsf{DisjNP}\wedge \mathsf{UP}\wedge \mathsf{NP}\cap\mathsf{coNP}\Rightarrow\mathsf{SAT}$. In particular, regarding the conjectures by Pudlák this extends a result by Khaniki [Kha19].

cs.CC