Multi-trials technique
Open-knowledge reference entry
The multi-trials technique by Schneider et al. is employed for distributed algorithms and allows breaking of symmetry efficiently. Symmetry breaking is necessary, for instance, in resource allocation problems, where many entities want to access the same resource concurrently. Many message passing algorithms typically employ one attempt to break symmetry per message exchange. The multi-trials technique transcends this approach through employing more attempts with every message exchange.
For example, in a simple algorithm for computing an O(Δ) vertex coloring, where Δ denotes the maximum degree in the graph, every uncolored node randomly picks an available color and keeps it if no neighbor (concurrently) chooses the same color. For the multi-trials technique, a node gradually increases the number of chosen colors in every communication round. The technique can yield more than an exponential reduction in the required communication rounds. However, if the maximum degree Δ is small more efficient techniques exist, e.g. the (extended) coin-tossing technique by Richard Cole and Uzi Vishkin.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Multi-trials technique” is open-knowledge reference entry. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Multi-trials, technique and Open-knowledge, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “open-knowledge reference entry” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Apr 12, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q6934515.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Multi-trials technique”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Multi-trials technique primary sources, Multi-trials technique archive and Multi-trials research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Multi-trials technique”?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Multi-trials technique” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.