2509.01024
Finite-time consensus in a compromise process
P. L. Krapivsky, A. Yu. Plakhov
correcthigh confidence
- Category
- math.DS
- Journal tier
- Specialist/Solid
- Processed
- Sep 28, 2025, 12:57 AM
- arXiv Links
- Abstract ↗PDF ↗
Audit review
The paper proves: (i) finite-time consensus occurs with probability one iff N is a power of two (for non-powers, impossibility holds under a general-position hypothesis), and (ii) when N = 2^k, the exact minimal number of averaging steps is k·2^{k−1}. These are stated as Theorem 1 and Theorem 2 and proved via a constructive hypercube schedule (sufficiency) and an integer-coefficient/general-position argument (necessity and the sharp lower bound) . The candidate solution reaches the same conclusions. Its sufficiency argument uses the same hypercube pairing idea, and its necessity argument matches the paper’s integer-clearing/general-position approach. For the minimal-steps lower bound, the model uses an information-theoretic (entropy/Jensen–Shannon) potential to show a per-step increase of at most 2 bits in total row entropy, yielding the Nk/2 bound that the hypercube schedule attains; the paper instead uses a participation-count contradiction to derive the same bound . Thus results coincide; the proofs differ only in the lower-bound method.
Referee report (LaTeX)
\textbf{Recommendation:} minor revisions \textbf{Journal Tier:} specialist/solid \textbf{Justification:} The core results are sharp and persuasive: Theorem 1 characterizes exactly when finite-time consensus can occur, and Theorem 2 identifies the exact minimal number of steps. The sufficiency proof via a hypercube schedule and the necessity proof via dyadic integer coefficients under a general-position hypothesis are clean and correct. A few minor clarifications (explicitly stating the matrix-product viewpoint and the independence across blocks; optionally noting an alternative information-theoretic lower bound) would further enhance clarity without altering the substance.