Game-Theoretic Fairness Meets Multi-party Protocols: The Case of Leader Election
Kai-Min Chung, T.-H. Hubert Chan, Ting Wen, Elaine Shi
Abstract
Suppose that players want to elect a random leader and they communicate by posting messages to a common broadcast channel. This problem is called leader election, and it is fundamental to the distributed systems and cryptography literature. Recently, it has attracted renewed interests due to its promised applications in decentralized environments.
In a game theoretically fair leader election protocol, roughly speaking, we want that even majority coalitions cannot increase its own chance of getting elected, nor hurt the chance of any honest individual. The folklore tournament-tree protocol, which completes in logarithmically many rounds, can easily be shown to satisfy game theoretic security. To the best of our knowledge, no sub-logarithmic round protocol was known in the setting that we consider.
We show that
by adopting an appropriate notion of approximate game-theoretic fairness,
and under standard cryptographic assumption,
we can achieve
-fairness in rounds for ,
where denotes the number of players. In particular, this means that we can approximately match the fairness of the tournament tree protocol using as few as rounds.
We also prove a lower bound showing that
logarithmically many rounds is necessary if we restrict ourselves
to perfect'' game-theoretic fairness and protocols that are very similar in structure'' to the tournament-tree protocol.
Although leader election is a well-studied problem in other contexts in distributed computing, our work is the first exploration of the round complexity of game-theoretically fair leader election in the presence of a possibly majority coalition. As a by-product of our exploration, we suggest a new, approximate game-theoretic fairness notion, called ``approximate sequential fairness'', which provides a more desirable solution concept than some previously studied approximate fairness notions.
Ask about this paper
Ask your agent about it.
Lune has read the top-tier papers around this one, so every answer names the papers it rests on.
Your agent calls
Lunesearch_papers
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers get 1fe25766-4a40-485d-a553-2d9a91ff5cdaCited by top-tier papers1
Ask how each one uses itRelated papers
- log *-Round Game-Theoretically-Fair Leader ElectionIlan Komargodski, Shin'ichiro Matsuo, Elaine Shi, Ke WuCRYPTO 2022 · 4 citations
- Game Theory Does Not Always Help: The Case of Statistical Multi-party Coin TossingChen-Da Liu-Zhang, Elisaweta Masserova, João Miguel Lourenço Ribeiro, Sri Aravinda Krishnan ThyagarajanEUROCRYPT 2026 · 1 citation
- Game-Theoretically Fair Distributed SamplingSri Aravinda Krishnan Thyagarajan, Pratik Soni, Ke WuCRYPTO 2024 · 2 citations
- A Complete Characterization of Game-Theoretically Fair, Multi-Party Coin TossKe Wu, Gilad Asharov, Elaine ShiEUROCRYPT 2022 · 9 citations
- Improved Bounds for Coin Flipping, Leader Election, and Random SelectionEshan Chattopadhyay, Mohit Gurumukhani, Noam Ringach, Rocco A. ServedioSTOC 2026
