arXiv subjects

Jukka Suomela

Publications and source records attributed to Jukka Suomela.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Distributed Quantum Advantage in Locally Checkable Labeling Problems

In this paper, we present the first known example of a locally checkable labeling problem (LCL) that admits asymptotic distributed quantum advantage in the LOCAL model of distributed computing: our problem can be solved in $O(\log n)$ communication rounds in the quantum-LOCAL model, but it requires $Ω(\log n \cdot \log^{0.99} \log n)$ communication rounds in the classical randomized-LOCAL model. We also show that distributed quantum advantage cannot be arbitrarily large: if an LCL problem can be solved in $T(n)$ rounds in the quantum-LOCAL model, it can also be solved in $\tilde O(\sqrt{n T(n)})$ rounds in the classical randomized-LOCAL model. In particular, a problem that is strictly global classically is also almost-global in quantum-LOCAL. Our second result also holds for $T(n)$-dependent probability distributions. As a corollary, if there exists a finitely dependent distribution over valid labelings of some LCL problem $Π$, then the same problem $Π$ can also be solved in $\tilde O(\sqrt{n})$ rounds in the classical randomized-LOCAL and deterministic-LOCAL models. That is, finitely dependent distributions cannot exist for global LCL problems.

cs.DC↗

arXiv2026

Distributed Quantum Algorithms Cannot Color Cycles with Probability 1

We prove that any distributed quantum algorithm that finds a $3$-coloring with probability $1$ in a cycle of anonymous identical computers has to be global, that is, it needs $Ω(n)$ communication rounds. It follows that quantum computation and communication does not help with this problem. All prior lower bounds on quantum advantage in distributed graph algorithms use arguments related to physical causality. However, it is known that such arguments cannot rule out fast quantum advantage for $3$-coloring cycles. In particular, any causality-based argument would rule out the existence of finitely dependent coloring, but Holroyd and Liggett (2016) showed that such colorings do exist. Hence to tackle this problem, we need a ``genuinely quantum'' lower-bound technique that can distinguish between (1) distributions that do not violate physical causality vs. (2) distributions that can be realized with a quantum strategy. We present the first such lower-bound technique in this context. First, we show that $1$-round quantum algorithms cannot break symmetry with probability $1$. Second, we present a wishful teleportation strategy that can be used to turn $T$-round quantum 3-coloring algorithms into $1$-round quantum algorithms breaking symmetry, while preserving success probability $1$. Put together, the lower bound follows.

cs.DS↗

arXiv2026

Rectangular Matrix Multiplication in the Low-Bandwidth Model

We study rectangular matrix multiplication in the low-bandwidth model of distributed computing. There are $n$ computers; initially the input matrices are distributed evenly between computers, and in each communication round every computer can send and receive an $O(\log n)$-bit message. Eventually each computer must output its designated part of the product matrix. While prior work has focused primarily on square $n \times n$ multiplication under various sparsity assumptions, we study rectangular instances with no sparsity assumption. We denote by $\langle a,b,c\rangle$ the task of multiplying an $a\times b$ matrix by a $b\times c$ matrix in this model. We concentrate on two natural aspect ratios, $\langle n,d,n\rangle$ and $\langle d,n,d\rangle$, for $d \le n$, and we study how the round complexity depends on $n$ and $d$. When $d \to n$, both $\langle n,d,n\rangle$ and $\langle d,n,d\rangle$ approach $\langle n,n,n\rangle$, which is the usual task of multiplying square matrices. If we consider multiplication over semirings, the current best upper bound in that case is $O(n^{4/3})$ rounds, and there is a trivial unconditional lower bound of $Ω(n)$. We show that for $\langle d,n,d\rangle$, we can achieve the complexity of $\tilde O(d^{4/3})$, which seems like a natural generalization of the upper bound $\tilde O(n^{4/3})$ when $d=n$. However, the case of $\langle n,d,n\rangle$ is fundamentally different, and also exhibits a phase transition. We show that for $d \le \sqrt{n}$, the complexity of $\langle n,d,n\rangle$ is $Θ(d \sqrt{n})$; we have matching upper and lower bounds. However, the behavior is genuinely different in the region $d \ge \sqrt{n}$, where the upper bound is $O(d^{2/3} n^{2/3})$.

cs.DC↗

arXiv2026

Meta-Theorems for Cuttable Distributed Problems

We prove that given any $α$-approximation LOCAL algorithm for Minimum Dominating Set (MDS) on planar graphs, we can construct an $f(g)$-round $(3α+1)$-approximation LOCAL algorithm for MDS on graphs embeddable in a given Euler genus-$g$ surface. Heydt et al. [European Journal of Combinatorics (2025)] gave an algorithm with $α=11+\varepsilon$, from which we derive a $(34 +\varepsilon)$-approximation algorithm for graphs of genus $g$, therefore improving upon the current state of the art of $24g+O(1)$ due to Amiri et al. [ACM Transactions on Algorithms (2019)]. It also improves the approximation ratio of $91+\varepsilon$ due to Czygrinow et al. [Theoretical Computer Science (2019)] in the particular case of orientable surfaces. We generalize this result into two directions: (1) by considering other graph problems studied in Distributed Computing such as Minimum $k$-Tuple Dominating Set, for which constant-round approximation algorithms were known for planar graphs, but not for graphs of bounded genus; and (2) by considering graph classes beyond bounded genus graphs, called locally nice, and relying on the asymptotic dimension of the class. We prove these results by a series of meta-theorems about cuttable minimization problems with constant-round approximation LOCAL algorithms. Roughly speaking, in cuttable problems, one can systematically extract small subgraphs whose solutions are in proportion to the global solution restricted to the neighbourhood of the subgraph.

cs.DC↗

arXiv2026

Classification of Local Optimization Problems in Directed Cycles

We present a complete classification of the distributed computational complexity of local optimization problems in directed cycles for both the deterministic and the randomized LOCAL model. We show that for any local optimization problem $Π$ (that can be of the form min-sum, max-sum, min-max, or max-min, for any local cost or utility function over some finite alphabet), and for any constant approximation ratio $α$, the task of finding an $α$-approximation of $Π$ in directed cycles has one of the following complexities: 1. $O(1)$ rounds in deterministic LOCAL, $O(1)$ rounds in randomized LOCAL, 2. $Θ(\log^* n)$ rounds in deterministic LOCAL, $O(1)$ rounds in randomized LOCAL, 3. $Θ(\log^* n)$ rounds in deterministic LOCAL, $Θ(\log^* n)$ rounds in randomized LOCAL, 4. $Θ(n)$ rounds in deterministic LOCAL, $Θ(n)$ rounds in randomized LOCAL. Moreover, for any given $Π$ and $α$, we can determine the complexity class automatically, with an efficient (centralized, sequential) meta-algorithm, and we can also efficiently synthesize an asymptotically optimal distributed algorithm. Before this work, similar results were only known for local search problems (e.g., locally checkable labeling problems). The family of local optimization problems is a strict generalization of local search problems, and it contains numerous commonly studied distributed tasks, such as the problems of finding approximations of the maximum independent set, minimum vertex cover, minimum dominating set, and minimum vertex coloring.

cs.DC↗

arXiv2026

2-Coloring Cycles in One Round

We show that there is a one-round randomized distributed algorithm that can 2-color cycles such that the expected fraction of monochromatic edges is less than 0.24118. We also show that a one-round algorithm cannot achieve a fraction less than 0.23879. Before this work, the best upper and lower bounds were 0.25 and 0.2. Our proof was largely discovered and developed by large language models, and both the upper and lower bounds have been formalized in Lean 4.

cs.DC↗

arXiv2026

Is a LOCAL algorithm computable?

Common definitions of the "standard" LOCAL model tend to be sloppy and even self-contradictory on one point: do the nodes update their state using an arbitrary function or a computable function? So far, this distinction has been safe to neglect, since problems where it matters seem contrived and quite different from e.g. typical local graph problems studied in this context. We show that this question matters even for locally checkable labeling problems (LCLs), perhaps the most widely studied family of problems in the context of the LOCAL model. Furthermore, we show that assumptions about computability are directly connected to another aspect already recognized as highly relevant: whether we have any knowledge of $n$, the size of the graph. Concretely, we show that there is an LCL problem $Π$ with the following properties: 1. $Π$ can be solved in $O(\log n)$ rounds if the LOCAL model is uncomputable. 2. $Π$ can be solved in $O(\log n)$ rounds in the computable model if we know any upper bound on $n$. 3. $Π$ requires $Ω(\sqrt{n})$ rounds in the computable model if we do not know anything about $n$. We also show that the connection between computability and knowledge of $n$ holds in general: for any LCL problem $Π$, if you have any bound on $n$, then $Π$ has the same round complexity in the computable and uncomputable models.

cs.DC↗

arXiv2026

It does not matter how you define locally checkable labelings

Locally checkable labeling problems (LCLs) form the foundation of the modern theory of distributed graph algorithms. First introduced in the seminal paper by Naor and Stockmeyer [STOC 1993], these are graph problems that can be described by listing a finite set of valid local neighborhoods. This seemingly simple definition strikes a careful balance between two objectives: they are a family of problems that is broad enough so that it captures numerous problems that are of interest to researchers working in this field, yet restrictive enough so that it is possible to prove strong theorems that hold for all LCL problems. In particular, the distributed complexity landscape of LCL problems is now very well understood. In this work we show that the family of LCL problems is extremely robust to variations. We present a very restricted family of locally checkable problems (essentially, the "node-edge checkable" formalism familiar from round elimination, restricted to regular unlabeled graphs); most importantly, such problems cannot directly refer to e.g. the existence of short cycles. We show that one can translate between the two formalisms (there are local reductions in both directions that only need access to a symmetry-breaking oracle, and hence the overhead is at most an additive $O(\log^* n)$ rounds in the LOCAL model).

cs.DC↗

arXiv2026

Distributed Algorithms for Potential Problems

In this work, we present a fast distributed algorithm for local potential problems: these are graph problems where the task is to find a locally optimal solution where no node can unilaterally improve the utility in its local neighborhood by changing its own label. A simple example of such a problem is the task of finding a locally optimal cut, i.e., a cut where for each node at least half of its incident edges are cut edges. The distributed round complexity of the locally optimal cut problem has been wide open; the problem is known to require $Ω(\log n)$ rounds in the deterministic LOCAL model and $Ω(\log \log n)$ rounds in the randomized LOCAL model, but the only known upper bound is the trivial brute-force solution of $O(n)$ rounds. Locally optimal cut in constant-degree graphs is perhaps the simplest example of a locally checkable labeling problem for which there is still such a large gap between current upper and lower bounds. We show that in constant-degree graphs, all local potential problems, including locally optimal cut, can be solved in $\log^{O(1)} n$ rounds, both in the deterministic and randomized LOCAL models. In particular, the deterministic round complexity of the locally optimal cut problem is now settled to $\log^{Θ(1)} n$. Our algorithms also apply to the general case of graphs of maximum degree $Δ$. For the special case of locally optimal cut, we obtain a randomized algorithm that runs in $O(Δ^{2} \log^{6} n)$ rounds, which can be derandomized at polylogarithmic cost with standard techniques. Furthermore, we show that a dependence in $Δ$ is necessary: we prove a lower bound of $Ω(\min\{Δ,\sqrt{n}\})$ rounds, even in the quantum-LOCAL model; in particular, there is no polylogarithmic-round algorithm for the general case.

cs.DC↗

arXiv2026

Online Locality Meets Distributed Quantum Computing

We connect three distinct lines of research that have recently explored extensions of the classical LOCAL model of distributed computing: A. distributed quantum computing and non-signaling distributions [e.g. STOC 2024], B. finitely-dependent processes [e.g. Forum Math. Pi 2016], and C. locality in online graph algorithms and dynamic graph algorithms [e.g. ICALP 2023]. We prove new results on the capabilities and limitations of all of these models of computing, for locally checkable labeling problems (LCLs). We show that all these settings can be sandwiched between the classical LOCAL model and what we call the randomized online-LOCAL model. Our work implies limitations on the quantum advantage in the distributed setting, and we also exhibit a new barrier for proving tighter bounds. Our main technical results are these: 1. All LCL problems solvable with locality $O(\log^\star n)$ in the classical deterministic LOCAL model admit a finitely-dependent distribution with locality $O(1)$. This answers an open question by Holroyd [2024], and also presents a new barrier for proving bounds on distributed quantum advantage using causality-based arguments. 2. In rooted trees, if we can solve an LCL problem with locality $o(\log \log \log n)$ in the randomized online-LOCAL model (or any of the weaker models, such as quantum-LOCAL), we can solve it with locality $O(\log^\star n)$ in the classical deterministic LOCAL model. One of many implications is that in rooted trees, $O(\log^\star n)$ locality in quantum-LOCAL is not stronger than $O(\log^\star n)$ locality in classical LOCAL.

cs.DC↗

arXiv2025

New Limits on Distributed Quantum Advantage: Dequantizing Linear Programs

In this work, we give two results that put new limits on distributed quantum advantage in the context of the LOCAL model of distributed computing. First, we show that there is no distributed quantum advantage for any linear program. Put otherwise, if there is a quantum-LOCAL algorithm $\mathcal{A}$ that finds an $α$-approximation of some linear optimization problem $Π$ in $T$ communication rounds, we can construct a classical, deterministic LOCAL algorithm $\mathcal{A}'$ that finds an $α$-approximation of $Π$ in $T$ rounds. As a corollary, all classical lower bounds for linear programs, including the KMW bound, hold verbatim in quantum-LOCAL. Second, using the above result, we show that there exists a locally checkable labeling problem (LCL) for which quantum-LOCAL is strictly weaker than the classical deterministic SLOCAL model. Our results extend from quantum-LOCAL also to finitely dependent and non-signaling distributions, and one of the corollaries of our work is that the non-signaling model and the SLOCAL model are incomparable in the context of LCL problems: By prior work, there exists an LCL problem for which SLOCAL is strictly weaker than the non-signaling model, and our work provides a separation in the opposite direction.

cs.DC↗

arXiv2025

On the Universality of Round Elimination Fixed Points

Recent work on distributed graph algorithms [e.g. STOC 2022, ITCS 2022, PODC 2020] has drawn attention to the following open question: are round elimination fixed points a universal technique for proving lower bounds? That is, given a locally checkable problem $Π$ that requires at least $Ω(\log n)$ rounds in the deterministic LOCAL model, can we always find a relaxation $Π'$ of $Π$ that is a nontrivial fixed point for the round elimination technique [see STOC 2016, PODC 2019]? If yes, then a key part of distributed computational complexity would be also decidable. The key obstacle so far has been a certain family of homomorphism problems [ITCS 2022], which require $Ω(\log n)$ rounds, but the only known proof is based on Marks' technique [J. AMS 2016]. We develop a new technique for constructing round elimination lower bounds systematically. Using so-called tripotent inputs we show that the aforementioned homomorphism problems indeed admit a lower bound proof that is based on round elimination fixed points. Hence we eliminate the only known obstacle for the universality of round elimination. Yet we also present a new obstacle: we show that there are some problems with inputs that require $Ω(\log n)$ rounds, yet there is no proof that is based on relaxations to nontrivial round elimination fixed points. Hence round elimination cannot be a universal technique for problems with inputs (but it might be universal for problems without inputs). We also prove the first fully general lower bound theorem that is applicable to any problem, with or without inputs, that is a fixed point in round elimination. Prior results of this form were only able to handle certain very restricted inputs.

cs.DC↗

arXiv2025

Distributed Computation with Local Advice

In this work we study local computation with advice: the goal is to solve a graph problem $Π$ with a distributed algorithm in $T(Δ)$ communication rounds, for some function $T$ that only depends on the maximum degree $Δ$ of the graph, and the key question is how many bits of advice per node are needed. Some of our results regard Locally Checkable Labeling problems (LCLs), which are constraint-satisfaction graph problems that can be defined with a finite set of valid input/output-labeled neighborhoods. Our main results are: - Any LCL can be solved with only $1$ bit of advice per node in graphs with sub-exponential growth. Moreover, we can make the set of nodes that carry advice bits arbitrarily sparse. As a corollary, any LCL admits a locally checkable proof with $1$ bit per node in graphs with sub-exponential growth. - The assumption of sub-exponential growth is complemented by a conditional lower bound: assuming the Exponential-Time Hypothesis, there are locally checkable labeling problems that cannot be solved in general with any constant number of bits per node. - In any graph we can find an almost-balanced orientation with $1$ bit of advice per node, and again we can make the advice arbitrarily sparse. As a corollary, we can also compress an arbitrary subset of edges so that a node of degree $d$ stores only $d/2 + 2$ bits, and we can decompress it locally, in $T(Δ)$ rounds. - In any graph of maximum degree $Δ$, we can find a $Δ$-coloring (if it exists) with $1$ bit of advice per node, and again, we can make the advice arbitrarily sparse. - In any $3$-colorable graph, we can find a $3$-coloring with $1$ bit of advice per node. As a corollary, in bounded-degree graphs there is a locally checkable proof that certifies $3$-colorability with $1$ bit of advice per node.

cs.DC↗

arXiv2024

Local problems in trees across a wide range of distributed models

The randomized online-LOCAL model captures a number of models of computing; it is at least as strong as all of these models: - the classical LOCAL model of distributed graph algorithms, - the quantum version of the LOCAL model, - finitely dependent distributions [e.g. Holroyd 2016], - any model that does not violate physical causality [Gavoille, Kosowski, Markiewicz, DISC 2009], - the SLOCAL model [Ghaffari, Kuhn, Maus, STOC 2017], and - the dynamic-LOCAL and online-LOCAL models [Akbari et al., ICALP 2023]. In general, the online-LOCAL model can be much stronger than the LOCAL model. For example, there are locally checkable labeling problems (LCLs) that can be solved with logarithmic locality in the online-LOCAL model but that require polynomial locality in the LOCAL model. However, in this work we show that in trees, many classes of LCL problems have the same locality in deterministic LOCAL and randomized online-LOCAL (and as a corollary across all the above-mentioned models). In particular, these classes of problems do not admit any distributed quantum advantage. We present a near-complete classification for the case of rooted regular trees. We also fully classify the super-logarithmic region in unrooted regular trees. Finally, we show that in general trees (rooted or unrooted, possibly irregular, possibly with input labels) problems that are global in deterministic LOCAL remain global also in the randomized online-LOCAL model.

cs.DC↗

arXiv2024

Distributed Quantum Advantage for Local Problems

We present the first local problem that shows a super-constant separation between the classical randomized LOCAL model of distributed computing and its quantum counterpart. By prior work, such a separation was known only for an artificial graph problem with an inherently global definition [Le Gall et al. 2019]. We present a problem that we call iterated GHZ, which is defined using only local constraints. Formally, it is a family of locally checkable labeling problems [Naor and Stockmeyer 1995]; in particular, solutions can be verified with a constant-round distributed algorithm. We show that in graphs of maximum degree $Δ$, any classical (deterministic or randomized) LOCAL model algorithm will require $Ω(Δ)$ rounds to solve the iterated GHZ problem, while the problem can be solved in $1$ round in quantum-LOCAL. We use the round elimination technique to prove that the iterated GHZ problem requires $Ω(Δ)$ rounds for classical algorithms. This is the first work that shows that round elimination is indeed able to separate the two models, and this also demonstrates that round elimination cannot be used to prove lower bounds for quantum-LOCAL. To apply round elimination, we introduce a new technique that allows us to discover appropriate problem relaxations in a mechanical way; it turns out that this new technique extends beyond the scope of the iterated GHZ problem and can be used to e.g. reproduce prior results on maximal matchings [FOCS 2019, PODC 2020] in a systematic manner.

cs.DC↗

arXiv2024

Shared Randomness Helps with Local Distributed Problems

By prior work, we have many results related to distributed graph algorithms for problems that can be defined with local constraints; the formal framework used in prior work is locally checkable labeling problems (LCLs), introduced by Naor and Stockmeyer in the 1990s. It is known, for example, that if we have a deterministic algorithm that solves an LCL in $o(\log n)$ rounds, we can speed it up to $O(\log^*n)$ rounds, and if we have a randomized $O(\log^*n)$ rounds algorithm, we can derandomize it for free. It is also known that randomness helps with some LCL problems: there are LCL problems with randomized complexity $Θ(\log\log n)$ and deterministic complexity $Θ(\log n)$. However, so far there have not been any LCL problems in which the use of shared randomness has been necessary; in all prior algorithms it has been enough that the nodes have access to their own private sources of randomness. Could it be the case that shared randomness never helps with LCLs? Could we have a general technique that takes any distributed graph algorithm for any LCL that uses shared randomness, and turns it into an equally fast algorithm where private randomness is enough? In this work we show that the answer is no. We present an LCL problem $Π$ such that the round complexity of $Π$ is $Ω(\sqrt n)$ in the usual randomized \local model with private randomness, but if the nodes have access to a source of shared randomness, then the complexity drops to $O(\log n)$. As corollaries, we also resolve several other open questions related to the landscape of distributed computing in the context of LCL problems. In particular, problem $Π$ demonstrates that distributed quantum algorithms for LCL problems strictly benefit from a shared quantum state. Problem $Π$ also gives a separation between finitely dependent distributions and non-signaling distributions.

cs.DC↗

arXiv2024

Low-Bandwidth Matrix Multiplication: Faster Algorithms and More General Forms of Sparsity

In prior work, Gupta et al. (SPAA 2022) presented a distributed algorithm for multiplying sparse $n \times n$ matrices, using $n$ computers. They assumed that the input matrices are uniformly sparse--there are at most $d$ non-zeros in each row and column--and the task is to compute a uniformly sparse part of the product matrix. The sparsity structure is globally known in advance (this is the supported setting). As input, each computer receives one row of each input matrix, and each computer needs to output one row of the product matrix. In each communication round each computer can send and receive one $O(\log n)$-bit message. Their algorithm solves this task in $O(d^{1.907})$ rounds, while the trivial bound is $O(d^2)$. We improve on the prior work in two dimensions: First, we show that we can solve the same task faster, in only $O(d^{1.832})$ rounds. Second, we explore what happens when matrices are not uniformly sparse. We consider the following alternative notions of sparsity: row-sparse matrices (at most $d$ non-zeros per row), column-sparse matrices, matrices with bounded degeneracy (we can recursively delete a row or column with at most $d$ non-zeros), average-sparse matrices (at most $dn$ non-zeros in total), and general matrices.

cs.DC↗

arXiv2024

No distributed quantum advantage for approximate graph coloring

We give an almost complete characterization of the hardness of $c$-coloring $χ$-chromatic graphs with distributed algorithms, for a wide range of models of distributed computing. In particular, we show that these problems do not admit any distributed quantum advantage. To do that: 1) We give a new distributed algorithm that finds a $c$-coloring in $χ$-chromatic graphs in $\tilde{\mathcal{O}}(n^{\frac{1}α})$ rounds, with $α= \bigl\lfloor\frac{c-1}{χ- 1}\bigr\rfloor$. 2) We prove that any distributed algorithm for this problem requires $Ω(n^{\frac{1}α})$ rounds. Our upper bound holds in the classical, deterministic LOCAL model, while the near-matching lower bound holds in the non-signaling model. This model, introduced by Arfaoui and Fraigniaud in 2014, captures all models of distributed graph algorithms that obey physical causality; this includes not only classical deterministic LOCAL and randomized LOCAL but also quantum-LOCAL, even with a pre-shared quantum state. We also show that similar arguments can be used to prove that, e.g., 3-coloring 2-dimensional grids or $c$-coloring trees remain hard problems even for the non-signaling model, and in particular do not admit any quantum advantage. Our lower-bound arguments are purely graph-theoretic at heart; no background on quantum information theory is needed to establish the proofs.

cs.DC↗