ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing
◆◆◆◆◆
This quarterly publication is a
quarterly journal that publishes
refereed articles addressing issues
of computing as it impacts the
lives of people with disabilities.
The journal will be of particular
interest to SIGACCESS members
and delegrates to its affiliated
conference (i.e., ASSETS), as well
as other international accessibility
conferences.
◆◆◆◆◆
www.acm.org/taccess
www.acm.org/subscribe
ery integer can be so expressed, but
there was no efficient algorithm for
doing it. In 1977 I found an efficient
randomized algorithm for doing that
computation. That algorithm later appeared in a joint paper with Jeff Shallit
in 1986 together with additional applications of randomization to number
theoretical algorithms. Later, I turned
my attention to distributed algorithms
and found an approach using a random shared bit for solving Byzantine
Agreement far more efficiently than
previous approaches. Still later I applied randomization to asynchronous
fault-tolerant parallel computations in
collaboration with Jonatan Aumann,
Zvi Kedem, and Krishna Palem.
Right now, if you look at STOC
and FOCS [the major conferences in
theoretical computer science] maybe
a third to half of the papers are built
around randomized algorithms. And
of course you’ve got the wonderful
book Randomized Algorithms by Rajeev
Motwani and Prabhaker Raghavan.
Shasha: Let me back up and talk a
little bit about the general uses of randomness in computer science. There
seem to be at least three streams of
use of randomness—yours, the use
in communication (for example, exponential back off in the Ethernet
protocol), and the use in genetic algorithms where random mutations and
random recombination sometimes
lead to good solutions of combinatorial problems. Do you see any unified
theme among all those three?
Rabin: I would say the following:
The use in the Ethernet protocol is in
some sense like the use in Byzantine
agreement. In Byzantine agreement,
the parties want to reach agreement
against improper or malicious opponents. In the Ethernet protocol, the
more recently, i have
become interested
in protecting the
privacy and secrecy
of auctions.
participants want to avoid clashes,
conflicts. That’s somewhat similar. I
don’t know enough about genetic algorithms, but they are of the same nature as the general randomized algorithms. I must admit that after many
years of work in this area, the efficacy
of randomness for so many algorithmic problems is absolutely mysterious
to me. It is efficient, it works; but why
and how is absolutely mysterious.
It is also mysterious in another way
because we cannot really prove that
any process, even let’s say radioactive decay, is truly random. Einstein
rejected the basic tenets of Quantum
Theory and said that God does not
play dice with the universe. Randomized algorithms, in their pure form,
must use a physical source of randomness. So it is cooperation between us
as computer scientists and nature as
a source of randomness. This is really quite unique and touches on deep
questions in physics and philosophy.
tree Automata
Let me return to a chapter of my work
that I skipped before. After the work
on finite automata by Dana Scott and
me, two mathematicians, Richard Buchi and Calvin Elgot, discovered how
the theory of finite automata could
be used to solve decision problems in
mathematical logic. They showed that
the so-called Pressburger arithmetic
decision problem could be solved by
use of finite automata. Then Buchi
went on to generalize finite automata
on finite sequences to finite automata
on infinite sequences, a very brilliant
piece of work that he presented at
the Congress on Logic, Philosophy,
and Methodology in Science in 1960.
In that paper, he showed that the so-called monadic second-order theory
of one successor function is decidable. Let me explain very briefly what
that means.
We have the integers, 0, 1, 2, 3. The
successor function is defined as S(x) =
x+ 1. The classical decision problems
pertain to problems formulated within a predicate logic—the logic of relations and functions with the quantifiers of “exists” x and “for all” x, and the
logical connectives. Monadic second-order theory means that you quantify
over sets. Buchi demonstrated that
the monadic second-order theory of