Armando Castañeda

Hagit Attiya, Armando Castañeda, Dhrubajyoti Ghosh et al.

We revisit the relationship between two fundamental models of distributed computation: the asynchronous message-passing model with up to $f$ crash failures ($\operatorname{AMP}_f$) and the Heard-Of model with up to $f$ message omissions ($\operatorname{HO}_f$). We show that for $n > 2f$, the two models are equivalent with respect to the solvability of colorless tasks, and that for colored tasks the equivalence holds only when $f = 1$ (and $n > 2$). The separation for larger $f$ arises from the presence of silenced processes in $\operatorname{HO}_f$, which may lead to incompatible decisions. The proofs proceed through bidirectional simulations between $\operatorname{AMP}_f$ and $\operatorname{HO}_f$ via an intermediate model that captures this notion of silencing. The results extend to randomized protocols against a non-adaptive adversary, indicating that the expressive limits of canonical rounds are structural rather than probabilistic. Together, these results delineate precisely where round-based abstractions capture asynchronous computation, and where they do not.

Gilde Valeria Rodríguez, Borzoo Bonakdarpour, Armando Castañeda et al.

We introduce c-Lattice Aggregation, a fault-tolerant reconstruction problem for distributed verification under crash and Byzantine failures. In our setting, n asynchronous processes supervise a concurrent execution I: each process holds a local sample, and must collaboratively reconstruct I from partial, potentially overlapping observations. A protocol solves c-Lattice Aggregation if at least c correct processes output the complete execution I, while all correct outputs are comparable and bounded by I. This strengthens Lattice Agreement [Attiya, Herlihy and Rachman, 1995] and Byzantine Lattice Agreement [Di Luna et al., 2020; Zheng and Garg, 2020]. We parameterize inputs by a redundancy parameter x -- every element of I appears in at least x initial samples -- and establish tight feasibility thresholds. Under crash failures with at most t faulty processes, Lattice Aggregation is solvable if and only if x >= t + 1. Under Byzantine failures with t < n/3, c-Lattice Aggregation is solvable if and only if x >= 2t + c. All bounds are tight: we present matching algorithms based on SCD-broadcast [Imbs et al., 2018; Khanchandani and Wattenhofer, 2024] and indistinguishability-based lower bounds. Finally, we define globally dependent languages -- those for which no partial view can certify correctness, including consensus, linearizability, k-set agreement, and leader election -- and prove that soundness of any monitoring system is achievable if and only if c-Lattice Aggregation is solved, yielding the first complete characterization of fault-tolerant verification under Byzantine failures.

Gilde Valeria Rodríguez, Armando Castañeda, Miguel Piña

Determining whether one concurrent operation completed before another began is a fundamental prerequisite for reasoning about the correctness of concurrent systems. We formalize this challenge as the Causal Observability Problem (COP): assign timestamps to the observable boundary events of a concurrent execution, invocations and responses, that faithfully reflect real-time operation order. A solution is complete if it never misses a genuine precedence, and sound if it never reports a spurious one. We prove that a strongly consistent solution, one that is simultaneously complete and sound, is unachievable at the observable boundary. We then show that the placement of instrumentation events relative to operation boundaries deterministically governs what a monitor can guarantee: internal placement yields completeness, external placement yields soundness, and neither achieves both. This dichotomy holds independently of the underlying timestamp mechanism. We instantiate this framework with three non-blocking implementations of a Causal Monitor object: FAInc (centralized atomic counter), Striped (decentralized counter), and Collect (iterative register snapshot). FAInc and Striped are linearizable; Collect is only quiescently consistent. Despite this internal consistency gap, we prove that all three provide identical COP guarantees: placement alone determines observable behavior. We validate these claims empirically on a 64-core NUMA architecture, showing that Striped matches Collect in throughput while preserving linearizability, resolving the cache-contention bottleneck of FAInc at high thread counts.