<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">AM</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Applied Mathematics</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2152-7385</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/am.2014.515219</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">AM-48599</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>COMPUTER SCIENCE &amp; COMMUNICATIONS</subject><subject>ENGINEERING</subject><subject>PHYSICS &amp; MATHEMATICS</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>Precise Asymptotic Distribution of the Number of Isolated Nodes in Wireless Networks with Lognormal Shadowing</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Lixin</surname><given-names>Wang</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Alberto</surname><given-names>Argumedo</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>William</surname><given-names>Washington</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff1"><addr-line>Department of Mathematics, Sciences and Technology, Paine College, Augusta, USA</addr-line></aff><author-notes><corresp id="cor1">* E-mail:<email>lwang@paine.edu(LW)</email>;<email>ArgumedoA@paine.edu(AA)</email>;<email>WashingtonW@paine.edu(WW)</email>;</corresp></author-notes><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>05</day><month>08</month><year>2014</year></pub-date><volume>05</volume><issue>15</issue><fpage>2249</fpage><lpage>2263</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>1</day>	<month>June</month>	<year>2014</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>5</day>	<month>July</month>	<year>2014</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>18</day>	<month>July</month>	<year>2014</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>In this paper, we study the connectivity of multihop wireless networks
under the log-normal shadowing model by investigating the precise distribution
of the number of isolated nodes. Under such a realistic shadowing model, all
previous known works on the distribution of the number of isolated nodes were obtained
only based on simulation studies or by ignoring the important boundary effect
to avoid the challenging technical analysis, and thus cannot be applied to any
practical wireless networks. It is extremely challenging to take the
complicated boundary effect into consideration under such a realistic model
because the transmission area of each node is an irregular region other than a
circular area. Assume that the wireless nodes are represented by a Poisson
point process with densitynover a
unit-area disk, and that the transmission power is properly chosen so that the
expected node degree of the network equals ln<em>n</em> + <em>ξ</em> (<em>n</em>), where <em>ξ</em> (<em style="white-space:normal;">n</em>) approaches to a constant <em style="font-size:14px;line-height:21px;white-space:normal;">ξ </em>as n → ∞. Under such a shadowing model with the boundary effect taken into
consideration, we proved that the total number of isolated nodes is
asymptotically Poisson with mean e$ {-<em style="font-size:14px;line-height:21px;white-space:normal;">ξ</em>}. The Brun’s sieve is utilized to derive the precise asymptotic distribution.
Our results can be used as design guidelines for any practical multihop
wireless network where both the shadowing and boundary effects must be taken
into consideration.</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Connectivity</kwd><kwd> Asymptotic Distribution</kwd><kwd> Random Geometric Graph</kwd><kwd> Isolated Nodes</kwd><kwd> log-Normal  Shadowing</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>Connectivity is one of the most fundamental properties of multi-hop wireless networks. It is the premise for enabling a network with proper functions. The path-loss model (also known as the unit-disk communication model) of wireless networks assumes that the received signal strength at a receiving node from a transmitting node is only determined by a deterministic function of the Euclidean distance between the two nodes. Under such a simple communication model, two nodes are directly connected if and only if their Euclidean distance is no more than a given threshold, and network connectivity has been well studied in the literature (e.g., [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref1">1</xref>] -[<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref7">7</xref>] ). However, in reality, the received signal strength often shows probabilistic variations induced by the shadowing effects that are unavoidably caused by different levels of clutter (e.g., ubiquitous background noises and obstructions such as buildings and trees) on the propagation path. In order to better capture physical reality, the variations of the received signal strength should be considered. It has been shown that a more accurate and realistic modeling of the physical layer is indeed important for better understanding of wireless multi-hop network characteristics [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref8">8</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref9">9</xref>] . This generalized radio propagation model is referred to as the log-normal shadowing model which has been widely used in the literature [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref10">10</xref>] -[<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref15">15</xref>] . The generalized shadowing model provides a good abstraction of large scale wireless multi-hop networks, and is a realistic model for many types of wireless multihop network applications such as sensor wireless networks for bush fire monitoring, ocean temperature monitoring, volcano monitoring, etc.</p><p>The study of multihop wireless networks with the log-normal shadowing model can date back to the early of 1980s [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref11">11</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref12">12</xref>] . Under such a realistic model, researchers have investigated fundamental problems related to network connectivity such as the largest connected component in the network, the relation between having a connected network and having no isolated node, etc. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref10">10</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref13">13</xref>] -[<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref15">15</xref>] . But most of the known results on network connectivity were obtained only based on simulation studies or ignoring the important boundary effect to avoid the challenging technical analysis under, and thus cannot be applied to any practical wireless networks. It is extremely challenging to take the complicated boundary effect into consideration under such a realistic shadowing model because the transmission area of each node is an irregular region other than a circular area. To the best of our knowledge, under such a realistic shadowing model, there are no theoretical results obtained by rigorous analytical studies in multihop wireless networks when the important boundary effect is taken into consideration.</p><p>In this paper, we assume that the wireless networking nodes are represented by a Poisson point process with density <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\2a42c8ff-122e-4cf3-912a-c7acfb2bc88a.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> over a unit-area disk <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\48d2a52d-6a0e-4a23-804b-cac2e60dfe2e.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> on the plane<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\a72be9a0-ceba-4a6f-9349-1e076b8f2d06.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>, and that the transmission power is properly chosen so that the expected node degree of the network is equal to<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\ab1e8164-ada1-4381-818f-e8ac078eedc5.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>, where <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\7ea855c2-f719-473e-a8eb-e4f16b9ebc2c.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> approaches to some constant <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\798e754a-3ff5-44bc-b6be-36f4bc2050a8.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> as<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\8b33794f-31ed-447b-aa99-78066d21c3a0.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>. We derive the precise asymptotic distribution of the number of isolated nodes in the network under the log-normal shadowing model, taking the complicated boundary effect into consideration. The Brun’s sieve is utilized to derive the precise asymptotic distribution.</p><p>The vanishing of isolated nodes is not only a prerequisite but also a good indication of network connectivity. Under the path-loss model, it is well-known that the probability of having a connected network equals the probability of having no isolated nodes in the network as the node density <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\c7194ca3-084e-4bb9-9ec8-7b9cde866d72.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> (see Penrose [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref16">16</xref>] ). With the log- normal shadowing model, such a result is predicted and has been verified by simulation studies (see Bettstetter et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref10">10</xref>] ). Therefore, it is of importance to study the asymptotic distribution of the number of isolated nodes in the network under such a realistic shadowing model. The results obtained in this paper can be used as design guidelines for any practical multihop wireless network where both the shadowing and boundary effects must be taken into consideration.</p><p>In what follows, <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\88cf9f39-edb1-41d4-87db-78bf9e004522.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>is the origin of the Euclidean plane<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\89c52f34-4c7a-4997-95e3-32364f3f065c.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\a916db91-bfc9-4b71-a995-23b1a142c293.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is the unit-area disk centered at<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\7f61fc3f-d0d4-4d0a-bbcc-c896b52adc0c.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>. We assume that <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\00dbade8-5aee-40cf-9ce0-c36a8d02e865.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is the Poisson point process over <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\390ff6dc-994e-45c9-8e88-40e36df5eaef.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> with density<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\a96f4a3e-3770-441f-abf1-d69ae30c53a6.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>. The Euclidean norm of a point <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\b63c90b1-9267-415b-ae07-c0067a17e5a4.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is denoted by<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\937cbeaf-e12c-4951-bc41-bd9af4029cbf.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>, and the Euclidean distance between two points <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\e9409c83-1550-461b-b073-741766b47b82.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\a585aa29-742c-4b2a-b41e-df3346f5bd76.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is denoted by<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\035729bb-397d-4907-aa51-fe4cedb48e19.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>. The Lebesgue measure (or area) of a measurable set <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\9b783a9f-d762-4983-a23e-797cbb177003.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is denoted by<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\664ca312-3829-4f48-84e3-5c7900d9b65f.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>. The disk of radius <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\a285ec4d-e141-47ea-bd87-b4e4001d26e8.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> centered at <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\49f6b077-8f41-434d-86fd-9b9cd007a146.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is denoted by<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\e837cccd-306d-4be7-aa6a-f48d6031c877.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>.</p><p>The remaining of this paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we give a literature review for related work of our paper. The log-normal shadowing model is introduced and explained in Section 3. In Section 4, we give some definitions and geometric results that will be used to prove the main result of this paper. In Section 5, we derive the precise asymptotic distribution of the number of isolated nodes in the network under the log-normal shadowing model. Finally, we conclude our paper in Section 6.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. Related Work</title><p>Under the unit-disk communication model, network connectivity has been extensively studied, and a huge number of existing research work are available in the literature [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref1">1</xref>] -[<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref7">7</xref>] . Gupta et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref3">3</xref>] showed that if each node uses the transmission radius</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula1"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\85262113-9880-4323-b29b-6c97ef9bddc1.png"/></disp-formula><p>where <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\a012d241-3dc0-45ec-ada6-43cb0a7857f2.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is a positive parameter depending only on<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\2bae1211-bad1-4b73-8140-ad027d04400a.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>, then the network is connected a.a.s. if and only if<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\694b9a60-58d5-4063-9d19-edfb121538f6.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>, assuming the <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\cfd2033b-ca78-4c57-b507-31a14017f574.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> nodes are uniformly distributed in a disk on the plane. M. Penrose proved that the longest edge of the minimum spanning tree (MST) equals the critical transmission range for connectivity [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref16">16</xref>] , he then derived in [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref17">17</xref>] the asymptotic distribution of the longest edge of the MST. Xue et al. obtained in [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref6">6</xref>] several results including a sufficient condition on the average node degree for connectivity. They proved that every node must connect to at least <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\95490418-139a-4da6-9ea0-3865552e6fed.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> closest neighbors if the network is to be connected as<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\838e7b24-95bf-44ca-8f45-c6715c7b8f8b.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>, assuming that the <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\b33e6897-3454-42e0-97ed-9a6d80369eb4.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> nodes are randomly and uniformly distributed in a unit square on the plane. Phillips et al. in [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref4">4</xref>] provided a necessary condition on the average node degree (i.e. the expected number of neighbors of an arbitrary node) required for connectivity and showed that the average node degree must grow logarithmically with the area of the network to ensure that the network is connected, assuming that the networking nodes are represented by a Poisson point process with density <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\bed5e6ad-f927-4a70-ad93-b176cf4f3a68.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> in the plane.</p><p>The log-normal shadowing model is a much more realistic radio propagation model and has been widely used by many researchers for network connectivity [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref10">10</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref13">13</xref>] -[<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref15">15</xref>] . Hekmat et al. investigated in [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref13">13</xref>] the largest connected component in wireless ad-hoc networks through simulations, where the <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\14183a56-2cfd-4d1f-8a82-bd7b7ddb5e4d.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> nodes are uniformly distributed in a bounded region on the plane. In this paper the authors proposed a formula to evaluate the size of the largest connected component on average. In [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref10">10</xref>] , Bettstetter et al. investigated a relation between the probability of having a connected network and the probability of having no isolated node, where the wireless devices are represented by a Poisson point process with density<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\b9e9427b-2c73-423c-8949-65dad44923d3.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>. The authors verified by using simulation that the two probabilities are approximately equal when <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\9c29567f-88b8-45f1-95a2-689bc73068dd.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is sufficiently large. In [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref14">14</xref>] , Mukherjee et al. studied the probability distribution for the minimal number of hops required to connect an arbitrary source node to a destination node by ignoring the complicated boundary effect. Through simulation studies, Stuedi et al. investigated in [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref15">15</xref>] how the transmission range affects the end-to-end connection probability in a log-normal shadowing model and compared the results to theoretical bounds and measurements in the path-loss model. In [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref18">18</xref>] , with the complicated boundary effect taken into consideration, Wang et al. first derived an explicit formula for the expected number of the isolated nodes in the network under such a realistic shadowing model, then obtained an upper and a lower bound for the critical transmission power to ensure that the vanishing of isolated nodes is asymptotically almost sure (abbreviated as a.a.s.). The upper and lower bounds for the critical transmission power obtained in [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref18">18</xref>] are almost tight.</p><p>Most of the results in these known works were obtained only based on simulation studies or ignoring the important boundary effect to avoid the rigorous analysis by assuming the toroidal metric as done in the literature. To the best of our knowledge, there are no theoretical results on asymptotic distribution of the number of isolated nodes in the network obtained by rigorous analytical studies with the realistic log-normal shadowing model when the complicated boundary effect is taken into consideration.</p></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. The Log-Normal Shadowing Model</title><p>With the path-loss model, the received power levels decrease as the distance between the transmitter and the receiver increases. Attenuation of radio signals due to path-loss effect has been modelled by averaging the measured signal power over long times and distances around the transmitter. The averaged power at any given distance <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\2f6641b1-a40c-47ff-a783-c171036b7c33.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> to the transmitter is referred to as the area mean power<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\c4d498f2-99df-4f96-93f9-1869c4116601.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>. Based on the path-loss model, the area mean power <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\bc92d77e-743d-42a6-9d84-0d41b3c75be0.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is expressed as</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula2"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\d691f5b6-9312-4659-949a-a81e83c854a2.png"/></disp-formula><p>where <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\8d7808ae-9c5c-463e-bbf6-84d61e041d4b.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is a constant depending on the receiver and transmitter antenna gains and the wavelength, <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\c8ef6981-9fdd-45e9-85aa-04c36244c451.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>is the transmission power used by each node, <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\6a0b8f8a-6d5a-4d7e-b1f7-a2393fdce74a.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>is the path-loss exponent which indicates the rate at which the received signal strength decreases with distance, and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\c2ca1bc5-2e17-4ca5-8f65-601e8a90c234.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is a close-in reference distance such that <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\6ae32976-7c0f-451d-9d47-458bce7a904d.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> for any two nodes <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\4afa7872-8858-4677-9702-8c8e4fd01d72.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\2fa5994d-71a4-4ec6-ace2-9607da475b1b.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> in the network. The value of <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\697ed15b-d390-4200-928e-c6ee89ef1c7b.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> depends only on the environment and terrain structure and can vary between 2 in free space and 6 in heavily built urban areas. The values of <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\a4ab7cfc-8a3c-496d-b1b3-eae159fbe9c0.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\c43fec74-0cad-48e4-94a6-4adc5dde0f98.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> depend on the density<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\71b815a5-9faf-427a-9064-11d8d9e69bfb.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>. Under the path-loss model, the communication range of each node is a perfect circular disk (see <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>(a)). The node <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\92ac90f8-cdc2-4778-a7aa-2803c24f027b.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> can directly communicate with all other nodes that are within its communication range.</p><p>But the path-loss model could be inaccurate because in reality the received power levels may show significant variations around the area mean power value. Due to these variations, short links could disappear while long links could merge. The log-normal shadowing model allows for random power variations around the area mean power. With the log-normal shadowing model, the received mean power taken over all possible locations that are at distance <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\6d5a33f7-7f31-4ddf-929c-c6e5fe723505.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> to the transmitter is equal to the area mean power. However, it is further assumed that the time averaged received power varies from location to location in an apparently random manner [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref19">19</xref>] .</p><p>Assume that links are symmetric and the received power at node <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\a9437855-a313-4bdf-8d97-611447e58d6d.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> from node <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\a77e3333-1184-4b45-bcfd-961481308963.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is equal to the received power at node <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\6cb0dee4-6a57-438a-88db-f11823671071.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> from node <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\ba8efb4c-4637-4f48-b4c6-6e5c84021223.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> For any given Euclidean distance <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\01402f3e-bb07-4b38-8444-553cbfd40b88.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> let <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\8f6c6f68-18bf-4801-a014-aa8124cbfbb3.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> denote the received power strength between any two nodes separated by the distance <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\f9726563-97d0-4083-86f7-fa4a945198ff.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> under the log-normal shadowing model. The basic assumption in this realistic shadowing model is that the logarithm of <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\b09b65b5-9197-43d6-bd90-bc737fdcf162.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is normally distributed around the logarithm of the area mean power<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\a3c889eb-dd96-4a78-b80f-51302139e5f8.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>. That is,</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula3"><label>(1)</label><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\bcc42e94-69dc-42c4-82a9-bfd50c2a3e06.png"/></disp-formula><p>where <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\b94c921e-13e8-4086-9f20-269983ad9c53.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is a zero-mean Gaussian (normal) distributed random variable (in dB) with standard deviation <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\750d0e53-0493-4599-a16b-c8cde168ed66.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> (also in dB). The standard deviation <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\7a0f11a3-3b64-486a-aaa2-c530660c3051.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is a nonnegative value and, in case of severe signal fluctuations due to irregularities in the surroundings of the receiving and transmitting antennas, measurements indicates that it can be as high as 12 dB [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref20">20</xref>] .</p><p>For any two nodes separated by the Euclidean distance<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\6803c359-398a-4808-b7e1-2e0846516d64.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>, there exists a link between them if and only if the received power <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\748836bc-165f-4316-b805-b7b586109f82.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> under such a model is not less than some given threshold <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\7c885509-23f1-4191-9ea8-bf3df46fab48.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> (also in dB milliwatts) that is assumed to be a constant in this paper, i.e.</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula4"><label>(2)</label><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\8215483d-b014-40f3-bdf0-86b32fda09d4.png"/></disp-formula><p>And we say that any two nodes are directly connected if and only if there exists a link between them.</p><p>Define <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\4e27ea3c-2dd1-4e10-9bb8-0b9ba9e7bc0b.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> as the Euclidean distance where the area mean power <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\818995f5-1426-468a-8b1d-1cc811e450ec.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is equal the given threshold power <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\3d9e43b0-902e-4443-808f-aa4a116e5586.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> That is, <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\6842062d-4089-4114-95a1-9da2ffadde1d.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>Then</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula5"><label>(3)</label><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\a7ef8f32-69d4-4aa6-921f-d9aeda2bc411.png"/></disp-formula><p>If both sides of Equation (1) minus <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\31c00222-a889-4311-ab9b-6b1ff6b99615.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> since <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\cd99a1bc-a1a3-4f45-9832-254f2d95026b.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> we have</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula6"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\4d922798-1cdb-4133-b964-cbd4ac780aff.png"/></disp-formula><p>Then Equation (2) is equivalent to</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula7"><label>(4)</label><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\28f31d93-e094-4744-8419-287058e5ea0b.png"/></disp-formula><p>Thus for any two nodes separatedy the Euclidean distance <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\1f16d694-a65a-421c-91ca-ab11449c5545.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> let <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\214baf82-b98f-4284-ae10-0b15211cae75.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> denote the probability that there is a link between the two nodes. Then</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula8"><label>(5)</label><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\a1201450-cd0c-4a8b-a2a3-458cc1ad34c9.png"/></disp-formula><p>When <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\b658f226-b6ea-4769-ab27-8fc70a9957f8.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> there is no shadowing (i.e.,<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\519aca7d-66e8-4b9d-aa00-c6a6f74fafb8.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>). Then</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula9"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\2207d4b5-17af-42c8-8c6c-1fd4aba585a7.png"/></disp-formula><p>Thus, any two nodes are directly connected if and only if their Euclidean distance is at most<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\1180e80b-f878-431b-b15a-3f87078affdf.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>. In such a case, the channel model is reduced to the simple unit-disk communication model and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\c0e3745a-58d7-47e5-a0be-c7d5641cdd15.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is the maximum transmission radius of each node.</p><p>When<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\280030e2-c200-445d-8165-271251db877f.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>, the existence of a link is determined by both a deterministic function of the link length r and the shadowing effect represented by<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\ed150279-5033-45e9-b408-6b2cbd4a953a.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>. The transmission area of each node is no longer a circular area under the log-normal shadowing model. Under the log-normal shadowing model, the communication range of each node is an irregular region other than a circular area (see <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>(b)). In this figure, the node <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\366a0c7d-021d-470a-bd1a-74e78a2a090b.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is closer to node A than node D, the nodes A and D are directly connected, but the nodes A and C are not because of the shadowing effect between the nodes A and C. In real applications, σ is larger than zero, hence, the communication model with shadowing is more realistic than that without shadowing.</p><p>The following lemma demonstrates how the probability <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\a3f99b2a-d861-41d1-9a9d-1e4b064349b6.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> changes when the link length<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\cb71d8e9-4615-4ea9-823d-e962e2b5689d.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>, or the density <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\c25a40fd-0ca7-4adc-b085-a49b7db5c1ca.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> or the transmission power <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\7ff946f3-e1ff-44d1-aa73-edff5257be69.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> changes.</p><p>Lemma 1. When <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\23dc7b3b-6100-41db-bc0e-1f76d19ab536.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\9eff7683-a8b3-4b34-a521-8c402d1eb31e.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> are fixed, the probability <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\ac671fd3-bcbf-4f2c-82a3-e3a4d51530a3.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> decreases as <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\5741d56a-98fc-4a7f-b506-91c8a2bdb59b.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> increases; when <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\1c818d24-31fc-4206-bf0e-7ad1940a96b2.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\b8035455-185b-45e7-a47f-dd974f7d4bfc.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> are fixed, the probability <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\81dd2cd1-9a79-462a-a054-5a215a472746.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> increases as <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\260976e4-8d04-42ec-aa84-bf471dcf36e5.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> increases.</p><p>Proof. According to Equation (5), <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\c8090060-b877-4d79-b709-3cdcdd9c359b.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>is fixed when <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\f30c77e3-3aaf-48e1-adf2-23e511fb98a5.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\34dd29b0-3332-4f68-b586-070c9dc5145d.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> are fixed, since <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\200a12ae-3cbb-49d8-826a-eaa2c97a04df.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> increases as <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\89486d00-083e-4d3f-9df3-047c733968ef.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> increases, it is easy to see that the probability <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\f36ab423-4e68-498c-b34e-de6dc5f21d06.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is a decreasing function of the link length<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\bef86b3f-bdd9-4fa4-a1e7-6fb49bf81831.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>, which accords with intuition. When the density <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\11f9e3cf-f31b-43f4-8146-d60bcbe8c31d.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and the link length <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\7f8f819d-e93e-4c70-aeec-b31e6b9153c9.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> are fixed, as <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\cd8032ed-82b4-4559-9a59-607aca7bcd17.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> increases, <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\4b379a2c-fc4e-4164-8133-36dcdcefa1b8.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>increases and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\48951332-6f39-4c48-bcb5-40a56005e0c3.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> decreases. Therefore, the probability <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\abe18f53-02e9-4801-bef0-e5b5237eb13c.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> increases as <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\5ef12b96-a23d-4666-bce5-4ce53f107ac0.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> increases, which also accords with intuition. Thus, the lemma is proved.</p></sec><sec id="s4"><title>4. Preliminaries</title><p>In this section, we shall give some definitions that will be used to prove our main result of this paper. The results in this section are purely geometric, with no probabilistic content. Let <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\8f4f8427-1ad4-4613-b471-848343c96c4d.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> be the maximum transmission radius of the nodes. For any finite set of nodes <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\fdf47a61-4db6-4d4a-98ff-c15efa100721.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> in<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\ff2ab44c-16de-4f13-9da3-beb5d6337e4a.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>, we use <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\ad56b995-b99d-4b3e-af4a-28a39dd90e3d.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> to denote the <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\02e1c95d-eabc-4861-baf6-465c3f4ce28b.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>-disk graph over <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\f1f52fa0-0ec1-4067-ae06-b320920e1a41.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> in which there is an edge between two nodes if and only if their Euclidean distance is at most<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\eb8b260a-c6f0-4d50-a397-c2734edac436.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>. For any positive integers <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\617a47a4-1a64-458b-8136-b8782716127c.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\1b4c4320-057e-4d4d-94d8-12a6bf6293cd.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> with<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\7341a131-f42c-4e43-9949-c6c741815b79.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>, let <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\10bf60c8-a6dd-41c1-849e-503ad4f103f5.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> denote the set of <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\c809460d-c0aa-4d69-9e4b-996620ac3f05.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> satisfying that <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\99fe27a8-280f-4477-90dc-256680595042.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> has exactly <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\4b695f9e-6771-4fb5-89fb-c5edbda0fcda.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> connected components.</p><p>For the given maximum transmission radius r, the unit-area disk <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\3866fee4-df12-42c9-bfbd-cc0ebdc3791f.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is partitioned into three regions, <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\119c98e1-ebc3-46ee-a3fa-21c274df059f.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>,</p><p><inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\515b4329-357c-4aa8-b3d7-f54c7bec00e3.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\d3323c71-e9ac-478c-8860-55b0b36f8049.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> as shown in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>: <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\a3de90c8-b495-4597-be2d-5907503affff.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>is the disk of radius <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\e2832bd6-898d-42a3-a234-eba958de9c8f.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> centered at the origin; <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\323de4f3-50bb-4e93-82e7-e68e57c6f45c.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>is the annulus of radii <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\d94b6f46-1ca9-4757-99ea-508cec3592f2.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\61f23506-d5a8-448f-89c3-a67c5df6c033.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> centered at the origin; and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\99f4751a-81ff-49c0-b6cc-04a6fdf0afad.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is the annulus of radii <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\a278016e-5a09-4883-9014-d4e9c1c7319b.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\b4ea89f0-b4da-49e3-bea4-75e1c140b1b8.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> centered at the origin.</p><p>Then we have</p><p>(a) (b)</p><fig-group id="fig1"> <caption><title>Figure 1</title><p> (a) Unit-disk communication model; (b) Log-normal shadowing model</p></caption><fig id ="fig1_1"><label>(a)</label><graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\1e9f7bd7-6b97-4f5a-bd64-be52e243db7d.png"/></fig><fig id ="fig1_2"><label>(b)</label><graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\69c9606e-566c-4dbb-babf-058c16bc43e6.png"/></fig></fig-group><fig id="fig2"><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p> Partition of the unit-area disk<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\f6211e99-2a36-4ef1-8b26-bb5622fe9cf2.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula></p></caption><graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\d743e100-88db-4fc9-aacf-8752a9fdd1b5.png"/></fig></sec><sec id="s5"><title>5. Precise Asymptotic Distribution of the Number of Isolated Nodes</title><p>In this section, we assume that all the nodes transmit at a uniform power<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\4881c1a5-1e9d-4081-af82-4b351bbbf6b6.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>. We derive the precise asymptotic distribution of the number of isolated nodes in the network under the log-normal shadowing model with the complicated boundary effect taken into consideration.</p><p>We use the same notations as in Section 3. Recall that <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\0fa7a4a7-6ec1-4f1b-ad0f-2e6081005386.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> denotes the probability that any two nodes separated by the distance <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\632bdce8-d580-4c64-b145-4068071231e7.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> are directly connected. Then by Equation (5), we have</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula10"><label>(6)</label><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\152f9c74-9600-4e5c-affe-4534e1b1b774.png"/></disp-formula><p>Let</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula11"><label>(7)</label><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\87d98ec5-ba45-4c00-b53f-f86b8f46fd81.png"/></disp-formula><p>Refer to the discussions in [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref10">10</xref>] and [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref21">21</xref>] , <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\308d0bd3-a51c-40fd-98cc-646415634ce0.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>is actually the expected node degree of the network. By Equations (6) and (7)</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula12"><label>(8)</label><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\f1eb1d33-0d48-40f7-a8f5-19bbac54eee0.png"/></disp-formula><p>Based on our assumptions, <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\32c445ae-310a-48dc-b1da-359000a7a401.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>is a function of <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\d0b8b480-1e31-40bf-9db0-100a03c35ee8.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\b67ab1f7-e001-46a5-aeb3-e49d770bfa14.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> (see Equation (3)). Therefore, <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\ba64471d-7c3e-4ea2-b000-f7bc0ceaf024.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>depends only on <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\4563eda4-f9d9-405f-a051-88aac5d6b73f.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\0d876190-4866-4773-b497-c264b39ce2e2.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>. When <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\80d94148-5448-46e9-a984-6ecd8f37adb7.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is fixed, it is easy to see that the value of <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\4fcd1314-02de-4465-aeb5-c9e7476f34cd.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> increases as <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\a652c08f-e4cd-4a22-b3c9-e2608cb72bdf.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> increases from Equation (8).</p><p>Let</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula13"><label>(9)</label><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\98e3cccc-6193-4acd-bc24-74af13b6b49a.png"/></disp-formula><p>Then, when <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\ba25203b-db01-451b-a05d-58124a127f26.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is fixed, <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\d073be1a-f096-4d50-ac08-180af84661b7.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>also increases as <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\4a6563a0-9370-4673-9aa1-025480d867b5.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> increases.</p><p>In this paper, we make the following two assumptions:</p><p>1) <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\e7cfada0-3772-4538-97bf-f1f1e82c0769.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>has bounded support w.r.t. <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\dee321d7-e718-44b1-bbe2-adcdd427fece.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>i.e., there is a positive parameter <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\2702781a-82e3-41b7-bc4d-b6beb2a7e47e.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> (depending only on <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\99f3a1ab-da30-4217-ace6-10d18c9cc438.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\cb17b82d-dc7c-49ab-8398-8381e2ae3922.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>) such that</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula14"><label>(10)</label><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\259be94b-81d9-45e5-8c02-f5cd64d8cf6f.png"/></disp-formula><p>2) the transmission power <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\2763621b-a481-41d4-aa58-53cce057534d.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is properly chosen so that <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\51d6e010-7ebf-452c-a785-436a75e2651f.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> for some constant <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\53e569cd-1263-4d59-a59f-02b39280c8ea.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> (including<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\34d09914-2e17-4f33-a360-74df7c95f1d3.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>).</p><p>The main theorem of this paper is stated below:</p><p>Theorem 2. Under the two assumptions given above, the total number of the isolated nodes in the network is asymptotically Poisson with mean <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\12dcba5d-37c4-4f81-82cd-31dd65e3efd2.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula></p><p>Remarks. If the probability <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\2615ab4c-cf17-4dcd-a368-247173e6d79a.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> (i.e., the shadowing model is reduced to the path-loss model), then Equation (9) is reduced to</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula15"><label>(11)</label><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\97641663-512d-4cb6-91ec-909efecacfcf.png"/></disp-formula><p>where <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\04d6ab91-ef93-4251-aa0b-b84d20b926bc.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is the minimal transmission radius of each node (determined by the minimal transmission power) required for connectivity of multihop wireless networks under the path-loss model (see Gupta et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref3">3</xref>] or Penrose [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref16">16</xref>] ).</p><p>If the probability <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\03182dc6-ca83-43ac-a461-298627b48842.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> for some constant <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\792327fd-cb9d-4872-b711-0ae2674da086.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> (i.e., the shadowing model is reduced to the unreliable link model used in [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref22">22</xref>] with all nodes active and<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\44b4292b-15c8-49b6-99b0-8a31c569a77a.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>), then Equation (9) is reduced to</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula16"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\6b43bd3a-c7c4-4e4a-b01c-456fb0586004.png"/></disp-formula><p>where <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\aa96cdae-c5d8-4628-947e-ecb648b60785.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is the maximum transmission radius of each node used to derive the precise asymptotic distribution of the number of isolated nodes in the network with the unreliable link model defined in [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref22">22</xref>] . Therefore, our Theorem 2 above is the generalization of the main theorem in [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref22">22</xref>] to the more realistic lognormal shadowing model.</p><p>Theorem 2 will be proved by using the Brun’s sieve in the form described, for example, in [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref23">23</xref>] , Chapter 8, which is an implication of the Bonferroni inequalities.</p><p>Theorem 3. (Brun’s sieve) Let <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\34d5ff80-cb9c-49e0-b8a7-be01e3b8bb7a.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> be a positive integer parameter. Suppose that <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\e0c7f6fb-4ceb-4056-9484-5bcb1a58345c.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is a non- negative integer random variable depending on<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\5e1c2e6a-5525-4335-8fd3-f5226894febf.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\eaf89639-fa99-48f9-aca1-3e79d08f0c46.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> are <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\c852e393-0eb2-4559-9c58-54cc5cdef03b.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> Bernoulli random variables depending on<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\a07b618a-2ba3-4e3a-abea-5c7ebbf3558c.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>. Assume that for any subset <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\b43acb5b-c60d-45eb-983f-0d0b86cd709c.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> we have</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula17"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\415c2912-3c43-419f-9297-a1e2b88db4ba.png"/></disp-formula><p>If there is a constant <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\466fbddc-f026-4db4-8b25-007455d22d4f.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> such that for every fixed positive integer<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\b4eb2c0b-5777-48e4-87e4-0604231f61e5.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>,</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula18"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\13fbb71f-3f19-428f-9f6d-94b03371b6cc.png"/></disp-formula><p>then <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\9acb31a1-f67a-4f1e-b380-e5f2ba84fcd6.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is asymptotically Poisson with mean <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\5c508678-6600-4b12-891d-0d526beebba6.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> (with respect to<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\5dfafe41-de4e-44a9-81a7-3ec4a148e158.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>).</p><p>To apply Theorem 3, let <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\661c0ae8-b594-4247-bf37-a74d925364c3.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> denote the event that the random point <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\aba6e7c3-0cd1-4b8f-a3ae-fef0395d7a22.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is isolated for <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\e82a4599-f12f-458c-bee5-2b80863682e7.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\47eae0cd-4089-45c6-a0af-f1cf066b33c3.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> be the number of <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\b3a287dd-6028-4f0a-b2d4-d2add854f48e.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> that holds. Then <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\c09a170a-8ea6-41c6-9c4a-092d8e542284.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is exactly the total number of isolated nodes. Clearly, for any subset <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\f90aa3be-0f32-4da6-9d66-565955898d75.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula></p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula19"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\61697f5e-f6cb-48f3-b0c7-7cd1ba3873a4.png"/></disp-formula><p>Therefore, in order to prove Theorem 2, it is sufficient to show that for any fixed positive integer <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\758acfca-2651-4452-84dd-331044dbc6a2.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> when the conditions of Theorem 2 hold, we have</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula20"><label>(12)</label><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\0388ae3b-685e-47ff-8e13-2258d7ad5839.png"/></disp-formula><p>The proof of this asymptotic equation will use the following lemmas.</p><p>Lemma 4. Assume the conditions of Theorem 2 hold. Then there exist a sufficiently large constant <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\00d49061-eeca-45ea-b7aa-71a1aa52e2ab.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and a sufficiently small constant <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\022afe17-31a4-438e-ae7b-ca7f67e7a65d.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> (both independent of<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\a6de20cc-ffb8-48c0-b38d-24cfda929460.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>) satisfying that the probability <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\7993ef09-9b20-467e-9937-5c6c9a924108.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula></p><p>for all <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\03d74ace-f2fb-4aae-9135-fbbbcc25ea20.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula></p><p>Proof. We prove the lemma by contradiction and assume the contrary is true. Then for any arbitrarily large <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\59c0c37f-f2b2-48ca-8173-3c9c79e78b47.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and any arbitrarily small <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\734f832c-91f3-4f16-9ac7-7b0eb44d2c3e.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> such that <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\546cd8bc-41a9-461a-a90d-c288957f78b4.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> as <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\5ab6e4f6-a678-4138-9f02-5208a425db91.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> there is an <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\3a689e61-5a7b-49d3-a3d8-b247e80bc4b3.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> (with  <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\d93e98f2-46dd-4c4d-9d33-bba28a7b7121.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>) satisfies that <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\8cbc947d-3977-43e9-ad36-75276716b4d0.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> Since <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\37882616-3aa2-4616-bcfb-2a9f1a506643.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is a decreasing function of <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\1108db8e-27e3-4484-ae99-876a4b570060.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> we have <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\2382ac7c-0f54-48b9-9b4e-d12da0d1176e.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> for all <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\f9764091-71c3-4d32-bb64-81bc2ee26d46.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> Note that <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\e2f7045c-c2ff-48bf-b9ae-e698f4dfb008.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> Then by Equation (7), for any fixed <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\bebcf841-a89d-40a2-ae0f-a391f52b76e6.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> we have</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula21"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\7ac57809-8f29-4c6d-ba22-8c4e641db01d.png"/></disp-formula><p>The above inequality holds for any arbitrarily large <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\7430eb2c-96c0-4ed2-83fa-44ea32ef83aa.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> when <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\1f810a65-a8b0-4660-9180-2caf16fe989b.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is fixed. Fix <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\69aaea67-556e-40e4-97ab-82f60c0b44ba.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and let <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\b2f02066-59df-4155-a0ff-1631a2de6b40.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> we have <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\e2985b1b-0695-478e-9b67-e40c76075e1d.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> Therefore, <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\f8a69f9b-a117-4607-8e25-9e18d9d28515.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>This contradicts with Equation (9). Therefore, the lemma is proved.</p><p>The following lemma shows that <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\d5229505-b9a3-4056-ac28-08e9f02396bb.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> has the order <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\2a455cc0-4f0a-406c-aad8-b11c1e9a5cec.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> when the conditions of Theorem 2 hold.</p><p>Lemma 5. Assume the conditions of Theorem 2 hold. Then we have <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\4dc18781-016f-4860-a85a-4b9f4de3203d.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula22"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\ba248f21-80c4-4017-a393-98067cb627f1.png"/></disp-formula><p>where <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\edb58538-7022-4e9f-9cbd-7a83b4ee6d17.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\fca9a87d-1090-43f4-a650-a5aa0220a9de.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> are the two constants obtained in Lemma 4.</p><p>Proof. Note that <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\0b27b939-6790-4218-88fe-a9d11c21c853.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> By Equation (9) and Equation (7),</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula23"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\58d89ded-f444-49e3-80d0-2cd8154ecca8.png"/></disp-formula><p>By Lemma 4, there exist a sufficiently large constant <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\5811dbe1-8b9d-45ca-87c9-606844f7f43f.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and a sufficiently small constant <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\076b7406-d6e1-49c3-b3a1-7f006867e64b.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula></p><p>(both independent of<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\79e6c9c4-a3d4-48fb-a15e-799af743fe71.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>) satisfying that <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\005995ac-f508-4f98-a2de-2b8a220aec0e.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> for all <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\c14c5d1b-4a4a-4c96-bd4f-d23947b82e33.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> Thus, we have</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula24"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\cf1286d5-87fa-47d8-aa8f-93a5cf3ba8eb.png"/></disp-formula><p>Thus, the lemma is proved.</p><p>Next we introduce a lemma that has only one event involved and has been proved in [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref18">18</xref>] (see Equation (10) and Equation (12) in [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref18">18</xref>] ).</p><p>Lemma 6. For any <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\29e00569-c393-4844-93f9-805767898ea7.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> we have</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula25"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\64e0cb06-aa8c-45f8-91da-a5a506bfb3dd.png"/></disp-formula><p>If <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\673d4572-435d-4a53-80cc-9efc71c59ed5.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> then</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula26"><label>(13)</label><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\18da6d6a-d9d4-4757-94b7-1a4619670c67.png"/></disp-formula><p>Lemma 7. For any <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\aaea2fc5-aab7-4bf9-b28b-d1d6807dde5f.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\0dc089ce-58fe-4d11-9f7c-d29827239f8c.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> there is a constant <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\89896673-dce7-4ec8-a60e-1a8f0e3dd51d.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> such that for any  <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\df4259cc-9156-41c1-8bf4-eb5c0845b709.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> we have</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula27"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\2eb241e3-003d-453a-932c-9884305d3bbd.png"/></disp-formula><p>Proof. First we prove the lemma holds when <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\a5432ce0-1837-444b-aac4-30820da84db0.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\a7de11cd-2b3e-439c-b25f-3e34cc1918bb.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> Let <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\aa09824d-e0a8-45a1-9fcf-967a1d90163a.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> Then <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\68319517-ff9c-426a-9e1e-2a2d4ba45b21.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> We consider two cases:</p><p>Case 1. <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\dafb154f-0fb2-4549-881d-9cc21e187956.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>Let <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\bc62b8e4-d34f-477d-89e8-7f0dbc0b836d.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> denote the event that <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\1916d9e6-7778-4c84-ba40-9cea32df1ee1.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> does not have links to nodes in  <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\b2b9c776-c935-479d-8ca1-212cf5c7e8fe.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> Then</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula28"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\f9182903-bda6-40b1-a9dd-ceeec9f7163e.png"/></disp-formula><p>It remains to show that there is a constant <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\a43ea0f5-3c2a-447f-9059-2366406537a4.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> such that</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula29"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\90804613-6cfd-419b-9e0e-b90e4285e2a0.png"/></disp-formula><p>For any <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\e7bbe3d5-42ed-4823-82e8-d58491dfafe6.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> let <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\8facbf3d-f879-4823-8bf9-258003c62f20.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> denote the angle of the arc of <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\bd83160c-1650-419b-b05f-874b204b136c.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> not contained in <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\732f0c22-54a4-4ede-9530-84ee54ccbce3.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> Since <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\5c39b7a6-3a78-42a6-9210-a2a1f1ebeeec.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is increasing w.r.t. <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\e4c8a40b-0e62-4b74-8a84-b33774ad1b2c.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>we have</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula30"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\0ddbaea3-985b-46f7-924e-bb232df9de56.png"/></disp-formula><p>Let</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula31"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\9fada447-34b5-4a6d-8fb0-caba77c80021.png"/></disp-formula><p>Apply the same approach in deriving the probability for <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\293ce9fd-17e7-4032-b301-19b63c5c9e0d.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> (see Equation (10) and Equation (12) in [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref18">18</xref>] ), we have</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula32"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\c0c53633-f608-4ecd-b41b-21b2022480bd.png"/></disp-formula><p>Case 2. <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\d7671773-7825-43fd-9f38-a4e693b3e97a.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>We only consider the nodes in <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\84bc77b7-1100-4636-986d-b3353003dbf1.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> Divide this disk by <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\8308043a-a97c-4f26-883b-ddc29fe57ac3.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> concentric circles with</p><p>center <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\412315aa-820a-4fbd-97d3-b88b06363876.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and radii <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\9ca44df7-ff7b-47c1-bc3e-f793c61420ed.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> as we did in [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.48599-ref18">18</xref>] . Since <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\687eebf9-dc5d-4544-ac51-759547f39e74.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is a decreasing function of <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\2ec27aed-5651-49a3-80ca-10a9272568c1.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> we have</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula33"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\e4ac5bf5-d57d-430f-af61-fbc1207026e6.png"/></disp-formula><p>Note that the inequality still holds for annuli not fully contained in <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\fe89c351-c6dc-4a08-a1b0-604aa16f2f58.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> Therefore,</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula34"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\c375d0ba-4367-47e4-88e9-5367322d84ef.png"/></disp-formula><p>For any <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\65e4e390-0faa-46d3-97ad-22c4cd3126d6.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> we have <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\86930dcc-43f5-40db-8953-0b9a77d12f5f.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> Let</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula35"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\8034a797-5fbf-4193-9665-50b9be98edec.png"/></disp-formula><p>Then</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula36"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\f2b7719c-24a1-47ac-b09e-9591665090e1.png"/></disp-formula><p>Thus,</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula37"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\b5522797-1d9d-4eb9-a2bf-f22cc0de53d8.png"/></disp-formula><p>The lemma holds for the constant <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\fe4975cf-98f4-400e-b0f6-b087667d0476.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> Thus, the lemma is proved when <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\5b1c1372-96f8-44f2-ad8f-23befbef7ea3.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\81d9f66d-d144-41de-aaf9-992ce9566cd0.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>.</p><p>When<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\d5da1602-9732-4c0a-984a-a8b65e25c3c3.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>, for any <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\a149b0a1-ed62-4e57-aea2-b12c6631f529.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> since there always exist two overlapping disks (the distance between the two</p><p>centers is at most<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\f5f38766-8fff-4863-ab5c-eca98d89f779.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>) in the components <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\186fae87-6e1c-47f5-a2f7-f4e6a091a112.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> the lemma can be proved by following similar steps</p><p>as the case for<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\ec1e053e-57e5-4231-8d15-49d385374546.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>.</p><p>Next we assume <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\8b73cd4b-449f-4cc7-9c21-339217f8c893.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\511ba848-4dcc-4810-ab6f-4e93acc62b6d.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> For any <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\b724df42-adfb-4330-b32d-52754b3ac459.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> the set <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\f7a251ea-ee23-4abe-b924-4b4c7de02f52.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is parti- tioned into exactly <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\e657f95b-bcd0-41aa-8319-e8f74bd6ec95.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> subsets <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\3a761b15-dab0-4f67-ab42-acf779a0d7b1.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> such that for each <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\b2c49601-be8a-4240-bfa2-ed184633c4a0.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> the subgraph of</p><p><inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\f6adaa86-fac7-41dd-8f36-0937034ca48a.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>induced by only the nodes in <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\558db049-57e9-4c3a-996d-924991f18815.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> forms a connected component. Let <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\d716aa2a-003e-47eb-875d-7fdf64f6fb8f.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> for each</p><p><inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\c95efb66-abf8-42c3-80a5-1f11700c9638.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>and let <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\b4e546e1-6fda-4292-93e2-75444b99da40.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> Then we have</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula38"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\98c619d4-06d4-421c-8941-4696cd8b8ca9.png"/></disp-formula><p>Since at least one <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\4a45d783-7134-471f-885f-1ab97ca96958.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> for each<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\31b3a05f-ba54-407b-9528-30b170e7b2d4.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>, we have</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula39"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\c32b5894-420b-4b26-887d-39e2afdecf6d.png"/></disp-formula><p>Thus, the lemma is proved.</p><p>Now we are ready to prove the asymptotic Equation (12). The proof of this asymptotic equation is divided into three lemmas. The case for <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\d6a2a356-9a56-4551-87f5-08fa6135e2da.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is proved in Lemma 8. The case for any <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\71b6c72f-27d2-46a2-ab28-abc45a746196.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\fc06aa8d-07b9-45f9-ba8a-d646a523c94e.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\cc942100-acf0-45c8-a40b-a2b74c683e8f.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> will be proved in Lemma 9. The case for any <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\7fd47796-2c75-44a9-8d07-458dfcd2a8c4.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\f024f402-7188-4ba3-91df-51fe74ac489c.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> will be verified in Lemma 10. Thus, the asymptotic Equation (12) holds for any <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\3a70a47e-714b-4c1c-b752-4adc641f2980.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> since <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\c7bf770a-0954-44e6-a39f-db4eab77f234.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula></p><p>Lemma 8. <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\f8433c96-9266-42be-9521-ae1983796b1d.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula></p><p>Proof.</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula40"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\db4d8534-a128-482d-8586-b58ad917ebe2.png"/></disp-formula><p>We will prove</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula41"><label>(14)</label><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\c1c335a6-4d29-446a-b636-03cec1721474.png"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula42"><label>(15)</label><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\5d8ee1e9-00a1-42b1-bcdf-0a5ec11df3d6.png"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula43"><label>(16)</label><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\9236da1b-fda0-46e1-bb01-e1a2953839c2.png"/></disp-formula><p>For the integral over <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\d5c8efda-7cbb-4020-80b6-6b4434c0b598.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> by Equation (13) we have</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula44"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\54935f25-3ef4-44e5-98b2-feeb6829280a.png"/></disp-formula><p>For the integral over <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\a79cdee6-076a-46ca-86eb-4c64e0c39c01.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> by Equation (13) we have</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula45"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\f311c5dc-a6ec-4144-b505-a606ef81ce40.png"/></disp-formula><p>Next we calculate the integral over <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\8404433a-41ea-48c9-b7b1-06747e550a73.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> For any <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\ddb96ab1-8a3e-4695-8948-1b1dfbe8f2e7.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> let <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\234d4ec6-320c-41a0-a875-807acfbceae6.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> be the point on <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\375910ca-22b5-4c36-8a3c-728f76c5d03a.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> such that <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\14bca0ce-9294-47ba-b47a-f52a7ce719ab.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\a372383d-0130-44c3-a4de-e46cce038dcb.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> the diameter perpendicular to <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\e8708ad9-c93c-4b5b-928d-a381be964bbf.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> (see <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref>). Let <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\bc1e210f-0ca4-49c9-96ae-68f3722f9655.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> denote the half disk contained in<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\7b75cb7e-985b-4678-981d-ad421b9b6d37.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>. Then</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula46"><label>(17)</label><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\695bbb6f-bb37-49e3-aa4f-f3ab50e03b86.png"/></disp-formula><p>Therefore, by Equation (7) and Equation (17)</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula47"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\79d3efff-39f0-4015-bd66-eafbef04e688.png"/></disp-formula><p>To complete the proof of the lemma, it is sufficient to prove that this integral over <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\2114c079-1a65-4598-b5c9-b296386586fe.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is asymptotically vanishing as<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\e5115b05-7485-4508-9f3c-8b54d84bcd72.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>. We consider two cases.</p><p>Case 1.<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\7a499cc7-7a4f-4088-a969-47f464b1a988.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>. Then</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula48"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\402153a5-6f58-49c1-8bbb-1da3fe46eda8.png"/></disp-formula><p>Thus,</p><fig id="fig3"><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p><inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\e08361be-0e89-4b2d-a69f-90e4581a2b75.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula></p></caption><graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\7f414868-9406-4a93-bcea-b40b9df1bd89.png"/></fig><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula49"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\44eda26f-d53e-4835-b1be-5e142f32b2e7.png"/></disp-formula><p>The last equation holds since <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\dd96b5ff-a6b7-417d-b55a-33cf9a24301e.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> by Lemma 5.</p><p>Case 2.<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\b6edf376-2e1a-420e-8ee4-8bc911cf77b2.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>. Then</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula50"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\9c70bb37-0308-40d0-a68f-58c3ea157641.png"/></disp-formula><p>Thus,</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula51"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\2acc0dfe-b75e-4937-8745-a9e71e67a303.png"/></disp-formula><p>Therefore, the lemma is proved.</p><p>Lemma 9. For any <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\683fb9ce-89d7-4640-8d40-3a8c07f4efb0.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\e1805228-a7c6-40f1-9a53-939175238616.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> we have</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula52"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\7368d379-ccda-49b8-8761-9f7923cf5627.png"/></disp-formula><p>Proof. By Equations (15) and (16), it is straightforward to verify that the lemma holds when</p><p><inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\b7c9ae6c-1f57-4fc4-84cc-83d03cd27033.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>for some <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\4220e3ca-6e26-4ff4-ba91-1013864f47da.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> Therefore, we only need to consider the case when  <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\f9aa3c0f-d114-4c0a-8fad-390b7666bd6a.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula></p><p>We first prove the case when <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\8666cc5e-1770-4c34-95dd-71bc25904d12.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> For any <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\03d417c9-2bc6-405b-9480-961f5a7a8432.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> the <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\1faba9e0-ad4e-41d2-8238-2cb95783b601.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>-disk graph <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\572fc3a8-5323-4910-9d90-391171d1b637.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> has exactly one connected component. That is, the graph <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\d7cb6265-b63a-4759-831a-143bf90cfe8b.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is connected. Assume that the points <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\98870d63-994f-4d86-997b-be3352f68880.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is listed in the increasing order of the graph distances from <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\83fb0471-cf68-4483-a1d5-d9a9deb3af43.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> to <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\c04e1754-69ce-4131-bbf8-19e8e14f2cfe.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\d24f59b9-d5a9-460e-9dfb-473e4aeef609.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> Then</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula53"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\d5f624f8-61c4-412d-8342-9b70cba15b98.png"/></disp-formula><p>where the second last equation holds from Lemma 5.</p><p>Next we assume <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\81f9085e-3c08-4cb7-a401-68dc8a44f1a7.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> For any <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\f55d7a96-2e88-4418-8377-04973b47f3d9.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> the set <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\779b4b3c-4a90-4ff8-aba4-af1427562bcd.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is partitioned into exactly <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\bae23f5c-a0ac-4ac2-be45-762d23af756e.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> subsets <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\7900bb07-1aeb-40f9-8651-f11688d40532.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> such that for each <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\c0f7572a-0df6-4d44-a235-d02acee075fd.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> the subgraph of <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\389f75e8-50dd-4995-a23b-93cbf479946a.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> induced by only the nodes in <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\73fb8786-4ede-400a-bc60-95e2f310e03e.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> forms a connected component. Let <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\b22f81c6-629f-4e63-8274-1c391f3df1e1.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> for each <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\72a6ba9c-0507-49ed-b3f7-563120513d22.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and let</p><p><img src="htmlimages\9-7402310x\111233eb-4ef9-4c41-8609-a9166337ecf7.png" width="238.75" height="62.3750019073486" />Then we have</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula54"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\ec479055-3c06-48ae-80be-659206238d25.png"/></disp-formula><p>where the last equation holds by following the similar arguments as the case <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\04688d99-1507-4d85-a37d-97ca0d913898.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula></p><p>This completes the proof of the lemma.</p><p>Lemma 10. For any <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\4c44b862-42bf-4f53-a3ab-318c66d50334.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> we have</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula55"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\11fe24f5-a848-4808-a82d-584f6079b682.png"/></disp-formula><p>Proof. For any <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\b1c49a2e-15ad-4f3b-b8c0-0e3ec460c66e.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> the <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\99da1e8d-181f-4143-b9ef-d8fdd416e866.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> disks <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\7e9c0882-fa67-4845-adbc-26b447cdf148.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> are disjoint. Thus, <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\344f9c32-0cce-4e91-8b58-3498e0587923.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>are independent. Therefore,</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula56"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\86edc7e3-1e05-4886-8ae4-ce6559d5917d.png"/></disp-formula><p>Next we calculate the two integrals <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\4905ce15-321a-4163-81c3-bcf4e6dc1b4b.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\b14027e0-5fd2-4a34-98de-75f9690779bf.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> separately.</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula57"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\05ff61fc-0fa9-4c80-b851-bac81c7ca8ff.png"/></disp-formula><p>the last equation holds by following the same steps as we used in the proof of Lemma 8.</p><disp-formula id="scirp.48599-formula58"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\c0616220-42f6-4d7a-b28e-dbd8328a57d7.png"/></disp-formula><p>where the last equation holds from Lemma 9.</p><p>This completes the proof of the lemma.</p></sec><sec id="s6"><title>6. Conclusion</title><p>In this paper, we assume that the wireless nodes are represented by a Poisson point process with density n over a unit-area disk, and that the transmission power is properly chosen so that the expected node degree of the network equals<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\c1560fd9-4d8b-45b0-a38b-b44238e91a63.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>, where <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\32b04dad-f01c-40d2-8c2c-f8a1b7e2e4f5.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> approaches to a constant <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\c41cd604-d683-48b0-b40e-0e19d466c5fd.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> as<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\f6553739-e0ce-4036-af03-cc7a34ad8607.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>. We also assume that the probability that a pair of nodes separated by a Euclidean distance <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\d8681ad8-67b0-427c-9e92-07ac2d89f5f6.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> are directly connected has bounded support w.r.t<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\8b107f9c-280b-4dde-a492-edeb3f3b05e4.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>. Under the log-normal shadowing model with the boundary effect taken into consideration, we proved that the total number of isolated nodes is asymptotically Poisson with mean<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\9-7402310x\cae1f81b-7541-4125-b436-f6bbd597bd66.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>.</p></sec><sec id="s7"><title>Acknowledgements</title><p>The work of Dr. Lixin Wang in this paper is supported in part by the NSF grant HRD-1238704 of USA.</p></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.48599-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>BETTSTETTER</surname><given-names> C. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>2004</year>)<article-title>ON THE CONNECTIVITY OF AD HOC NETWORKS</article-title><source> THE COMPUTER JOURNAL</source><volume> 47</volume>,<fpage> 432</fpage>-<lpage>447</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">HTTP://DX.DOI.ORG/10.1093/COMJNL/47.4.432</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.48599-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>BETTSTETTER</surname><given-names> C. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>2002</year>)<article-title>ON THE MINIMUM NODE DEGREE AND CONNECTIVITY OF A WIRELESS MULTIHOP NETWORK</article-title><source> 3RD ACM INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON MOBILE AD HOC NETWORKING AND COMPUTING</source><volume> LAUSANNE</volume>,<fpage> 80</fpage>-<lpage>91</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">HTTP://DX.DOI.ORG/10.1145/513800.513811</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.48599-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">GUPTA, P. AND KUMAR, P. (1998) CRITICAL POWER FOR ASYMPTOTIC CONNECTIVITY IN WIRELESS NETWORKS. STOCHASTIC ANALYSIS, CONTROL, OPTIMIZATION AND APPLICATIONS, 547-566.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.48599-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>PHILIPS</surname><given-names> T.K.</given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> PANWAR</surname><given-names> S.S. </given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> TANTAWI</surname><given-names> A.N. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>1989</year>)<article-title>CONNECTIVITY PROPERTIES OF A PACKET RADIO NETWORK MODEL</article-title><source> IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INFORMATION THEORY</source><volume> 35</volume>,<fpage> 1044</fpage>-<lpage>1047</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">HTTP://DX.DOI.ORG/10.1109/18.42219</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.48599-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">WAN, P.-J. AND YI, C.-W. (2004) ASYMPTOTIC CRITICAL TRANSMISSION RADIUS AND CRITICAL NEIGHBOR NUMBER FOR K-CONNECTIVITY IN WIRELESS AD HOC NETWORKS. MOBIHOC 2006, ROPPONGI, 1-8.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.48599-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>XUE</surname><given-names> F. </given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> KUMAR</surname><given-names> P. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>2004</year>)<article-title>THE NUMBER OF NEIGHBORS NEEDED FOR CONNECTIVITY OF WIRELESS NETWORKS</article-title><source> WIRELESS NETWORKS</source><volume> 10</volume>,<fpage> 169</fpage>-<lpage>181</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">HTTP://DX.DOI.ORG/10.1023/B:WINE.0000013081.09837.C0</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.48599-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">YI, C.-W., WAN, P.-J., LI, X.-Y. AND FRIEDER, O. (2006) ASYMPTOTIC DISTRIBUTION OF THE NUMBER OF ISOLATED NODES IN WIRELESS AD HOC NETWORKS WITH BERNOULLI NODES. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON COMMUNICATIONS, 54.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.48599-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">TAKAI, M., MARTIN, J. AND BAGRODIA, R. (2001) EFFECTS OF WIRELESS PHYSICAL LAYER MODELING IN MOBILE AD HOC NETWORKS. ACM INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON MOBILE AD HOC NETWORKING AND COMPUTING (MOBIHOC), LONG BEACH.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.48599-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>ZORZI</surname><given-names> M. </given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> PUPOLIN</surname><given-names> S. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>1995</year>)<article-title>OPTIMUM TRANSMISSION RANGES IN MULTIHOP PACKET RADIO NETWORKS IN THE PRESENCE OF FADING</article-title><source> IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON COMMUNICATIONS</source><volume> 43</volume>,<fpage> 2201</fpage>-<lpage>2205</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">HTTP://DX.DOI.ORG/10.1109/26.392962</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.48599-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>BETTSTETTER</surname><given-names> C. </given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> HARTMANN</surname><given-names> C. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>2005</year>)<article-title>CONNECTIVITY OF WIRELESS MULTIHOP NETWORKS IN A SHADOW FADING ENVIRONMENT</article-title><source> WIRELESS NETWORKS</source><volume> 11</volume>,<fpage> 571</fpage>-<lpage>579</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">HTTP://DX.DOI.ORG/10.1007/S11276-005-3513-X</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.48599-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>BERNHARDT</surname><given-names> R.C. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>1987</year>)<article-title>MACROSCOPIC DIVERSITY IN FREQUENCY REUSE SYSTEMS</article-title><source> IEEE JOURNAL OF SELECTED AREAS IN COMMUNICATIONS SAC</source><volume> 5</volume>,<fpage> 862</fpage>-<lpage>878</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">HTTP://DX.DOI.ORG/10.1109/JSAC.1987.1146594</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.48599-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>COX</surname><given-names> D.C.</given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> MURRAY</surname><given-names> R. </given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> NORRIS</surname><given-names> A. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>1984</year>)<article-title>800 MHZ ATTENUATION MEASURED IN AND AROUND SUBURBAN HOUSES</article-title><source> AT &amp; T BELL LABORATORY TECHNICAL JOURNAL</source><volume> 63</volume>,<fpage> 921</fpage>-<lpage>954</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">HTTP://DX.DOI.ORG/10.1002/J.1538-7305.1984.TB00030.X</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.48599-ref13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>HEKMAT</surname><given-names> R. </given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> MIEGHEM</surname><given-names> P.V. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>2006</year>)<article-title>CONNECTIVITY IN WIRELESS AD-HOC NETWORKS WITH A LOG-NORMAL RADIO MODEL</article-title><source> MOBILE NETWORKS AND APPLICATIONS</source><volume> 11</volume>,<fpage> 351</fpage>-<lpage>360</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">HTTP://DX.DOI.ORG/10.1007/S11036-006-5188-7</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.48599-ref14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">MUKHERJEE, S. AND AVIDOR, D. (2005) ON THE PROBABILITY DISTRIBUTION OF THE MINIMAL NUMBER OF HOPS BETWEEN ANY PAIR OF NODES IN A BOUNDED WIRELESS AD-HOC NETWORK SUBJECT TO FADING. INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOP ON WIRELESS AD-HOC NETWORKS (IWWAN), LONDON.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.48599-ref15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">STUEDI, P., CHINELLATO, O. AND ALONSO, G. (2005) CONNECTIVITY IN THE PRESENCE OF SHADOWING IN 802.11 AD HOC NETWORKS. IEEE WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS AND NETWORKING CONFERENCE, 2225-2230.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.48599-ref16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>PENROSE</surname><given-names> M. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>1997</year>)<article-title>THE LONGEST EDGE OF THE RANDOM MINIMAL SPANNING TREE</article-title><source> THE ANNALS OF APPLIED PROBABILITY</source><volume> 7</volume>,<fpage> 340</fpage>-<lpage>361</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">HTTP://DX.DOI.ORG/10.1214/AOAP/1034625335</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.48599-ref17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>PENROSE</surname><given-names> M. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>1999</year>)<article-title>A STRONG LAW FOR THE LONGEST EDGE OF THE MINIMAL SPANNING TREE</article-title><source> THE ANNALS OF APPLIED PROBABILITY</source><volume> 27</volume>,<fpage> 246</fpage>-<lpage>260</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">HTTP://DX.DOI.ORG/10.1214/AOP/1022677261</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.48599-ref18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">WANG, L. AND BAKER, A.J. (2013) CRITICAL POWER FOR VANISHING OF ISOLATED NODES IN WIRELESS NETWORKS WITH LOG-NORMAL SHADOWING. IEEE MASS 2013, HANGZHOU.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.48599-ref19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">BERTONI, H. (2000) RADIO PROPAGATION FOR MODERN WIRELESS SYSTEMS. PRENTICE HALL PTR, NEW JERSEY.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.48599-ref20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">RAPPAPORT, T.S. (2001) WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS: PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICE. 2ND EDITION, PRENTICE HALL PTR, NEW JERSEY.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.48599-ref21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">MEESTER, R. AND ROY, R. (1996) CONTINUUM PERCOLATION. CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS, CAMBRIDGE.HTTP://DX.DOI.ORG/10.1017/CBO9780511895357</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.48599-ref22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">YI, C.-W., WAN, P.-J., LIN, K.-W. AND HUANG, C.-H. (2006) ASYMPTOTIC DISTRIBUTION OF THE NUMBER OF ISOLATED NODES IN WIRELESS AD HOC NETWORKS WITH UNRELIABLE NODES AND LINKS. IEEE GLOBECOM.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.48599-ref23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">ALON, N. AND SPENCER, J.H. (2000) THE PROBABILISTIC METHOD. 2ND EDITION, WILEY, NEW YORK. HTTP://DX.DOI.ORG/10.1002/0471722154</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>