1. Introduction
The random-connection model, see, e.g., [Reference Meester and Roy12, Chapter 6], is a classical model in continuum percolation. It consists of a random graph built on the vertices of a point process on
${{\mathord{\mathbb R}}}^d$
by adding edges between two distinct vertices x and y with probability
$H (\Vert x - y
\Vert )$
. In the case of the Rayleigh fading
$H_\beta (\Vert x - y \Vert )
= \rm{e}^{- \beta \Vert x - y \Vert^2 }$
with
$x, y \in {{\mathord{\mathbb R}}}^2$
, the mean value of the number
$N^{x,y}_k$
of k-hop paths connecting
$x\in {{\mathord{\mathbb R}}}^d$
to
$y\in {{\mathord{\mathbb R}}}^d$
has been computed in [Reference Kartun-Giles, Kim and Commun9], together with the variance of 3-hop counts. However, this argument does not extend to
$k\geq 3$
as the proof of the variance identity for 3-hop counts in [Reference Kartun-Giles, Kim and Commun9] relies on the known Poisson distribution of the 2-hop count. As shown in [Reference Kartun-Giles, Kim and Commun9], the knowledge of moments can provide accurate numerical estimates of the probability
${\rm P}( N^{x,y}_k >0)$
of at least one k-hop path by expressing it as a series of factorial moments, and the need for a general theory of such moments was pointed out therein.
On the other hand, moment identities for Poisson stochastic integrals with random integrands have been obtained in [Reference Privault18] based on moment identities for Skorohod’s integral on the Poisson space; see [Reference Privault16,Reference Privault17], and also [Reference Privault19] for a review. These moment identities have been extended to point processes with Papangelou intensities in [Reference Decreusefond and Flint5], and to multiparameter processes in [Reference Bogdan, Rosiński, Serafin and Wojciechowski2]. Factorial moments have also been computed in [Reference Breton and Privault4] for point processes with Papangelou intensities.
In this paper we derive closed-form expressions for the moments of the number of k-hop paths in the random-connection model. In Proposition 4 the moment of order n of the k-hop count is given as a sum over non-flat partitions of
$\{1,\ldots , nk\}$
in a general random-connection model based on a point process admitting a Papangelou intensity. Those results are then specialized to the case of Poisson point processes, with an expression for the variance of the k-hop count given in Corollary 2 using a sum over integer sequences. Finally, in the case of Rayleigh fadings we show that some results of [Reference Kartun-Giles, Kim and Commun9], such as the computation of variance for 3-hop counts, can be recovered via a shorter argument; see Corollary 4.
We proceed as follows. After presenting some background notation on point processes and Campbell measures, see [Reference Kallenberg8], in Section 2 we review the derivation of moment identities for stochastic integrals using sums over partitions. In the multiparameter case we rewrite those identities for processes vanishing on diagonals, based on non-flat partition diagrams. In Section 3 we apply those results to the computation of the moments of k-hop counts in the random-connection model, and we specialize such computations to the case of Poisson point processes in Section 4. Section 5 is devoted to explicit computations in the case of Rayleigh fadings, which result in simpler derivations than the current literature on moments in the random-connection model.
1.1. Notation on point processes
Let X be a Polish space with Borel
$\sigma$
-algebra
${\cal B}(X)$
, equipped with a
$\sigma$
-finite non-atomic measure
$\lambda ({\rm d}x)$
. We let
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU1.gif?pub-status=live)
denote the space of locally finite configurations on X whose elements
$\omega \in \Omega^X$
are identified with the Radon point measures
$ \omega = \sum_{x\in \omega} \epsilon_x$
, where
$\epsilon_x$
denotes the Dirac measure at
$x\in X$
. A point process is a probability measure P on
$\Omega^X$
equipped with the
$\sigma$
-algebra
${\cal F}$
generated by the topology of vague convergence.
Point processes can be characterized by their Campbell measure C defined on
${\cal B}(X) \otimes {\cal F}$
by
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU2.gif?pub-status=live)
which satisfies the Georgii–Nguyen–Zessin [Reference Nguyen and Zessin14] identity
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqn1.gif?pub-status=live)
for all measurable processes
$u\,:\, X\times\Omega^X\to {{\mathord{\mathbb R}}}$
such that both sides of (1) make sense.
In the following we deal with point processes whose Campbell measure
$C({\rm d}x,{\rm d} \omega )$
is absolutely continuous with respect to
$\lambda \otimes P$
, i.e.
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU3.gif?pub-status=live)
where the density
$c(x;\,\omega)$
is called the Papangelou density. We will also use the random measure
$\hat{\lambda}^n ( {\rm d}\mathfrak{x}_n )$
defined on
$X^n$
by
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU4.gif?pub-status=live)
where
$\hat{c} ( \mathfrak{x}_n ;\,\omega )$
is the compound Campbell density
$
\hat{c}\,:\, \Omega_0^X\times\Omega^X \longrightarrow {{\mathord{\mathbb R}}}_+
$
defined inductively on the set
$\Omega_0^X$
of finite configurations in
$\Omega^X$
by
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqn2.gif?pub-status=live)
see Relation (1) in [Reference Decreusefond and Flint5]. In particular, the Poisson point process with intensity
$\lambda ({\rm d}x)$
is a point process with Campbell measure
$C=\lambda \otimes P$
and
$c(x;\, \omega)=1$
, and in this case the identity (1) becomes the Slivnyak–Mecke formula [Reference Slivnyak20, Reference Mecke11]. Determinantal point processes are examples of point processes with Papangelou intensities, see, e.g., [Reference Decreusefond, Flint, Privault and Torrisi6, Theorem 2.6], and they can be used for modeling wireless networks with repulsion; see, e.g., [Reference Deng, Zhou, Haenggi and Commun7, Reference Kong, Flint, Wang, Niyato and Privault10, Reference Miyoshi and Shirai13].
2. Moment identities
The moment of order
$n\geq 1$
of a Poisson random variable
$Z_\alpha$
with parameter
$\alpha \gt 0$
is given by
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqn3.gif?pub-status=live)
where the Stirling number of the second kind S(n,k) is the number of ways to partition a set of n objects into k non-empty subsets; see, e.g., [Reference Boyadzhiev3, Proposition 3.1]. Regarding Poisson stochastic integrals of deterministic integrands, in [Reference Bassan and Bona1] the moment formula
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqn4.gif?pub-status=live)
has been proved for deterministic functions
$f \in \bigcap_{p\geq 1} L^p(X,\lambda )$
.
The identity (Reference Breton and Privault4) has been rewritten in the language of sums over partitions, and extended to Poisson stochastic integrals of random integrands in [Reference Privault18, Proposition 3.1], and further extended to point processes admitting a Panpangelou intensity in [Reference Decreusefond and Flint5, Theorem 3.1]; see also [Reference Breton and Privault4]. In the following, given
$\mathfrak{z}_n =(z_1, \ldots, z_n)\in X^n$
, we will use the shorthand notation
$\varepsilon^+_{\mathfrak{z}_n }$
for the operator
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU5.gif?pub-status=live)
where F is any random variable on
$\Omega^X$
. Given
$\rho = \{ \rho_1,\ldots, \rho_k \} \in \Pi [n]$
a partition of
$\{1,\ldots , n\}$
of size
$|\rho|=k$
, we let
$|\rho_i |$
denote the cardinality of each block
$\rho_i$
,
$i=1,\ldots , k$
.
Proposition 1. Let
$u \,:\, X \times \Omega^X \longrightarrow {{\mathord{\mathbb R}}}$
be a (measurable) process. For all
$n\geq 1$
we have
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU6.gif?pub-status=live)
where the sum runs over all partitions
$\rho$
of
$\{ 1 , \ldots , n \}$
with cardinality
$| \rho |$
.
Proposition 1 has also been extended, together with joint moment identities, to multiparameter processes
$(u_{z_1,\ldots z_r})_{(z_1,\ldots z_r)\in X^r}$
; see [Reference Bogdan, Rosiński, Serafin and Wojciechowski2, Theorem 3.1]. For this, let
$\Pi [n\times r]$
denote the set of all partitions of the set
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU7.gif?pub-status=live)
identified to
$\{1,\ldots , nr\}$
, and let
$\pi \,:\!= (\pi_1,\ldots , \pi_n) \in \Pi [n\times r]$
denote the partition made of the n blocks
$\pi_k \,:\!= \{ (k,1), \ldots , (k,r) \}$
of size r, for
$k=1,\ldots , n$
. Given
$\rho = \{ \rho_1,\ldots , \rho_m \}$
a partition of
$\Delta_{n\times r}$
, we let
$\zeta^\rho \,:\, \Delta_{n\times r} \longrightarrow
\{1,\ldots , m \}$
denote the mapping defined as
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqn5.gif?pub-status=live)
In other words,
$\zeta^\rho (k,l)$
denotes the index p of the block
$\rho_p\subset \Delta_{n\times r}$
to which (k,l) belongs.
Next, we restate Theorem 3.1 of [Reference Bogdan, Rosiński, Serafin and Wojciechowski2] by noting that, in the same way as in Proposition 1, it extends to point processes admitting a Papangelou intensity using the arguments of [Reference Breton and Privault4, Reference Decreusefond and Flint5]. When
${(u(z_1,\ldots ,z_k ;\, \omega ) )_{z_1,\ldots , z_k \in X}}$
is a multiparameter process, we will write
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU8.gif?pub-status=live)
and in this case we may drop the variable
$\omega \in \Omega^X$
by writing
$\epsilon^+_{\mathfrak{z}_k} u(z_1,\ldots ,z_k ;\, \omega )$
instead of
$\epsilon^+_{\mathfrak{z}_k} u(z_1,\ldots ,z_k ;\, \omega )$
.
Proposition 2. Let
$u \,:\, X^r \times \Omega^X \longrightarrow {{\mathord{\mathbb R}}}$
be a (measurable) r-process. We have
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqn6.gif?pub-status=live)
with
$z^\rho_{\pi_k} \,:\!= (z_{\zeta^\rho (k,1)}, \ldots , z_{\zeta^\rho (k,r)})$
,
$k=1,\ldots , n$
.
Proof. The main change in the proof argument of [Reference Bogdan, Rosiński, Serafin and Wojciechowski2] is to rewrite the proof of Lemma 2.1 therein by applying (Reference Bogdan, Rosiński, Serafin and Wojciechowski2) recursively, as in the proof of [Reference Decreusefond and Flint5, Theorem 3.1], while the main combinatorial argument remains identical.
When
$n=1$
, Proposition 2 yields a multivariate version of the Georgii–Nguyen–Zessin identity (1), i.e.
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU9.gif?pub-status=live)
2.1. Non-flat partitions
In the following we write
$\nu \preceq \sigma$
when a partition
$\nu \in \Pi [n \times r]$
is finer than another partition
$\sigma \in \Pi [n \times r]$
, i.e. when every block of
$\nu$
is contained in a block of
$\sigma$
, and we let
$\hat{0} \,:\!= \{ \{1,1\},\ldots , \{n,r\}\}$
denote the partition of
$\Delta_{n\times r}$
made of singletons. We write
$\rho \wedge \nu = \hat{0}$
when
$\mu = \hat{0}$
is the only partition
$\mu \in \Pi [n \times r]$
such that
$\mu \preceq \nu$
and
$\mu \preceq \rho$
, i.e.
$|\nu_k \cap \rho_l| \leq 1$
,
$k=1,\ldots , n$
,
$l=1, \ldots , |\rho|$
. In this case we say that the partition diagram
$\Gamma (\nu , \rho )$
of
$\nu$
and
$\rho$
is non-flat; see [Reference Peccati and Taqqu15, Chapter 4].
Here, a partition
$\rho \in \Pi [n \times r]$
is said to be non-flat if the partition diagram
$\Gamma (\pi , \rho )$
of
$\rho$
and the partition
$\pi$
is non-flat, where
$\pi \,:\!= (\pi_1,\ldots , \pi_n) \in \Pi [n\times r]$
with
$\pi_k \,:\!= \{ (k,1), \ldots , (k,r) \}$
,
$k=1,\ldots , n$
. Figure 1 shows an example of a non-flat partition with
$n=5$
,
$r=4$
, and
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU10.gif?pub-status=live)
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_fig1g.gif?pub-status=live)
Figure 1. Example of a non-flat partition.
2.2. Processes vanishing on diagonals
The next consequence of Proposition 2 shows that when
$u(z_1,\ldots , z_r;\,\omega )$
vanishes on the diagonals in
$X^r$
, the moments of
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU11.gif?pub-status=live)
reduce to sums over non-flat partition diagrams.
Proposition 3. Assume that
$u(z_1,\ldots , z_r;\,\omega )=0$
whenever
$z_i=z_j$
,
$1\leq i\not= j \leq r$
,
$\omega \in \Omega^X$
. Then we have
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU12.gif?pub-status=live)
Proof. Assume that
$u(z_1,\ldots , z_r;\,\omega )$
vanishes on diagonals, and let
$\rho \in \Pi [n]$
. Then, for any
$z_1,\ldots , z_r\in X$
we have
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU13.gif?pub-status=live)
whenever
$p\,:\!=\zeta^\rho (k,a) = \zeta^\rho (k,b)$
for some
$k\in \{1,\ldots , n \}$
and
$a\not=b \in \{1,\ldots , r\}$
. According to (5) this implies that
${(k,a)\in \rho_p}$
and
${(k,b)\in \rho_p}$
; therefore
$\rho$
is not a non-flat partition, and it should be excluded from the sum over
$\Pi [n]$
.
When
$n=1$
, the first moment in Proposition 3 yields the Georgii–Nguyen–Zessin identity
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqn7.gif?pub-status=live)
see [Reference Kartun-Giles, Kim and Commun9, Lemma IV.1] and [Reference Bogdan, Rosiński, Serafin and Wojciechowski2, Lemma 2.1] for different versions based on the Poisson point process. In the case of second moments, we find that
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU14.gif?pub-status=live)
and since the non-flat partitions in
$\Pi [ 2\times r]$
are made of pairs and singletons, this identity can be rewritten as the following consequence of Proposition 3, in which for simplicity of notation we write
$\pi_1 = \{1,\ldots ,r\}$
and
$\pi_2 = \{r+1,\ldots ,2r\}$
.
Corollary 1. Assume that
$u(z_1,\ldots , z_r;\,\omega )=0$
whenever
$z_i=z_j$
,
$1\leq i\not= j \leq r$
,
$\omega \in \Omega^X$
. Then the second moment of the integral of k-processes is given by
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU15.gif?pub-status=live)
where the above sum is over all bijections
$\gamma \,:\, \pi_2 \to A \cup \{ r+1,\ldots , 2r-|A|\}$
.
Proof. We express the partitions
$\rho \in \Pi [n\times r]$
with non-flat diagrams
$\Gamma ( \pi , \rho )$
in Proposition 4 as the collections of pairs and singletons,
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU16.gif?pub-status=live)
for all subsets
$A\subset \pi_1 = \{1,\ldots , r \}$
and bijections
$\gamma \,:\, \pi_2 \to A \cup \{ r+1,\ldots , 2r-|A|\}$
.
In the case of 2-processes, Corollary 1 shows that
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU17.gif?pub-status=live)
Similarly, in the case of 3-processes we find
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU18.gif?pub-status=live)
3. Random-connection model
Two point process vertices
$x\not= y$
are independently connected in the random-connection graph with the probability H(x,y) given
$\omega \in \Omega^X$
, where
$H\,:\,X\times X \longrightarrow [0,1]$
. In particular, the 1-hop count
${\bf 1}_{\{ x \leftrightarrow y \} }$
is a Bernoulli random variable with parameter H(x,y), and we have the relation
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU19.gif?pub-status=live)
for any subset
$\{z_0,\ldots , z_{r+1}\}$
of distinct elements of X, where
$\mathfrak{z}_r = \{z_1,\ldots , z_r\}$
and
$x \leftrightarrow y$
means that
$x\in X$
is connected to
$y\in X$
.
Given
$x,y \in X$
, the number of
$(r+1)$
-hop sequences
$z_1,\ldots , z_r\in \omega$
of vertices connecting x to y in the random graph is given by the multiparameter stochastic integral
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU20.gif?pub-status=live)
of the
$\{0,1\}$
-valued r-process
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqn8.gif?pub-status=live)
which vanishes on the diagonals in
$X^r$
, with
$z_0\,:\!=x$
and
$z_{r+1} \,:\!= y$
. In addition, for any distinct
$z_1,\ldots , z_r \in X$
and
$u(z_1,\ldots , z_r;\,\omega )$
given by (8) we have
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqn9.gif?pub-status=live)
and therefore the first-order moment of the
$(r+1)$
-hop count between
$x\in X$
and
$y\in X$
is given as
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqn10.gif?pub-status=live)
(see also [Reference Kartun-Giles, Kim and Commun9, Theorem II.1]) as a consequence of the Georgii–Nguyen–Zessin identity (Reference Deng, Zhou, Haenggi and Commun7).
In the next proposition we compute the moments of all orders of r-hop counts as sums over non-flat partition diagrams. The role of the powers
$1/n^\rho_{l,i}$
in (Reference Kong, Flint, Wang, Niyato and Privault10) is to ensure that all powers of H(x,y) in (Reference Kong, Flint, Wang, Niyato and Privault10) are equal to one, since all powers of
${\bf 1}_{\{ z \leftrightarrow z' \} }$
in (Reference Mecke11) below are equal to
${\bf 1}_{\{ z \leftrightarrow z' \} }$
.
Proposition 4. The moment of order n of the
$(r+1)$
-hop count between
$x\in X$
and
$y\in X$
is given by
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqn11.gif?pub-status=live)
where
$z_0=x$
,
$z_{r+1}=y$
,
$\zeta^\rho (l,0)=0$
,
$\zeta^\rho (l,r+1)=r+1$
, and
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU21.gif?pub-status=live)
$1\leq l \leq n$
,
$0 \leq i \leq r$
.
Proof. Since
$u(z_1,\ldots , z_r;\, \omega )$
vanishes whenever
$z_i=z_j$
for some
$1\leq i \lt j \leq r$
, by Proposition 3 we have
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqn12.gif?pub-status=live)
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU22.gif?pub-status=live)
where we applied (9).
As in Corollary 1, we have the following consequence of Proposition 4, which is obtained by expressing the partitions
$\rho \in \Pi [n\times r]$
with non-flat diagrams
$\Gamma ( \pi , \sigma )$
as a collection of pairs and singletons.
Corollary 2. The second moment of the
$(r+1)$
-hop count between
$x\in X$
and
$y\in X$
is given by
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU23.gif?pub-status=live)
where the above sum is over all bijections
$\gamma \,:\, \{1,\ldots , r\} \to A \cup \{ r+1,\ldots , 2r-|A|\}$
with
$\gamma (0)\,:\!=0$
,
$\gamma (r+1)=\!:\,r+1$
,
$z_0=\!:\,x$
, and
$z_{r+1}\,:\!=y$
, and
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU24.gif?pub-status=live)
for
$0 \leq i \leq r$
.
3.1. Variance of 3-hop counts
When
$n=2$
and
$r=2$
, Corollary 2 allows us to express the variance of the 3-hop count between
$x\in X$
and
$y\in X$
as follows:
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU25.gif?pub-status=live)
3.2. Variance of 4-hop counts
When
$r=3$
and
$n=2$
, Corollary 2 yields
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU26.gif?pub-status=live)
4. Poisson case
In this section and the next one we will work in the Poisson random-connection model, using a Poisson point process on
$X={{\mathord{\mathbb R}}}^d$
with intensity
$\lambda ({\rm d}x)$
on
${{\mathord{\mathbb R}}}^d$
. We let
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqn13.gif?pub-status=live)
The 2-hop count between
$x\in {{\mathord{\mathbb R}}}^d$
and
$y\in {{\mathord{\mathbb R}}}^d$
is given by the first-order stochastic integral
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU28.gif?pub-status=live)
and its moment of order n is
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU29.gif?pub-status=live)
therefore, from (3), the 2-hop count between
$x\in {{\mathord{\mathbb R}}}^d$
and
$y\in {{\mathord{\mathbb R}}}^d$
is a Poisson random variable with mean
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU30.gif?pub-status=live)
By (10), the first-order moment of the r-hop count is given by
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU31.gif?pub-status=live)
Corollary 3. The variance of the r-hop count between
$x\in {{\mathord{\mathbb R}}}^d$
and
$y\in {{\mathord{\mathbb R}}}^d$
is given by
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU32.gif?pub-status=live)
with
$k_0=l_0=0$
,
$k_{p+1}=l_{p+1}=r$
,
$\sigma (0)=0$
, and
$\sigma (r)=r$
, where the above sum is over all permutations
$\sigma \in \Sigma [p]$
of
$\{1,\ldots , p\}$
.
Proof. We rewrite the result of Corollary 2 by denoting the set
$A\subset \pi_1$
as
$A = \{k_1, \ldots , k_p \}$
, for
$1\leq k_1 \lt\cdots \lt k_p \leq r-1$
, and we identify
$\gamma (A) \subset A \cup \{ r+1,\ldots , 2r-|A|\}$
with
$\{l_1, \ldots , l_p \}$
, which requires a sum over the permutations of
$\{1,\ldots , p\}$
since
$1\leq l_1 \lt\cdots \lt l_p \leq r-1$
, where
$1 \leq p \leq r-1$
. In addition, the multiple integrals over contiguous index sets in
$A^c$
are evaluated using (Reference Miyoshi and Shirai13).
4.1. Variance of 3-hop counts
When
$n=2$
and
$r=2$
Corollary 3 allows us to compute the variance of the 3-hop count between
$x\in {{\mathord{\mathbb R}}}^d$
and
$y\in {{\mathord{\mathbb R}}}^d$
, as follows:
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqn14.gif?pub-status=live)
By Corollary 3 the variance of 4-hop counts can be similarly computed explicitly as a sum of 33 terms.
5. Rayleigh fading
In this section we consider a Poisson point process on
$X={{\mathord{\mathbb R}}}^d$
with flat intensity
$\lambda ({\rm d}x) = \lambda {\rm d}x$
on
${{\mathord{\mathbb R}}}^d$
,
$\lambda \gt0$
, and a Rayleigh fading function of the form
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU33.gif?pub-status=live)
Lemmas 1 and 2 can be used to evaluate the integrals appearing in Corollary 3 and in the variance (Reference Nguyen and Zessin14) of the 3-hop counts.
Lemma 1. For all
$n\geq 1$
,
$y_1,\ldots, y_n \in {{\mathord{\mathbb R}}}^d$
, and
$\beta_1, \ldots , \beta_n \gt0$
we have
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU34.gif?pub-status=live)
Proof. We start by showing that for all
$n\geq 1$
we have
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqn17.gif?pub-status=live)
Clearly, this relation holds for
$n=1$
. In addition, at the rank
$n=2$
we have
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU35.gif?pub-status=live)
Next, assuming that (15) holds at the rank
$n\geq 1$
, we have
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU36.gif?pub-status=live)
As a consequence, we find that
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU37.gif?pub-status=live)
In particular, applying Lemma 1 for
$n=2$
yields
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqn19.gif?pub-status=live)
and the 2-hop count between
$x\in {{\mathord{\mathbb R}}}^d$
and
$y\in {{\mathord{\mathbb R}}}^d$
is a Poisson random variable with mean
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU38.gif?pub-status=live)
By an induction argument similar to that of Lemma 1, we obtain the following lemma.
Lemma 2. For all
$n \geq 1$
,
$x_0,\ldots, x_n \in {{\mathord{\mathbb R}}}^d$
, and
$\beta_1, \ldots , \beta_n \gt0$
we have
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU39.gif?pub-status=live)
Proof. Clearly the relation holds at the rank
$n=1$
. Assuming that it holds at the rank
$n\geq 1$
and using (16), we have
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU40.gif?pub-status=live)
In particular, the first-order moment of the r-hop count between
$x_0\in {{\mathord{\mathbb R}}}^d$
and
$x_r\in {{\mathord{\mathbb R}}}^d$
is given by
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqn20.gif?pub-status=live)
5.1. Variance of 3-hop counts
Corollary 3 and Lemma 2 allow us to recover Theorem II.3 of [Reference Kartun-Giles, Kim and Commun9] for the variance of 3-hop counts by a shorter argument, while extending it from the plane
$X = {{\mathord{\mathbb R}}}^2$
to
$X = {{\mathord{\mathbb R}}}^d$
.
Corollary 4. The variance of the 3-hop count between
$x\in {{\mathord{\mathbb R}}}^d$
and
$y\in {{\mathord{\mathbb R}}}^d$
is given by
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU41.gif?pub-status=live)
Proof. By (Reference Privault17) and Lemma 2 we have
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU42.gif?pub-status=live)
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20191211054124816-0805:S0021900219000639:S0021900219000639_eqnU43.gif?pub-status=live)
and we conclude by (14).
Acknowledgement
This research was supported by NTU MOE Tier 2 grant MOE2016-T2-1-036.