Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data.

Liah Kor

dblp:05/8773 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
4ranked-venue papers
2as first author
0since 2021 · last 2013
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Theory of computation · 4 · 2 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Theoretical computer science
2 papers
Distributed computing theory · 80% Computational complexity · 20%

Topics — the 6 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Distributed computing theory › distributed graph algorithms
distributed approximation
0.322012
Distributed Verification and Hardness of Distributed Approximation · SIAM J. Comput. 2012
Distributed verification and hardness of distributed approximation · STOC 2011
Distributed computing theory
distributed verification
0.322012
Distributed Verification and Hardness of Distributed Approximation · SIAM J. Comput. 2012
Distributed verification and hardness of distributed approximation · STOC 2011
Computational complexity
hardness of approximation
0.112012
Distributed Verification and Hardness of Distributed Approximation · SIAM J. Comput. 2012
Distributed computing theory › distributed complexity
time complexity lower bounds
0.112012
Distributed Verification and Hardness of Distributed Approximation · SIAM J. Comput. 2012
Computational complexity
communication complexity
0.012012
Distributed Verification and Hardness of Distributed Approximation · SIAM J. Comput. 2012
Distributed computing theory › distributed complexity
distributed lower bounds
0.012012
Distributed Verification and Hardness of Distributed Approximation · SIAM J. Comput. 2012

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

communication complexity · 0.1round complexity · 0.1distributed algorithm · 0.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2013 Tight Bounds for Distributed Minimum-Weight Spanning Tree Verification
Liah Kor, Amos Korman, David Peleg
Theory Comput. Syst.1
2012 Distributed Verification and Hardness of Distributed Approximation
abstract
We study the verification problem in distributed networks, stated as follows. Let $H$ be a subgraph of a network $G$ where each vertex of $G$ knows which edges incident on it are in $H$. We would like to verify whether $H$ has some properties, e.g., if it is a tree or if it is connected (every node knows at the end of the process whether $H$ has the specified property or not). We would like to perform this verification in a decentralized fashion via a distributed algorithm. The time complexity of verification is measured as the number of rounds of distributed communication. In this paper we initiate a systematic study of distributed verification and give almost tight lower bounds on the running time of distributed verification algorithms for many fundamental problems such as connectivity, spanning connected subgraph, and $s$-$t$ cut verification. We then show applications of these results in deriving strong unconditional time lower bounds on the hardness of distributed approximation for many classical optimization problems including minimum spanning tree (MST), shortest paths, and minimum cut. Many of these results are the first nontrivial lower bounds for both exact and approximate distributed computation, and they resolve previous open questions. Moreover, our unconditional lower bound of approximating MST subsumes and improves upon the previous hardness of approximation bound of Elkin [M. Elkin, SIAM J. Comput., 36 (2006), pp. 433--456] as well as the lower bound for (exact) MST computation of Peleg and Rubinovich [D. Peleg and V. Rubinovich, SIAM J. Comput., 30 (2000), pp. 1427--1442]. Our result implies that there can be no distributed approximation algorithm for MST that is significantly faster than the current exact algorithm for any approximation factor. Our lower bound proofs show an interesting connection between communication complexity and distributed computing which turns out to be useful in establishing the time complexity of exact and approximate distributed computation of many problems.
Atish Das Sarma, Stephan Holzer, Liah Kor, Amos Korman, Danupon Nanongkai, Gopal Pandurangan, David Peleg, Roger Wattenhofer
SIAM J. Comput.3
2011 Tight Bounds For Distributed MST Verification
abstract
This paper establishes tight bounds for the Minimum-weight Spanning Tree (MST) verification problem in the distributed setting. Specifically, we provide an MST verification algorithm that achieves simultaneously tilde ~O(|E|) messages and $tilde O(sqrt{n} + D) time, where |E| is the number of edges in the given graph G and D is G's diameter. On the negative side, we show that any MST verification algorithm must send Omega(|E|) messages and incur ~Omega(sqrt{n} + D) time in worst case. Our upper bound result appears to indicate that the verification of an MST may be easier than its construction, since for MST construction, both lower bounds of Omega(|E|) messages and Omega(sqrt{n} + D) time hold, but at the moment there is no known distributed algorithm that constructs an MST and achieves simultaneously tilde O(|E|) messages and ´~O(sqrt{n} + D) time. Specifically, the best known time-optimal algorithm (using ~O(sqrt{n} + D) time) requires O(|E|+n^{3/2}) messages, and the best known message-optimal algorithm (using ~O(|E|) messages) requires O(n) time. On the other hand, our lower bound results indicate that the verification of an MST is not significantly easier than its construction.
Liah Kor, Amos Korman, David Peleg
STACS1
2011 Distributed verification and hardness of distributed approximation
abstract
We study the verification problem in distributed networks, stated as follows. Let H be a subgraph of a network G where each vertex of G knows which edges incident on it are in H. We would like to verify whether H has some properties, e.g., if it is a tree or if it is connected (every node knows in the end of the process whether H has the specified property or not). We would like to perform this verification in a decentralized fashion via a distributed algorithm. The time complexity of verification is measured as the number of rounds of distributed communication.
Atish Das Sarma, Stephan Holzer, Liah Kor, Amos Korman, Danupon Nanongkai, Gopal Pandurangan, David Peleg, Roger Wattenhofer
STOC3