1: \documentclass{amsart}
2:
3: \usepackage{bbm}
4: \usepackage{graphicx}
5: \usepackage{verbatim}
6: %\usepackage{changebar}
7: \def\cbstart{ } \def\cbend{ }
8:
9: \usepackage[latin1]{inputenc}
10:
11: \newtheorem{proposition}{Proposition}
12: \newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}
13: \newtheorem{lemma}{Lemma}
14: \newtheorem{definition}{Definition}
15: \newtheorem{corollary}{Corollary}
16:
17: \newcommand\ind[1]{\mathbbm{1}_{\{#1\}}}
18:
19: \def\cal{\mathcal}
20: \def\C{{\mathbb C}}
21: \def\N{{\mathbb N}}
22: \def\R{{\mathbb R}}
23: \def\Z{{\mathbb Z}}
24: \def\P{{\mathbb P}}
25: \def\E{{\mathbb E}}
26: \def\Var{\mathrm{Var}}
27: \def\Cov{\mathrm{Cov}}
28: \def\eps{\varepsilon}
29: \def\Wdir{./}
30: \def\etal{{\em et al.}}
31: \def\T{\mathcal{T}}
32: \setcounter{tocdepth}{1}
33:
34: \renewcommand\labelitemi{---}
35:
36: \title[Analysis of Steiner subtrees]{Analysis of Steiner subtrees of Random Trees for Traceroute Algorithms}
37:
38: \author{Fabrice Guillemin}
39: \address[F.~Guillemin]{Orange Labs, 2, Avenue Pierre Marzin, F-22300 Lannion}
40: \email{Fabrice.Guillemin@orange-ftgroup.com}
41: \author{Philippe Robert}
42: \address[Ph.~Robert]{INRIA-Rocquencourt, RAP project, Domaine de Voluceau, 78153 Le Chesnay, France}
43: \email{Philippe.Robert@inria.fr}
44: \urladdr{http://www-rocq.inria.fr/\~{}robert}
45: \date{\today}
46:
47:
48:
49: \begin{document}
50:
51: \begin{abstract}
52: We consider in this paper the problem of discovering, via a traceroute algorithm, the
53: topology of a network, whose graph is spanned by an infinite branching process. A subset
54: of nodes is selected according to some criterion. As a measure of efficiency of the
55: algorithm, the Steiner distance of the selected nodes, i.e. the size of the spanning
56: sub-tree of these nodes, is investigated. For the selection of nodes, two criteria are
57: considered: A node is randomly selected with a probability, which is either independent of
58: the depth of the node (uniform model) or else in the depth biased model, is exponentially
59: decaying with respect to its depth. The limiting behavior the size of the discovered
60: subtree is investigated for both models.
61: \end{abstract}
62:
63: \keywords{Traceroute Algorithm. Steiner Distance. Branching Processes. Oscillating Behavior. Asymptotic Expansions.}
64:
65: \maketitle
66:
67:
68: \hrule
69:
70: \tableofcontents
71:
72: \vspace{-5mm}
73:
74: \hrule
75:
76: \vspace{5mm}
77:
78: \section{Introduction}
79: In the past ten years, the Internet has known an extraordinary expansion and still
80: experiences today a sustained growth. The counterpart of this success is that the
81: different autonomous systems composing the global Internet have been independently
82: developed by different operators. This raises some issue since the Internet is by
83: construction a flat network, where the different components are interdependent in terms of
84: connectivity availability, security, quality of service etc. It thus turns out that the
85: knowledge of the physical layout of a network is of prime interest for network operators. The
86: physical topology of a component of the Internet is in general very difficult to describe.
87: To establish a representation of the whole or a part of the Internet, some topology
88: exploration methods have to be devised. Various topology discovery experiments have been
89: initiated by different organizations in order to infer the topology of the global
90: Internet, notably the Skitter project by CAIDA \cite{caida}, the DIMES
91: project~\cite{Dimes} and many other initiatives. The method generally proposed for
92: analyzing the topology of a network is based on the traceroute facility offered by
93: routers. Roughly speaking, a traceroute procedure consists of sending
94: traceroute messages between hosts as follows:
95:
96: \vspace{4mm}
97:
98: \hrule
99:
100: \vspace{3mm}
101:
102: \noindent
103: {\sc Traceroute Algorithm} \\
104: If $H$ and $G$ are hosts participating in the topology discovery experiment,
105: $H$ sends to $G$ a traceroute message so that all the hosts/routers on the path
106: $(H,G)$ are identified.
107:
108: \vspace{3mm}
109:
110: \hrule
111:
112: \vspace{4mm}
113:
114: The purpose of this paper is to investigate the efficiency of the traceroute algorithm.
115: While a large number of experimental papers are available in the technical literature on
116: the analysis of the topology of the Internet, a very few studies provide analytical
117: insight into the efficiency of these topology discovery methods; see Vespignani
118: \etal~\cite{Vespignani} for a discussion and Azzana \etal~\cite{Azzana:01} for an analysis
119: in the case of specific deterministic trees.
120:
121: In this paper, a more realistic model is proposed to include some randomness in the degree
122: of the nodes of the graph representing the topology of a network. One specifically
123: considers a network with a random tree architecture spanned by a Galton-Watson branching
124: process. \cbstart{We shall restrict the analysis to the case of offspring distributions, which have a finite second momenmt. This notably precludes the case of power law distributions with infinite second moments, typically distributions $G$ such that $\P(G \geq n) \sim C n^{-\alpha} $ with $\alpha \in (0,2)$.}\cbend
125:
126:
127: The Internet graph is definitely not a tree, since many studies (see the Skitter
128: project) show that there is a core of highly connected routers. Nevertheless, some
129: components of the Internet have a topology close to a tree structure. This is notably
130: the case of access or collect networks, which play the role of capillarity networks in
131: charge of collecting and distributing traffic between customers and the core of the
132: Internet. This latter component is not critical for the problem we study in this paper
133: since core routers are easy to discover by traceroute procedures. This is why we focus on
134: collect networks, which can be represented by a tree architecture, spanned by a branching
135: process. In addition, to get more insight into the topology discovery process in the case
136: of a large network, it is assumed that the underlying branching process does not terminate
137: with probability $1$; in particular the depth of the tree is infinite.
138:
139: The discovery process is as follows: a random number of nodes are selected among the nodes
140: of the tree. After the selected nodes have performed the traceroute algorithm, the set of
141: the nodes discovered is the spanning tree of the selected nodes. The performance
142: criterion used in this paper is simply the size of this sub-tree. In graph theory it is
143: known as the {\em Steiner distance} of the selected nodes (with the slight difference that
144: the selected nodes are not counted). It has been the subject of a recent interest by
145: Mahmoud and Neininger~\cite{Mahmoud2} and Christophi and Mahmoud~\cite{ChMa} which
146: considered the asymptotic behavior of the distance between two random nodes of the tree.
147: Panholzer~\cite{Panholzer}, Panholzer and Prodinger~\cite{Panholzer2} proved central limit
148: theorems when multiple points are considered. The asymptotics investigated in these
149: papers concern the size of the random tree. In our paper, we will study two situations:
150: when the size of the tree and the number of selected nodes go to infinity and also when
151: the infinite tree is fixed and the number of selected nodes grows. See
152: Panholzer~\cite{Panholzer} for a thorough discussion of the literature in this domain.
153:
154: Two stochastic models for selecting the nodes in the network are considered. In the first
155: model, the uniform model, we adopt the point of view of an external observer to the
156: network; a set of nodes is chosen at random and a traceroute algorithm is performed. In
157: the second model, the depth biased model, the observer is located at one node (the root
158: node) and it chooses more likely nodes not too far away. As it will be seen, in the
159: uniform model , the selected nodes are basically in the ``bottom'' of the tree where most
160: of the nodes are, while in the second model they are more concentrated at the ``top'' of
161: the tree.
162:
163: In the first model, referred to as the uniform model, nodes whose depth is less than $N>0$
164: are randomly chosen with probability $1-\exp(-\lambda)$ for some $\lambda >0$
165: independently of the position of the node in the tree. The quantity analyzed here is the
166: ratio $\rho_N(\lambda)$ of the mean size $\E(R_N)$ of the sub-tree discovered and the mean
167: number $\E(T_N)$ of nodes of the tree whose depth is less than $N$. The quantity
168: $\rho_N(\lambda)$ denotes the fraction of the tree discovered. The asymptotic results of
169: this paper first determine the limit $\rho(\lambda)$ of $\rho_N(\lambda)$ as $N$ tends to
170: infinity. In a second step, the asymptotic behavior of $\rho(\lambda)$ for $\lambda \to
171: 0$ is investigated. This last point gives an indication of the efficiency of the
172: algorithm when only a few nodes are selected in the topology discovery experiment.
173:
174: For the uniform model, it is shown in Theorem~\ref{rho1} that, for small $\lambda$, the
175: exploration rate $\rho(\lambda)/\lambda$ is equivalent to $\log_m\lambda$ where $m$ is the
176: mean value of the offspring distribution of a node, so that at the first order the
177: algorithm is very efficient. A second order analysis, Proposition~\ref{vartree}, reveals
178: that the standard deviation of the size of the discovered tree scales with the mean size
179: of the tree, except when the offspring distribution is deterministic. This latter case is
180: degenerate in the sense that the standard deviation is negligible when compared to the
181: mean value.
182:
183: In the second model, referred to as the depth biased model, the probability of selecting a
184: node depends on its depth in the tree so that the mean number of selected nodes at depth
185: $n$ is $\alpha^n$ for some $\alpha >0$. It is shown in Theorem~\ref{oscil} that the ratio
186: of the average of the size $R(\alpha)$ of the sub-tree discovered and the
187: average number of selected nodes is equivalent to $1/(1-\alpha)$.
188:
189: \begin{comment}
190: In
191: general they can be expressed as $F(\phi(x))$ where $F$ is some periodic function and
192: $\phi$ is a slowly increasing function. Technically this phenomenon comes from the fact
193: that a Mellin transform has an infinite number of poles on a vertical axis (for an
194: analytic approach, see~\cite{Flajolet:14}) or the fact that a discrete renewal theorem
195: has to be used (for a probabilistic approach, see~\cite{Mohamed:01}). In the present
196: case, the corresponding oscillating term cannot be represented in such a way; this unusual
197: asymptotic behavior is obtained through an integral representation of the main quantity of
198: interest.
199: \end{comment}
200: The paper is organized as follows: In Section~\ref{formulation}, the models for the
201: selection of the nodes of the tree are introduced. The uniform model is investigated in
202: Section~\ref{uniform} and the depth biased model in Section~\ref{biased}. The main
203: ingredients for the analysis of these models are Kesten-Stigum Theorem and some results on
204: the rates of convergence for Galton-Watson branching processes and a general limit theorem
205: proved in Section~\ref{Convsec}.
206:
207: \subsection*{Acknowledgments}
208: The authors wish to thank two anonymous referees for their work, their detailed comments
209: have helped us a lot to improve and correct mistakes in the first version of the paper.
210:
211:
212:
213: \section{Problem Formulation}\label{formulation}
214: Throughout this paper, we consider a Galton-Watson branching process, whose graph is a
215: tree denoted by ${\cal T}$. Each element of the $n$th generation (or $n$th level) gives birth
216: to $G$ nodes at the $(n+1)$th generation independently of the other elements of the $n$th
217: level, where the offspring $G$ is some {\em integrable} random variable. (See Athreya and
218: Ney~\cite{Athreya:04} and Lyons and Peres~\cite{Lyons:07} for an introduction to random
219: trees.)
220:
221: It is assumed that $\P(G{=}0){=}0$ and $P(G\geq 2)>0$, in particular the tree is supercritical, i.e. $m=\E(G)>1$.
222: For $n\geq 0$, the variable $Z_n$ denotes the number of nodes at level $n$, in particular
223: $Z_0=1$. For $1\leq\ell\leq Z_n$, a node of the tree can be represented as a pair
224: $(n,\ell)$, where $n$ is its generation and $\ell$ its rank within the generation. (For notational conventions, see
225: Neveu~\cite{Neveu:20} for example.) Let ${\cal T}_{k}^{n,\ell}$ denote the sub-tree of
226: ${\cal T}$ with depth less than or equal to $k$ and with root at node $(n,\ell)$. The size of
227: ${\cal T}_{k}^{n,\ell}$ is denoted by $T_{k}^{n,\ell}$. When $(n,\ell)$ is the root node,
228: i.e. $(n,\ell)=(0,1)$, the upper index $(0,1)$ is omitted. With the above notation,
229: one gets easily that for all $N>1$ and $n= 1,\dots, N$
230: \begin{equation}\label{eq1st}
231: T_N=\sum_{i=0}^{n-1}Z_i+ \sum_{\ell=1}^{Z_{n}} T_{N-n}^{n,\ell}.
232: \end{equation}
233:
234: Let us consider a counting measure $\mathcal{N}$ on the tree representing the distribution
235: of the points selected in the tree: For a subset $A$ of the nodes of the tree, ${\cal
236: N}(A)$ denotes the total number of points in $A$. By selecting nodes, a sub-tree from
237: $\mathcal{T}$ is obtained through the traceroute algorithm; this sub-tree is referred to as sampled
238: tree. See Figure~\ref{trafig}.
239:
240: \begin{figure}[ht]
241: \begin{center}
242: \scalebox{.5}{\includegraphics{tree}}
243: \end{center}
244: \caption{Traceroute Algorithm.}\label{trafig}
245: \end{figure}
246:
247: To complete the description of the problem, it remains to specify how the nodes of the
248: original tree are selected. In the following, we shall consider two selection criteria:
249: \begin{description}
250: \item[Uniform model] Nodes are chosen at random on all the nodes of the tree whose depth
251: is less than or equal to $N$, $N$ being a fixed integer. A node is selected with
252: probability $1-\exp(-\lambda)$ independently of his depth in the tree. The mean number of
253: nodes involved in the discovery experiment is then $(1-\exp(-\lambda)) (m^{N+1}-1)/(m-1)$.
254: (Recall that the mean size of the $n$th generation is $m^n$, $n\geq 0$, where $m =\E(G)$,
255: the mean of the offspring variable $G$.)
256:
257: To investigate the topology discovery process, we shall consider for a fixed
258: $N>0$ the $N$ first levels of the original tree $\mathcal{T}$ and count the number of
259: nodes which are discovered, given by
260: \begin{equation}\label{relfond}
261: R_N=\sum_{n=0}^N \sum_{\ell=1}^{Z_{N-n}}\ind{{\cal N}(\T_{n}^{N-n,\ell})\not=0}.
262: \end{equation}
263: In the following, we shall be particularly interested in the quantity
264: \begin{equation}
265: \label{defrhoN}
266: \rho_N(\lambda)= \frac{\E(R_N)}{\E(T_N)},
267: \end{equation}
268: i.e., the ratio of the mean number of discovered nodes to the mean number of nodes in the
269: tree, when the analysis is restricted to the $N$ first levels of the tree. Then the
270: behavior of this ratio when the number $N$ of levels tends to infinity is investigated.
271:
272: \item[Depth biased model] Nodes at given level $n$ are selected with probability
273: $1-\exp[-(\alpha/m)^n]$ for some $\alpha\in(0,1)$. The mean number of nodes selected at
274: level $n$ is $m^n(1-\exp[-(\alpha/m)^n]) \sim \alpha^n$ and therefore is
275: exponentially decreasing with respect to the depth. The rational behind that is the fact
276: that, for this model, the traceroute procedure will rarely select nodes ``far away'' from the root
277: node, in contrary to the uniform case where geometric aspects are completely ignored for the
278: selections of the hosts.
279:
280: By denoting by $R(\alpha)$ the total number
281: of nodes discovered, the efficiency of the traceroute algorithm is measured in this case
282: through the ratio of the mean $\E(R(\alpha))$ to the average number of
283: selected nodes. The limiting behavior when the average number of selected nodes becomes
284: large, i.e. when $\alpha\nearrow 1$, is investigated.
285:
286: \end{description}
287: Additionally it is assumed that the root node of the tree is always selected; it is not
288: difficult to show that for both models described above, the root node belongs to
289: the sample tree with a very high probability and then the above assumption is not really restrictive. This implies that a node $(n,\ell)$ of
290: the tree ${\cal T}$ at level $n$ belongs to the sampled tree whenever ${\cal N}({\cal
291: T}_{N-n}^{n,\ell})$ is not $0$. In other words, a node of the original tree belongs
292: to the discovered tree if at least one of his descendants has been selected. \cbstart In the following, we shall use the following notation: for a subtree $\T^{N-n,\ell}_{n}$ rooted at a vertex $(N-n,\ell)$ of the $(N-n)$th generation of the tree $\T$ and with depth $n$, the quantity $\P(\mathcal{N}(\T^{N-n,\ell}_n)\neq 0)$ is the probability that a least one vertex of the subtree $\T^{N-n,\ell}_{n}$ is marked and $(N-n, \ell)\in \T$.\cbend
293:
294: Before proceeding to the analysis of the topology discovery process, we prove in the next
295: section a technical result, which is important in the analysis of the speed of the
296: exploration process.
297:
298:
299:
300: \section{A Convergence Result}\label{Convsec}
301: To prove asymptotic expansions in the following sections, the
302: following proposition will repeatedly be used. Its proof is based on integral
303: representations and Fubini's Theorem instead of complex analysis techniques as it is
304: usually the case in the context of harmonic series. See Robert~\cite{Robert:09} for a presentation of
305: these methods.
306: \begin{proposition}\label{asympprop}
307: Let $V$ be a positive random variable with $\E(V^2)<+\infty$ and $h$ be a non-negative
308: twice differentiable function on $\R_+$ such that $h(0)=0$. In addition, it is
309: assumed that the function $h'$ is integrable with $h'(0)\not=0$ and \cbstart that there exists some constant $K>0$ such that $|h''(x)|<K$ for all $x\in [0,\infty)$. \cbend
310:
311: The function $\Psi(h)(x)$ defined by
312: \begin{equation}\label{Branaire}
313: \Psi(h)(x)=\sum_{n=0}^{+\infty} \frac{1}{m^n}\E\left(h\left(x Vm^n\right)\right),\quad x\geq 0,
314: \end{equation}
315: is such that
316: \[
317: \lim_{x\to 0} \frac{\Psi(h)(x)}{x\log_m(1/x)} = \E(V)h'(0).
318: \]
319: \end{proposition}
320: \begin{proof}
321: Since $h$ is non-negative and $|h'|$ integrable with respect to Lebesgue measure on $\R_+$,
322: Fubini's Theorem applied twice shows that $\Psi(h)$ can be expressed as
323: \begin{align}
324: \Psi(h)(x)&=\sum_{n=0}^{+\infty} \frac{1}{m^n}\E\left(h\left(x Vm^n\right)\right)=
325: \E\left(\sum_{n=0}^{+\infty} \frac{1}{m^n} h\left(x Vm^n\right)\right)\notag\\
326: &= \E\left(\sum_{n=0}^{+\infty} \frac{1}{m^n} \int_0^{+\infty} h'(u)\ind{u\leq x
327: Vm^n}\,du \right)\notag \\
328: &= \E\left( \int_0^{+\infty} h'(u)\sum_{n=0}^{+\infty} \frac{1}{m^n} \ind{u\leq x
329: Vm^n}\,du \right).\label{Lang}
330: \end{align}
331: The function $\Psi(h)$ is thus well defined.
332:
333: Since $h'(0)>0$, Fatou's Lemma applied successively gives the relation
334: \begin{multline*}
335: \liminf_{x\to 0} \frac{\Psi(h)(x)}{x}\geq
336: \sum_{n=0}^{+\infty} \liminf_{x\to 0} \frac{m-1}{m^n}\E\left(\frac{h\left(x
337: Vm^n\right)}{x}\right)\\
338: \geq \sum_{n=0}^{+\infty} \frac{m-1}{m^n}\E\left(\liminf_{x\to 0}\frac{h\left(x
339: Vm^n\right)}{x}\right)
340: =\sum_{n=0}^{+\infty} (m-1)\E\left(V\right)h'(0)=+\infty,
341: \end{multline*}
342: therefore the ratio $\Psi(h)(x)/x$ diverges as $x\to 0$.
343:
344: By using representation~\eqref{Lang} of $\Psi(h)$, we have
345: \begin{multline*}
346: (m-1)\Psi(h)(x)
347: = m\E\left(\int_{0}^{xV} h'(u)\,du \right)\\+\E\left(\int_{xV}^{V}
348: \frac{1}{m^{\lfloor \log_m(u/xV)\rfloor}}h'(u)\,du \right)+ \E\left(\int_{V}^{+\infty}
349: \frac{1}{m^{\lfloor \log_m(u/xV)\rfloor}}h'(u)\,du \right),
350: \end{multline*}
351: where $\lfloor y \rfloor$ is the integer part of $y\in\R$. One first shows that only the
352: central term of the right hand side plays a role in the asymptotic behavior of $\Psi(h)$
353: at the first order.
354:
355: For the first term, note that, if $\|h''\|_{\infty}$ is the $L_\infty$ norm of $h''$,
356: \begin{multline*}
357: \left|\frac{1}{x}\E\left(\int_{0}^{xV} h'(u)\,du \right)\right|
358: \\\leq \frac{1}{x}\E\left(\int_{0}^{xV} \left(h'(0)+u \|h''\|_{\infty}\right)\,du \right)
359: \leq h'(0)\E(V)+\frac{x}{2}\E(V^2)\|h''\|_{\infty}
360: \end{multline*}
361:
362: For $u\geq V$, one has
363: \[
364: x m^{\lfloor \log_m(u/xV)\rfloor}\geq x m^{\lfloor \log_m(1/x)\rfloor}\geq
365: x m^{\log_m(1/x)-1}=m^{-1},
366: \]
367: and hence,
368: \[
369: \frac{1}{x}\E\left(\int_{V}^{+\infty}
370: \frac{1}{ m^{\lfloor \log_m(u/xV)\rfloor}}|h'(u)|\,du \right)
371: \leq m \int_0^{+\infty} |h'(u)|\, du.
372: \]
373: By gathering these estimations, it follows that the following equivalence
374: \begin{multline*}
375: \frac{\Psi(h)(x)}{x}\sim \E\left(\int_{xV}^{V} \frac{1}{x m^{\lfloor \log_m(u/xV)\rfloor}}h'(u)\,du \right)
376: \\ = \E\left(V\int_{xV}^{V} m^{\{ \log_m(u/xV)\}}\frac{h'(u)}{u}\,du\right),
377: \end{multline*}
378: holds as $x\to 0$,
379: with $\{y\}=y-\lfloor y \rfloor$, the fractional value of $y\in\R$. The above equivalence can be rewritten as
380: \begin{multline*}
381: \frac{\Psi(h)(x)}{x}\sim\E\left(V\int_{xV}^{V} m^{\{ \log_m(u/xV)\}}\frac{h'(u)-h'(0)}{u}\,du\right)
382: \\ +h'(0)\E\left(V\int_{xV}^{V} \frac{m^{\{ \log_m(u/xV)\}}}{u}\,du\right)
383: \end{multline*}
384: Due to the boundedness of $h''$ and the integrability of $V^2$, the first term in the
385: right hand side of the above equation is bounded as $x$ goes to $0$. Hence, only the second term
386: has to be considered. For $x<1$, we have
387: \begin{align*}
388: \int_{xV}^{V} &\frac{m^{\{ \log_m(u/xV)\}}}{u}\,du
389: =\int_1^{1/x} \frac{m^{\{\log_m(u)\}}}{u}\,du\\
390: &=\sum_{{k\geq 0:m^k\leq 1/x}}
391: \int_{m^k}^{m^{k+1}} \frac{m^{\{\log_m(u)\}}}{u}\,du+O(1)
392: =(m-1)\lfloor -\log_m(x)\rfloor +O(1)
393: \end{align*}
394: and the result follows.
395: \end{proof}
396:
397: Asymptotic behavior of algorithms with an underlying tree structure has been
398: extensively investigated, see Flajolet \etal~\cite{Flajolet:14}, Mohamed and
399: Robert~\cite{Mohamed:01} and Mahmoud~\cite{Mahmoud:02} for a general presentation.
400: By using the terminology of Flajolet \etal~\cite{Flajolet:14}, for non-negative sequences
401: $(\lambda_n)$ and $(\mu_n)$, a series like
402: \begin{equation}\label{eqaus}
403: G(x)=\sum_{n\geq 0} \lambda_n g(\mu_n x),
404: \end{equation}
405: for some function $g$ is defined as an {\em harmonic sum}. Because of the integration of the
406: random variable $V$ and given that one wants the weakest assumptions on this random variable,
407: series~\eqref{Branaire} could be seen as a \cbstart special case \cbend of harmonic sums.
408: The fact that the sequences $(\lambda_n)$ and $(\mu_n)$ are specific in Expression~\eqref{Branaire}
409: is not a real restriction, see Robert~\cite{Robert:09}.
410:
411: Flajolet \etal~\cite{Flajolet:14} derives the asymptotic expansion of $G(x)$ when
412: $x$ goes to $0$ or $+\infty$ by using Mellin transform techniques. For $s\in\C$, if
413: $h^*(s)$ is the Mellin transform of $h$, i.e. for $s$ in some vertical strip of $\C$,
414: \[
415: h^*(s)=\int_0^{+\infty} h(x) \,x^{s-1}\,dx,
416: \]
417: it is easy to check that the Mellin transform of $\Psi(h)$ is given by
418: \[
419: \Psi(h)^*(s)=\frac{1}{1-m^{-(s+1)}}\E\left(V^{-s}\right) h^*(s).
420: \]
421: Following the methods of Flajolet \etal~\cite{Flajolet:14}, to derive the asymptotic behavior
422: of $\Psi(h)(x)$ as $x$ goes to infinity, one has to identify the first singularity of
423: $\Psi(h)^*$ on the right of the maximal vertical strip where it is defined. In particular,
424: some conditions on the finiteness of some fractional moments of the random variable $V$ have to be
425: assumed (as well as growth conditions on $h^*$). From this point of view, our approach is
426: minimal since only the finiteness of $\E(V^2)$ and differentiability conditions on $h$ are assumed. It turns out that it is important
427: as it will be seen in the following sections, since in practice little is known on the
428: fractional moments of the corresponding variable $V$.
429:
430: \section{The Exploration Rate in the Uniform Model}\label{uniform}
431: In this section, nodes are selected at random with uniform probability in
432: the tree with depth less than $N$. The variable $R_N$ is the size of the underlying
433: sub-tree (or sampled tree) containing the selected nodes. The asymptotic behavior of
434: $\rho_N(\lambda)=\E(R_N)/\E(T_N)$, the fraction of discovered nodes, when $N$ tends to
435: infinity is investigated. In the second part of this section, the ratio
436: $\mathrm{var}(R_N)/\E(T_N)$ is analyzed.
437:
438: \subsection{First Order Asymptotics}
439:
440: In the uniform case, the limiting behavior of the ratio $\rho_N(\lambda)$ when $N$ tends to infinity is given by the following result.
441:
442: \begin{theorem}\label{ThFirst}\label{rho1}
443: The ratio of the average size $R_N$ of the sampled tree to
444: the total average size of the tree $\E(T_N)$ satisfies the relation
445: \begin{equation}
446: \label{defrholambda}
447: \rho(\lambda)\stackrel{\text{def.}}{=}\lim_{N\to+\infty}\rho_N(\lambda) =\sum_{n=0}^{+\infty} \frac{m-1}{m^{n+1}}\left(1-\E\left(\exp\left(-\lambda
448: \sum_{i= 0}^{n}Z_i\right)\right)\right).
449: \end{equation}
450: If additionally the condition $\E\left(G^2\right)<+\infty$ holds then
451: \begin{equation}\label{rate}
452: \lim_{\lambda \to 0} \frac{\rho(\lambda)}{\lambda\log_m(1/\lambda)} = 1.
453: \end{equation}
454: \end{theorem}
455:
456: Relation~\eqref{rate} shows that the rate of increase of the discovery process is infinite
457: near the origin. This implies that with only a few selected nodes one has the impression of rapidly discovering the whole network.
458:
459: \begin{proof}
460: By conditioning on the tree, the conditional probability that node $(N-n,\ell)$ does not
461: belong to the sampled tree is
462: \[
463: \left.\P\left( \rule{0mm}{4mm}{\cal N}\left({\cal T}^{N-n,\ell}_{n}\right)\not=0\right| {\cal T}\right)=
464: 1-\exp\left(-\lambda T_{n}^{N-n,\ell}\right).
465: \]
466: By summing-up these relations, one obtains that the expected value of $R_N$, i.e., the average
467: number of nodes in the sampled tree, is given by
468: \begin{align*}
469: \E(R_N)&=\sum_{n=0}^{N} \E(Z_{N-n})
470: \left(1-\E\left(\exp\left(-\lambda T_{n}\right)\right)\right)\\
471: &=\sum_{n=0}^{N} m^{N-n}\left(1-\E\left(\exp\left(-\lambda \sum_{i = 0}^{n}Z_i\right)\right)\right).
472: \end{align*}
473: The limit when $N \to \infty$ of the ratio $\rho_N(\lambda)$ is then given by
474: $$
475: \rho(\lambda)\stackrel{\text{def.}}{=}\lim_{N\to +\infty} \rho_N(\lambda) =\sum_{n=0}^{+\infty}
476: \frac{m-1}{m^{n+1}}\left(1-\E\left(\exp\left(-\lambda \sum_{i=0}^{n}Z_i\right)\right)\right)
477: $$
478: since $\E(T_N) \sim m^{N+1}/(m-1)$ for large $N$. This proves the first equality stated in Theorem~\ref{ThFirst}.
479:
480: We now study the behavior of $\rho(\lambda)$ when $\lambda$ goes to $0$. Since $\E(G^2)<+\infty$,
481: Kesten-Stigum's Theorem ensures the existence of a
482: random variable $W$ such that $\P(W>0)=1$ (because of the assumption on the
483: distribution of $G$) and $\E(W)=1$ (See Lyons and Peres~\cite{Lyons:07}) and that, almost surely,
484: \begin{equation}
485: \label{defW}
486: \lim_{n\to+\infty} \frac{Z_n}{m^n}=W.
487: \end{equation}
488: Let us define
489: $$
490: f(\lambda)\stackrel{\text{def.}}{=}\sum_{n=0}^{+\infty}
491: \frac{m-1}{m^{n+1}}\left(1-\E\left(\exp\left(-\lambda W \frac{m^{n+1} -1}{m-1}\right)\right)\right).
492: $$
493: Then,
494: \begin{multline}\label{aux:1}
495: \frac{|\rho(\lambda)-f(\lambda)|}{\lambda} \\ \leq
496: \sum_{n=0}^{+\infty}
497: \frac{m-1}{\lambda m^{n+1}}\left|\E\left(\exp\left(-\lambda
498: \sum_{i=0}^{n}Z_i\right)\right)-\E\left(\exp\left(-\lambda W
499: \frac{m^{n+1}-1}{m-1}\right)\right)\right|.
500: \end{multline}
501:
502: Since $W$ is integrable, Lebesgue's dominated convergence Theorem gives that
503: \begin{multline}\label{eqaux:1}
504: \lim_{\lambda\to 0} \frac{1}{\lambda}
505: \E\left(\exp\left(-\lambda
506: \sum_{i=0}^{n}Z_i\right)-\exp\left(-\lambda W \frac{m^{n+1}-1}{m-1}\right) \right)\\=
507: \E\left(\sum_{i=0}^{n}Z_i- W \frac{m^{n+1}-1}{m-1}\right)=0.
508: \end{multline}
509: We have
510: \begin{multline*}
511: \frac{1}{m^{n+1}\lambda}
512: \left|\E\left(\exp\left(-\lambda\sum_{i=0}^{n}Z_i\right)\right)-\E\left(\exp\left(-\lambda W \frac{m^{n+1}-1}{m-1}\right)\right)\right|
513: \\ \leq \frac{1}{m^{n+1}} \sum_{i=0}^{n}\E |Z_i -m^i W|.
514: \end{multline*}
515: From Athreya and Ney~\cite[Theorem~1, page~54]{Athreya:04}, for $n\geq 1$, there
516: exists a sequence $(W^i)$ of i.i.d. random variables with the same distribution as $W$
517: such that
518: \begin{equation}\label{CV}
519: Z_n-m^n W=\sum_{i=1}^{Z_n} (1-W^{i}).
520: \end{equation}
521: By using Cauchy-Shwartz's Inequality, we obtain
522: \begin{align}
523: \E\left(\left|Z_n-m^n W\right|\right)|&
524: \leq \sqrt{\E\left((Z_n -m^n W)^2\right)}\notag \\
525: &=\Var(1-W)\sqrt{\E(Z_n)}\notag \\
526: &=\Var(1-W) m^{n/2}.\label{CS}
527: \end{align}
528: From the above inequality, we deduce that
529: \begin{multline*}
530: \frac{1}{m^{n+1}\lambda}
531: \left|\E\left(\exp\left(-\lambda\sum_{i=0}^{n}Z_i\right)\right)-\E\left(\exp\left(-\lambda W \frac{m^{n+1}-1}{m-1}\right)\right)\right|
532: \\\leq \frac{\Var(1-W)}{\sqrt{m}-1} \frac{1}{m^{(n+1)/2}}.
533: \end{multline*}
534: Relation~\eqref{eqaux:1} and Lebesgue's Theorem then imply that
535: \[
536: \lim_{\lambda\to 0}\frac{\rho(\lambda)-f(\lambda)}{\lambda}=0.
537: \]
538: Hence, up to an expression which is of the order of $o(\lambda)$, the behavior at $0$ of
539: $\rho(\lambda)$ is equivalent to the behavior of $f(\lambda)$ as $\lambda$ becomes small.
540:
541:
542: By using Proposition~\ref{asympprop}, we have by taking $h(u)=1-e^{-u}$ and $V=W m/(m-1)$,
543: \[
544: \sum_{n=0}^{+\infty} \frac{m-1}{m^{n+1}}\left(1-\E\left(\exp\left(-x V m^{n}\right)\right)\right) =\Psi(h)(x)\sim x \log_m (1/x)
545: \]
546: as $x \to 0$. To conclude the proof, we note that
547: $$
548: \lim_{x \to 0} \frac{\Psi(h)(x) -f(x)}{x\log_m x}=0
549: $$
550: and the result follows.
551: \end{proof}
552:
553: \subsection{Second Order Properties}
554:
555: The results obtained in the previous section show that the size of the sampled tree is of
556: the same order of magnitude as the original tree when the probability of selecting a node is fixed. When this probability is very small (i.e., for small $\lambda$), the
557: speed of the discovery process is even very fast. In this section, we evaluate the second
558: moment of the random variable $R_N$ in order to estimate the dispersion of the size of the
559: sampled tree around the mean value.
560:
561: \cbstart In the rest of this section, we use the following notation: If $(n,\ell)$ and $(n',\ell')$ are two nodes of the
562: tree, the relation $(n',\ell') < (n,\ell)$ indicates that the nodes are distinct and
563: that $(n',\ell')$ is a node of the sub-tree whose root is $(n,\ell)$. \cbend
564:
565: \begin{proposition}[Asymptotic behavior of the variance]\label{vartree}
566: When the size $N$ of the original tree goes to infinity, the variance of the size of the
567: sampled tree is such that
568: \begin{enumerate}
569: \item If the random variable $G$ is not deterministic and $\E(G^2)<+\infty$, then
570: \begin{equation}\label{rho21}
571: \rho_2^{(1)}(\lambda)\stackrel{\mathrm{def}}{=} \lim_{N\to \infty}\frac{\Var(R_N)}{\E(T_N)^2} = \frac{\Var(G)}{m^2-m} \rho(\lambda)^2
572: \end{equation}
573: where $\rho(\lambda)$ is defined by Equation~\eqref{defrholambda}.
574: \item If $G\equiv m$ almost surely, then
575: \begin{multline} \label{rho22}
576: \rho^{(2)}_2(\lambda)\stackrel{\mathrm{def}}{=} \lim_{N\to \infty}\frac{\Var(R_N)}{\E(T_N)} \
577: \ =
578: \frac{m-1}{m}\sum_{n=1}^{+\infty}
579: \frac{1}{m^n}\left[
580: \E\left(e^{-\lambda T_n}\right)\left(1-\E\left(e^{-\lambda T_n}\right)\right) \right. \\
581: \left. +2\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\E\left(e^{-\lambda T_{n{-}k{-}1}} Z_{n-k} \E\left(e^{-\lambda T_{k}
582: }\right)^{Z_{n-k}-1}
583: \E\left(e^{-\lambda T_{k}}\left(1-e^{-\lambda T_{k}}\right)\right)\right)\right].
584: \end{multline}
585: where $T_n = (m^{n+1}-1)/(m-1)$.
586: \end{enumerate}
587: \end{proposition}
588: It is worth noting that the case of a deterministic offspring distribution is degenerate
589: in the sense that the standard deviation of the size of the tree discovered by means of
590: the traceroute algorithm does not scale with the size of the tree (and the discovered
591: tree). The coefficient of variation of the random variables $R_N$ tends to 0 when $N$
592: goes to infinity.
593:
594: \begin{proof}
595: \cbstart Using Representation~\eqref{relfond} for the size of the sampled tree, one obtains by conditioning on the tree the relation
596: $$
597: R_N-\E(R_N) =A_{N,1}+A_{N,2}+A_{N,3},
598: $$
599: where
600: \begin{align*}
601: A_{N,1} &= \sum_{n=0}^N\sum_{\ell=1}^{Z_{N-n}} \Delta^\ell_n,\\
602: A_{N,2} &= \sum_{n=0}^N (Z_{N-n} - \E(Z_{N-n})) \P\left({\cal N}(\T_{n})\not=0\right),\\
603: A_{N,3} &= \sum_{n=0}^N \sum_{\ell=1}^{Z_{N-n}} \left(1-\exp(-\lambda T^{N-n,\ell}_n)-\P(\cal{N}(\T_n)\neq 0)\right)
604: \end{align*}
605: with
606: $
607: \Delta^\ell_n =\ind{{\cal N}(\T_{n}^{N-n,\ell})\not=0} - (1-\exp(-\lambda
608: T_n^{N-n,\ell})).
609: $
610: Note that if distinct nodes $(n,l)$ and $(n',l')$ cannot be compared with the relation
611: $''{<}''$ then, conditionally on the tree ${\cal T}$, the corresponding random variables
612: $\Delta^\ell_n$ and $\Delta^{\ell'}_{n'}$ are {\em centered} and {\em independent}.
613: In addition, note that $ A_{N,1} = R_N-\E(R_N~|~\T)$.
614:
615: To study the variance of the random variable $R_N$, we separately consider the second
616: moments of the terms $A_{N,1}$, $A_{N,2}$ and $A_{N,3}$. Of course, the terms $A_{N,2}$ and $A_{N,3}$ are non null if
617: and only if the variable $G$ is not deterministic.
618:
619: \cbend
620:
621: \subsection*{The second moment of $A_{N,1}$}
622: \cbstart
623: It is shown that the second moment of $A_{N,1}$ is of the order of $m^N$.
624: By using the independence in the
625: selection of nodes in the tree and the fact that the random variables $\Delta_n^\ell$ are
626: centered conditionally on $\T$, we have the identity
627: \[
628: \E(A_{N,1}^2~|~\T) = \sum_{(n,\ell)\in \T_N}\Var(\Delta^\ell_n~|~\T) + 2\sum_{\substack{(n,\ell), (n',\ell')\in{\cal T}_N \\(n',\ell')<(n,\ell)}} \E\left(\Delta^\ell_n\Delta^{\ell'}_{n'}~|~\T\right).
629: \]
630: Conditioning on the state of the tree, when $(n',\ell')<(n,\ell)$, one has the identity
631: \[
632: \E\left(\Delta^\ell_n\Delta^{\ell'}_{n'}\mid {\cal T}\right)=
633: \exp\left(-\lambda T^{N-n,\ell}_{n}\right)\left(
634: 1-\exp\left(-\lambda T^{N-n',\ell'}_{n'}\right)\right).
635: \]
636: By symmetry, the above computations yield the following relation for the second moment $\E(A_{N,1}^2)$
637: \begin{align*}
638: U_N&\stackrel{\text{def.}}{=} \E(A_{N,1}^2)-\sum_{n=0}^N\E(Z_{N-n})\Var(\Delta_n^1)\\
639: &= 2\E\left(\sum_{n=0}^N \E(Z_{N-n}) \exp\left(-\lambda T_{n}^{N-n,1}\right)\sum_{\substack{(N-n',l')\in{\cal T}_N\\ (N-n',l')<(N-n,1)}}
640: \left(1-\exp\left(-\lambda T_{n'}^{N-n',\ell'}\right)\right)\right),
641: \end{align*}
642: where $\Var(\Delta_n)$ is the variance of the random variable $\ind{\mathcal{N}(\T_n)\neq 0}-\P(\mathcal{N}(\T_n)\neq 0)$.
643: \cbend
644:
645: For two nodes of the tree such that $(N{-}n',l')<(N{-}n,1)$, Equation~\eqref{eq1st} gives
646: the relation
647: \[
648: T_n\stackrel{\text{dist.}}{=}
649: \sum_{k=0}^{n-n'-1}\widetilde{Z}_{k}+
650: \sum_{\ell'=1}^{\widetilde{Z}_{n-n'}} {T}_{n'}^{N-n',\ell'},
651: \]
652: where $(\widetilde{Z}_{k}, k\geq 0)$ denotes another independent Galton-Watson process
653: independent of $(Z_n, n \geq 0)$ with the same offspring distribution. By using this relation, we have
654: \begin{multline*}
655: \E\left(\exp\left(-\lambda T_{n}^{N-n,1}\right)\sum_{\substack{(N-n',l')\in{\cal T}_N\\ (N-n',l')<(N-n,1)}}\left(1-\exp\left(-\lambda T_{n'}^{N-n',\ell'}\right)\right)\right) \\ = \E\left(\sum_{n'=0}^{n-1} \sum_{\ell'=1}^{Z_{n-n'}} \exp\left(-\lambda T_{n}^{N-n,\ell}\right)\left(1-\exp\left(-\lambda T_{n'}^{N-n',\ell'}\right)\right)\right)\\
656: = \E\left(\sum_{n'=0}^{n-1} \exp\left(-\lambda\sum_{k=0}^{n-n'-1} Z_k\right) \E(V_{n-n'})\right),
657: \end{multline*}
658: where
659: $$
660: V_{n-n'} = \sum_{\ell'=1}^{Z_{n-n'}} \exp\left(-\lambda\sum_{\ell''=1}^{Z_{n-n'}} T_{n'}^{N-n',\ell''}\right)\left(1-\exp\left(-\lambda T_{n'}^{N-n',\ell'}\right)\right).
661: $$
662: By using the independence of the different trees $\mathcal{T}_{n'}^{N-n',\ell'}$ for $\ell =1, \ldots, Z_{n-n'}$, we have
663: \begin{multline*}
664: \E(V_{n-n'}\mid Z_0,\ldots, Z_{n-n'-1}) \\ = \E\left(Z_{n-n'}\left(\E\left(
665: e^{-\lambda T_{n'}}\right)\right)^{Z_{n-n'}-1}\mid Z_0,\ldots,
666: Z_{n-n'-1}\right)\E\left( e^{-\lambda T_{n'}} \left(1-e^{-\lambda T_{n'}}\right)\right).
667: \end{multline*}
668: It follows that by using the above expression for $U_N$, one obtains
669: \begin{multline*}
670: U_N=2\sum_{n=0}^N \E(Z_{N-n})\sum_{n'=0}^{n-1}\E\left(\exp\left(-\lambda \sum_{k=0}^{n-n'-1}{Z}_{k}\right) \right.\\
671: \left.\rule{0mm}{7mm} Z_{n-n'} \E\left(\rule{0mm}{4mm}\exp\left(-\lambda T_{n'}\right)\right)^{Z_{n-n'}-1}
672: \E\left(\rule{0mm}{4mm}\exp\left(-\lambda T_{n'}\right)\left(1-\exp\left(-\lambda
673: T_{n'}\right)\right)\right) \right).
674: \end{multline*}
675: Dividing by $\E(T_N)$, we have
676: \begin{multline*}
677: \frac{U_N}{\E(T_N)}=\frac{2(m-1)}{m-1/m^n}\sum_{n=0}^N \frac{1}{m^n}\sum_{n'=0}^{n-1}\E\left(
678: \exp\left(-\lambda \sum_{k=0}^{n-n'-1}{Z}_{k}\right) \right.\\
679: \left.\rule{0mm}{7mm} Z_{n-n'}\E\left(\rule{0mm}{4mm}\exp\left(-\lambda T_{n'}\right)\right)^{Z_{n-n'}-1}
680: \E\left(\rule{0mm}{4mm}\exp\left(-\lambda T_{n'}\right)\left(1-\exp\left(-\lambda T_{n'}\right)\right)\right)\right).
681: \end{multline*}
682: By letting $N$ go to infinity, we finally obtain the relation for the second moment of the random variable $A_{N,1}$
683: \begin{multline}\label{A1}
684: \lim_{N\to \infty}\frac{\E(A_{N,1}^2)}{\E(T_N)} =
685: \frac{m-1}{m}\sum_{n=1}^{+\infty}
686: \frac{1}{m^n}\left[
687: \E\left(e^{-\lambda T_n}\right)\left(1-\E\left(e^{-\lambda T_n}\right)\right) \right. \\
688: \left. +2\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\E\left(e^{-\lambda T_{n{-}k{-}1}} Z_{n-k} \E\left(e^{-\lambda T_{k}}\right)^{Z_{n-k}-1}
689: \E\left(e^{-\lambda T_{k}}\left(1-e^{-\lambda T_{k}}\right)\right)\right)\right].
690: \end{multline}
691:
692: \subsection*{The second moment of $A_{N,2}$}
693: We have
694: \begin{multline*}
695: \frac{A_{N,2}}{m^{N}} = \sum_{n=0}^{N} \frac{\left(Z_{N-n} - \E(Z_{N-n})\right)}{m^{N-n}}\frac{(1-\E(e^{-\lambda T_n}))}{m^n}
696: \\= \sum_{n=0}^{N} \left(\frac{Z_{N-n}}{m^{N-n}} - 1\right) \frac{(1-\E(e^{-\lambda T_n}))}{m^n}.
697: \end{multline*}
698: If $\|H\|_2=\sqrt{\E(H^2)}$ for some random variable $H$, then we have
699: \[
700: \left\|\frac{A_{N,2}}{m^{N}}-(W - 1)\sum_{n=0}^{N} \frac{(1-\E(e^{-\lambda T_n}))}{m^n}\right\|_2 \leq \sum_{n=0}^{N} \left\|W-\frac{Z_{N-n}}{m^{N-n}}\right\|_2\frac{(1-\E(e^{-\lambda T_n}))}{m^n},
701: \]
702: where $W$ is defined by Equation~\eqref{defW}. \cbstart Athreya and Ney~\cite[Theorem~2, page~9]{Athreya:04} gives that the sequence
703: $\left(\left\|W-{Z_{n}}/{m^{n}}\right\|_2\right)$ converges to $0$. This implies
704: \begin{equation}\label{A2}
705: \lim_{N\to+\infty} \frac{\E(A_{N,2}^2)}{\E(T_N)^2}=\frac{(m-1)\Var(G)}{m^3}
706: \left(\sum_{n=0}^{+\infty} \frac{(1-\E(e^{-\lambda T_n}))}{m^n}\right)^2.
707: \end{equation}
708: since
709: $\E\left((1-W)^2\right)={\Var(G)}/{m(m-1)}$.
710:
711: \subsection{Second moment of $A_{N,3}$}
712: Clearly
713: $$
714: \|A_{N,3}\|_2 \leq \sum_{n=0}^N\left\| \sum_{\ell=1}^{Z_{N-n}} \exp(-\lambda T^{N-n,\ell}_n) - \E(\exp(-\lambda T_n))\right\|_2 ,
715: $$
716: and since conditionally on $Z_{N-n}$, the random variables $\exp(-\lambda T^{N-n,\ell}_n)$
717: for $\ell = 1, \ldots, Z_{N-n}$ are independent and identically distributed with mean
718: $\E(\exp(- \lambda T_n))$, we then have
719: \begin{align*}
720: \left\|\sum_{\ell=1}^{Z_{N-n}} \exp(-\lambda T^{N-n,\ell}_n) - \E(\exp(-\lambda T_n)) \right\|_2^2 &= \E(Z_{N-n})\Var(\exp(-\lambda T_n))\\ & \leq m^{(N-n)}.
721: \end{align*}
722: It follows that
723: $$
724: \|A_{N,3}\|_2 \leq \frac{m^{(N+1)/2}}{\sqrt{m}-1}.
725: $$
726: and then
727: \begin{equation}
728: \label{limA3N}
729: \limsup_{N\to\infty}\frac{\E(A_{N,3}^2)}{m^N} \leq \frac{m}{(\sqrt{m}-1)^2}.
730: \end{equation}
731:
732: Since $R_N-\E(R_N)=A_{N,1}+A_{N,2}+A_{N,3}$,
733: %%it is easily checked that $$\Var(R_N) = E(A_{N,1}^2) + \Var(A_{N,2}+A_{N,3}).$$
734: Relations~\eqref{A1}, \eqref{A2} and \eqref{limA3N} then imply that
735: \begin{enumerate}
736: \item When $G$ is non-deterministic, the expression $A_{N,2}$ dominates in $R_N-\E(R_N)$
737: so that $\Var(R_N)/\E(T_N)^2$ is converging to the right hand side of Equation~\eqref{A2}.
738: \item If $G\equiv m$, the term $A_{N,3}$ vanishes so that $\Var(R_N)/\E(T_N)$ is converging to
739: the right hand side of Equation~\eqref{A1}.
740: \end{enumerate}
741: Equations~\eqref{rho21} and \eqref{rho22} are established.
742: \end{proof}
743:
744: \cbend
745:
746: As for the first moment of $R_N$, we turn now to the analysis of the behavior of
747: of the second order characteristics defined by Equations~\eqref{rho21} and \eqref{rho22}
748: when $\lambda$ is in the neighborhood of $0$. For the non deterministic case, we have from Proposition~\ref{rho1}
749: \[
750: \lim_{\lambda\to 0} \frac{\rho^{(1)}_2(\lambda)}{(\lambda\log_m(1/\lambda))^2} =\frac{\Var(G)}{(m^2-m)}.
751: \]
752: In Proposition~\ref{vartree}, the expression of $\rho^{(2)}_2(\lambda)$ is defined a
753: priori only for a deterministic offspring distribution, but can be extended to any offspring distribution by using the right hand side of
754: Equation~\eqref{rho22}. In the following, we study the behavior of
755: $\rho_2^{(2)}(\lambda)$ for an arbitrary offspring distribution.
756:
757: \begin{lemma}[Asymptotic Behavior of $\lambda{\to}\rho^{(2)}_2(\lambda)$ at $0$]\label{Rho22}
758: Provided that the random variable $G$ has a finite second moment, the function $\rho^{(2)}_2(\lambda)$ defined by
759: Equation~\eqref{rho22} is such that
760: \begin{equation}\label{rate2}
761: \lim_{\lambda\searrow 0}\frac{\rho^{(2)}_2(\lambda)}{\lambda(\log_m\lambda)^2}=1.
762: \end{equation}
763: \end{lemma}
764:
765: \begin{proof}
766: Define
767: $$
768: f_a(\lambda)\stackrel{\text{def.}}{=} \sum_{n=1}^{+\infty} \frac{m-1}{m^n}\left(\E\left(e^{-\lambda T_n}\right)\left(1-\E\left(e^{-\lambda T_n}\right)\right)\right)
769: $$
770: and
771: \begin{multline*}
772: f_b(\lambda)\stackrel{\text{def.}}{=} \\ \sum_{n=1}^{+\infty} \frac{m-1}{m^n} \sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\E\left(e^{-\lambda T_{n{-}k{-}1}} Z_{n-k}\E\left(e^{-\lambda T_{k}}\right)^{Z_{n-k}-1}\right)\E\left(e^{-\lambda T_{k}}\left(1-e^{-\lambda T_{k}}\right)\right).
773: \end{multline*}
774: Equation~\eqref{rho22} gives that
775: ${m}\rho^{(2)}_2(\lambda)=2f_b(\lambda)+f_a(\lambda)$.
776:
777: \medskip
778:
779: \paragraph{\em Asymptotic behavior of $f_a$}
780: With similar arguments as in the proof of
781: Theorem~\ref{ThFirst} the asymptotic behavior of $f_a(\lambda)$ when $\lambda$ goes to
782: $0$ is equivalent to the asymptotic behavior of
783: \[
784: \sum_{n=1}^{+\infty}
785: \frac{m-1}{m^n}\left(\E\left(\exp\left(-\lambda \frac{W m^{n+1}}{m-1} \right)\right)\left(1-\E\left(\exp\left(-\lambda \frac{W m^{n+1}}{m-1} \right)\right)\right)\right).
786: \]
787: If $W_1$ and $W_2$ are two independent random variables with the same distribution as $W$,
788: the above series can be rewritten as
789: \begin{multline*}
790: \sum_{n=1}^{+\infty}
791: \frac{m-1}{m^n}
792: \E\left(\exp\left(-\lambda \frac{W_1 m^{n+1}}{m-1} \right)
793: \left(1-\E\left(\exp\left(-\lambda \frac{W_2 m^{n+1}}{m-1} \right)\right)\right)\right)
794: \\=
795: (m-1)\sum_{n=1}^{+\infty}
796: \left(\frac{1}{m^n} \E(h(\lambda(W_1+W_2)m^n/(m-1)))-\E(h(\lambda W_1m^n/(m-1)))\right),
797: \end{multline*}
798: with $h(u)=1-e^{-u}$. Consequently,
799: \begin{equation}\label{G1}
800: \lim_{\lambda\to 0} \frac{f_a(\lambda)}{-\lambda\log_m \lambda}=m
801: \end{equation}
802: by Proposition~\ref{asympprop}.
803:
804: \medskip
805: \paragraph{\em Asymptotic behavior of $f_b$} Let us fix some $\varepsilon >0$ and assume that $\lambda <\varepsilon$. The function $f_b(\lambda)$ can be rewritten as
806: \begin{equation}
807: \label{decompofb}
808: f_b(\lambda) = \sum_{n=1}^{\lfloor \log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)\rfloor} \frac{m-1}{m^n} S(n;\lambda) + \sum_{n=\lfloor \log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)\rfloor+1}^\infty \frac{m-1}{m^n} S(n;\lambda)
809: \end{equation}
810: where
811: $$
812: S(n;\lambda) = \sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\E\left(e^{-\lambda T_{n{-}k{-}1}} Z_{n-k}\E\left(e^{-\lambda T_{k}}\right)^{Z_{n-k}-1}\right)\E\left(e^{-\lambda T_{k}}\left(1-e^{-\lambda T_{k}}\right)\right)
813: $$
814: Since for $x\geq 0$, $e^{-x}(1-e^{-x}) \leq x$, we easily deduce that for all $n \geq 1$
815: $$
816: S(n;\lambda) \leq \sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\E\left( Z_{n-k}\right) \E\left(\lambda T_{k}\right) \leq \frac{n \lambda m^{n+1}}{m-1}
817: $$
818: and then
819: $$
820: \sum_{n=1}^{\lfloor \log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)\rfloor} \frac{m-1}{m^n} S(n;\lambda) \leq \frac{m}{2}\lambda \log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda) (\log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)+1).
821: $$
822:
823: The second term in the right hand side of Equation~\eqref{decompofb} can be written as
824: \begin{multline}
825: \label{termtech2}
826: \sum_{n=\lfloor \log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)\rfloor+1}^\infty \frac{m-1}{m^n} S( \lfloor \log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)\rfloor +1;\lambda)
827: \\
828: + \sum_{n=\lfloor \log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)\rfloor+1}^\infty \frac{m-1}{m^n} \left(S( n;\lambda) - S( \lfloor \log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)\rfloor +1;\lambda) \right).
829: \end{multline}
830: By using the fact that for $x>0$ and $\alpha>0$, $xe^{-\alpha x}\leq 1/\alpha$, we get that
831: $$
832: S( \lfloor \log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)\rfloor +1;\lambda) \leq \frac{1}{\E(e^{-\lambda T_k})} \sum_{k=0}^{ \lfloor \log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)\rfloor} \frac{\lambda\E(T_k)}{-\log\E(e^{-\lambda T_k})}.
833: $$
834: The relation $\E\left(\exp\left(-\lambda T_k\right)\right) \geq
835: \exp\left(-\lambda \E(T_k)\right)
836: \geq \exp(- m\varepsilon/(m-1))$ holds by Jensen's Inequality under the condition that $k \leq \lfloor
837: \log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)\rfloor $. In addition,
838: $$
839: \E(T_n^2) \leq \left(\sum_{i=0}^n \sqrt{\E(Z_i^2)}\right)^2 \leq \frac{m^{2n}}{(m-1)^2} \left(\frac{\sigma^2}{m-1}+1\right) ,
840: $$
841: where $\sigma^2$ is the variance of the random variable $G$, so that for $k \leq \lfloor \log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)\rfloor $
842: \begin{equation}
843: \label{rapportmoment}
844: \frac{\lambda\E(T_k^2)}{\E(T_k)} \leq \frac{\lambda m^k m^k}{(m-1)(m m^k-1)} \left(\frac{\sigma^2}{m-1}+1\right) \leq \frac{\varepsilon}{(m-1)^2} \left(\frac{\sigma^2}{m-1}+1\right).
845: \end{equation}
846: Since for $x \geq 0$, $e^{-x} \leq 1-x+{x^2}/{2}$, we have
847: $$
848: \E(e^{-\lambda T_k}) \leq 1 -\lambda\E(T_k) +\frac{\E\left((\lambda T_k)^2\right)}{2} \leq 1-\lambda \E(T_k) \left(1- \frac{\varepsilon}{(m-1)^2} \left(\frac{\sigma^2}{m-1}+1\right) \right).
849: $$
850: and then, for $k \leq \lfloor \log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)\rfloor $,
851: \begin{multline}\label{eqaux}
852: \frac{\lambda\E(T_k)}{-\log\E(e^{-\lambda T_k})} \leq
853: \frac{\lambda\E(T_k)}{1- \E(e^{-\lambda T_k}) }\\ \leq
854: \left(1- \frac{\varepsilon}{(m-1)^2} \left(\frac{\sigma^2}{m-1}+1\right)\right)^{-1}
855: \stackrel{\mathrm{def.}}{=}\kappa(\varepsilon)
856: \end{multline}
857: as long as
858: $$
859: \varepsilon< (m-1)^2\left/\left(\frac{\sigma^2}{m-1}+1\right)\right. \stackrel{\mathrm{def.}}{=}\varepsilon_1.
860: $$
861:
862: It follows that for $\varepsilon<\varepsilon_1$,
863: $$
864: S( \lfloor \log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)\rfloor +1;\lambda) \leq (1+\log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)) e^{m\varepsilon/(m-1)}\kappa(\varepsilon).
865: $$
866: and therefore,
867: $$
868: \sum_{n=\lfloor \log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)\rfloor+1}^\infty \frac{m-1}{m^n} S( \lfloor \log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)\rfloor +1;\lambda) \leq \frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon} \log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda) e^{m\varepsilon/(m-1)}\kappa(\varepsilon),
869: $$
870: which is $o(\lambda(\log\lambda)^2)$ when $\lambda \to 0$. In addition, the second term in the right hand side of Equation~\eqref{termtech2} can be rewritten as
871: $$
872: \sum_{k= \lfloor \log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)\rfloor +1}^\infty \frac{m-1}{m^k} \sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{1}{m^n} \E\left(e^{-\lambda T_{n-1}} Z_n \E(e^{-\lambda T_k})^{Z_n-1}\right) \E\left(e^{-\lambda T_{k}}\left(1-e^{-\lambda T_{k}}\right)\right).
873: $$
874: We first note that
875: \begin{multline*}
876: \sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{1}{m^n} \E\left(e^{-\lambda T_{n-1}} Z_n \E(e^{-\lambda T_k})^{Z_n-1}\right) =\\
877: \sum_{n=1}^{\lfloor \log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)\rfloor} \frac{1}{m^n} \E\left(e^{-\lambda T_{n-1}} Z_n \E(e^{-\lambda T_k})^{Z_n-1}\right) \\
878: + \sum_{n = \lfloor \log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)\rfloor+1}^\infty \frac{1}{m^n} \E\left(e^{-\lambda T_{n-1}} Z_n \E(e^{-\lambda T_k})^{Z_n-1}\right).
879: \end{multline*}
880: The first term in the right hand side of the above equation is less than or equal to the
881: quantity $\log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)$ since $\E(Z_n)=m^n$. The second term can be upper bounded as
882: \begin{multline*}
883: \sum_{n = \lfloor \log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)\rfloor+1}^\infty \frac{1}{m^n} \E\left(e^{-\lambda T_{n-1}} Z_n \E(e^{-\lambda T_{k}})^{Z_n-1}\right) \\ \leq \sum_{n=\lfloor \log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)\rfloor+1}^\infty \frac{1}{m^n}\E\left(Z_n e^{-\lambda Z_n} \right)
884: \leq \frac{1}{(m-1)\varepsilon},
885: \end{multline*}
886: where we have used the fact that $T_k \geq 1$ for all $k \geq 0$ and $xe^{-\lambda x}\leq 1/(e\lambda)$ for all $x>0$. It follows that the second term in the right hand side of Equation~\eqref{termtech2} is upper bounded by the quantity
887: $$
888: \frac{\lambda}{\varepsilon}\left(\log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)+ \frac{1}{(m-1)\varepsilon}\right),
889: $$
890: which is $o(\lambda(\log_m\lambda)^2)$ when $\lambda \to 0$.
891:
892: By using the above inequalities, we come up with the conclusion that for every $\varepsilon >0$,
893: \begin{equation}
894: \label{limsupfb}
895: \limsup_{\lambda \to 0} \frac{f_b(\lambda)}{\lambda(\log_m\lambda)^2} \leq \frac{m}{2}.
896: \end{equation}
897:
898:
899: For establishing a lower bound for $f_b(\lambda)$, we introduce the size-biased Galton-Watson branching process. The sequence of random variables $(Z_n/m^n)$ being a positive martingale, it induces a probability distribution $\widetilde{\P}$ such that, for any $n\geq 1$ and any random variable $Y$ measurable with respect to the random variables $Z_1, \ldots, Z_n$,
900: \[
901: \int Y d\widetilde{\P}=\E\left(Y\frac{Z_n}{m^n}\right).
902: \]
903: It is known, see Lyons and Peres~\cite{Lyons:07}, that under the probability
904: $\widetilde{\P}$, the sequence $(Z_n)$ as the same distribution as a branching process with
905: immigration $(\widetilde{Z}_n)$ where the number of children has the same distribution as
906: $G$ and the number of new immigrants is distributed as $\widetilde{G}$ such that
907: $\P(\widetilde{G}=n)=n\P(G=n)/m$. If $\widetilde{Z}_0=1$, it is easy to check that
908: \[
909: \widetilde{\E}\left(\widetilde{Z}_n\right)=m^n+\frac{m^n-1}{m(m-1)}\E(G^2).
910: \]
911: If $\widetilde{T}_n=\widetilde{Z}_0+\widetilde{Z}_1+\cdots+\widetilde{Z}_n$, we have by Jensen inequality
912: \begin{align*}
913: \E\left(\rule{0mm}{5mm}e^{-\lambda T_{n{-}k{-}1}}\right.&\left. \frac{Z_{n-k}}{m^{n-k}} \E\left(e^{-\lambda T_{k}}\right)^{Z_{n-k}-1}\right) =\widetilde{\E}\left(e^{-\lambda \widetilde{T}_{n{-}k{-}1}} \E\left(e^{-\lambda T_{k}}\right)^{\widetilde{Z}_{n-k}-1}\right) \\
914: &\geq \widetilde{\E}\left(e^{-\lambda \widetilde{T}_{n{-}k}} \E\left(e^{-\lambda T_{k}}\right)^{\widetilde{T}_{n-k}}\right) \\
915: &\geq \exp\left(-\lambda(1+\E(T_k)) \widetilde{\E}( \widetilde{T}_{n{-}k})\right)\\
916: &\geq \exp\left(-\frac{\lambda m}{m-1} \left(m^{n-k}+\frac{m^{n+1}}{(m-1)}\right)\left(1+\frac{g_2}{m}\right)\right)
917: \end{align*}
918: since
919: $$
920: \widetilde{\E}( \widetilde{T}_{n}) \leq \frac{m^{n+1}}{m-1}\left(1+\frac{g_2}{m} \right),
921: $$
922: where $g_2 = \E(G^2)$. In addition, by using the fact that $e^{-x}(1-e^{-x}) \geq x-2x^2$
923: holds for $x>0$, we have
924: \begin{multline*}
925: \sum_{n=1}^{\lfloor \log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)\rfloor} \frac{m-1}{m^n} S(n;\lambda)
926: \geq \sum_{n=1}^{\lfloor \log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)\rfloor} (m-1) \\\times
927: \sum_{k=0}^{n-1} \frac{1}{m^k}
928: \exp\left(-\frac{\lambda m}{m-1} \left(m^{n-k}+\frac{m^{n+1}}{(m-1)}\right)
929: \left(1+\frac{g_2}{m}\right)\right)
930: \E\left(\lambda T_k-2(\lambda T_k)^2\right) \\
931: \geq \exp\left(-\frac{\varepsilon m}{(m-1)}
932: \left(1+\frac{m}{(m-1)}\right)\left(1+\frac{g_2}{m}\right)\right)\\ \sum_{n=1}^{\lfloor
933: \log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)\rfloor} (m-1) \sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\frac{\lambda\E(T_k)}{m^k}
934: \left(1-\frac{\lambda\E(T_k^2)}{\E(T_k)}\right).
935: \end{multline*}
936: By using Inequality~\eqref{rapportmoment} and Definition~\eqref{eqaux}, we have, for
937: $\eps<\eps_1$,
938: \begin{multline*}
939: \sum_{n=1}^{\lfloor \log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)\rfloor} (m-1) \sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\frac{\lambda\E(T_k)}{m^k} \left(1-\frac{\lambda\E(T_k^2)}{\E(T_k)}\right) \geq \frac{\lambda}{\kappa(\eps)}\sum_{n=1}^{\lfloor \log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)\rfloor} \sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\frac{m^{k+1}-1}{m^k}
940: \end{multline*}
941: Since
942: \begin{multline*}
943: \sum_{n=1}^{\lfloor \log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)\rfloor} \sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\frac{m^{k+1}-1}{m^k} = \frac{m}{2}\lfloor \log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)\rfloor(\lfloor \log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)\rfloor+1)+\frac{m\lfloor \log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)\rfloor}{m-1} \\ -\frac{m}{(m-1)^2}\left(\frac{1}{m^{\lfloor \log_m(\varepsilon/\lambda)\rfloor}}-1\right)
944: \end{multline*}
945: and since we already know that the second term in the right hand side of Equation~\eqref{decompofb} is $o(\lambda(\log_m(\lambda))^2$ when $\lambda\to 0$, we then deduce that for all $\varepsilon \in (0,\varepsilon_1)$
946: $$
947: \liminf_{\lambda \to 0} \frac{f_b(\lambda)}{\lambda(\log_m\lambda)^2} \geq
948: \frac{m}{2\kappa(\eps)} \exp\left(-\frac{\varepsilon m}{(m-1)} \left(1+\frac{m}{(m-1)}\right)\left(1+\frac{g_2}{m}\right)\right)
949: $$
950: and hence,
951: \begin{equation}
952: \label{liminffb}
953: \liminf_{\lambda \to 0} \frac{f_b(\lambda)}{\lambda(\log_m\lambda)^2} \geq \frac{m}{2}.
954: \end{equation}
955: Combining Equations~\eqref{G1}, \eqref{limsupfb} and \eqref{liminffb}, Equation~\eqref{rate2} follows.
956: \end{proof}
957:
958:
959: \begin{proposition}
960: The functions $\rho^{(1)}_2(\lambda)$ and $\rho^{(2)}_2(\lambda)$ are such that
961: \begin{eqnarray}
962: \lim_{\lambda \to 0}\frac{\rho^{(1)}_2(\lambda)}{(\lambda\log_m\lambda)^2} &=& \frac{1}{m^2-m}\Var(G),\\
963: \lim_{\lambda \to 0} \frac{\rho^{(2)}_2(\lambda)}{\lambda(\log_m\lambda)^2} &=& 1.
964: \end{eqnarray}
965: where $G$ is the random variable describing the offspring of a node.
966: \end{proposition}
967:
968: From Theorem~\ref{rho1}, we observe that the size of the sampled tree scales with the
969: size of the original tree. The same phenomenon is true for the squared coefficient of variation of the size of the sampled tree if an only if the offspring distribution is not deterministic as shown by Proposition~\ref{vartree}. In the case of a deterministic offspring distribution, when $\lambda \to 0$, the squared coefficient of variation is approximately equal to $1/(\lambda \E(T_N))$ for large $N$. The quantity $\lambda\E(T_N)$ is precisely the mean number of selected points. This indicates that the distribution of the random variable $R_N$ is concentrated around its mean value. There is almost no randomness in the discovered tree.
970:
971:
972: % \begin{proof}
973: % The first term of the right hand side of Relation~\eqref{vartree} defining
974: % $\rho_2(\lambda)$ is
975: % \[
976: % \frac{m-1}{m}\sum_{n=1}^{+\infty}
977: % \frac{1}{m^n} \E\left(e^{-\lambda T_n}\right)\left(1-\E\left(e^{-\lambda T_n}\right)\right).
978: % \]
979: % By proceeding as in the proof of Theorem~\ref{ThFirst}, it is not difficult to prove that
980: % this expression is equivalent to $-C\lambda\log_m(\lambda)$ as $\lambda\to 0$ for some
981: % $C>0$. This term will be therefore neglible provided that one can prove that the
982: % complementary term in $\rho_2(\lambda)$ is of the order of $\lambda(\log_m \lambda)^2$.
983:
984: % The second term of the right hand side of
985: % Relation~\eqref{vartree} that is, up to the multiplicative constant $2(m-1)/m$, of the quantity
986: % \begin{multline}\label{eqche}
987: % \Phi(\lambda)=
988: % \sum_{n=1}^{+\infty}
989: % \frac{1}{m^n}
990: % \sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\E\left(e^{-\lambda T_{n{-}k{-}1}} Z_{n-k} \E\left(\rule{0mm}{4mm}e^{-\lambda T_{k}}\right)^{Z_{n-k}-1}
991: % \right. \\ \left.\E\left(\rule{0mm}{4mm}e^{-\lambda T_{k}}\left(1-e^{-\lambda T_{k}}\right)\right)\rule{0mm}{6mm}\right)
992: % \end{multline}
993: % by using Fubini's theorem, one gets that
994: % \[
995: % \Phi(\lambda)=
996: % \sum_{k=1}^{+\infty}
997: % \frac{1}{m^k} \E\left(\rule{0mm}{4mm}e^{-\lambda T_{k}}\left(1-e^{-\lambda T_{k}}\right)\right)\phi_k(\lambda),
998: % \]
999: % with
1000: % \[
1001: % \phi_k(\lambda)=\sum_{n>0}\E\left(e^{-\lambda T_{n{-}1}} \frac{Z_{n}}{m^{n}} \E\left(\rule{0mm}{4mm}e^{-\lambda T_{k}}\right)^{Z_{n}-1}\right).
1002: % \]
1003: % \paragraph{\em Lower Bound}
1004: % By using Jensen's Inequality, one gets that
1005: % it is clear that $\bar{\phi}(\lambda)$
1006: % \[
1007: % \phi_k(\lambda)\geq
1008: % \underline{\phi}(\lambda)
1009: % \stackrel{\text{def.}}{=}
1010: % \sum_{n>0}\E\left(e^{-\lambda T_{n{-}1}} \frac{Z_{n}}{m^{n}} e^{-\lambda m^{k+1}Z_{n}/(m-1)}\right).
1011: % \]
1012: % The sequence of random variables $(Z_n/m^n)$ being a positive
1013: % martingale, it induces a probability distribution $\widehat{\P}$ such that, for any $n\geq 1$
1014: % and any random variable $Y$ measurable with respect to the random variables $Z_1$, \ldots,
1015: % $Z_n$, then
1016: % \[
1017: % \int Y d\widehat{\P}=\E\left(Y\frac{Z_n}{m^n}\right).
1018: % \]
1019: % It is known, see Lyons and Peres~\cite{Lyons:07}, that under the probability
1020: % $\widehat{\P}$, the sequence $(Z_n)$ as the same distribution as a branching process with
1021: % immigration $(\widehat{Z}_n)$ where the number of children has the same distribution as
1022: % $G$ and the number of new immigrants is distributed as $\widehat{G}$ such that
1023: % $\P(\widehat{G}=n)=n\P(G=n)/m$. If $\widehat{Z}_0=1$, it is easy to check that
1024: % \[
1025: % \E\left(\widehat{Z}_n\right)=m^n+\frac{m^n-1}{m(m-1)}\E(G^2).
1026: % \]
1027: % If $\widehat{T}_n=\widehat{Z}_0+\widehat{Z}_1+\cdots+\widehat{Z}_n$, the lower bound
1028: % $\underline{\phi}(\lambda)$ can be written as
1029: % \begin{align*}
1030: % \underline{\phi}(\lambda)
1031: % &=\sum_{n>0}\E\left(e^{-\lambda \widehat{T}_{n{-}1}} e^{-\lambda
1032: % m^{k+1}\widehat{Z}_{n}/(m-1)}\right)\\
1033: % &\geq \sum_{n>0}e^{-\lambda \E(\widehat{T}_{n-1})} e^{-\lambda
1034: % m^{k+1}\E(\widehat{Z}_{n})/(m-1)}\\
1035: % &\geq \sum_{n>0}\exp\left(-\frac{\lambda}{m-1}\left(1+\frac{m_2}{m(m-1)}\right)(1+m^{k+1})m^n\right)
1036: % \end{align*}
1037: % where $m_2=\E(G^2)$
1038:
1039: % With this estimation, one gets that
1040: % \begin{equation}\label{eqaux}
1041: % \sum_{k=1}^{+\infty}
1042: % \frac{1}{m^k} g_k(\lambda)
1043: % H\left[\frac{\lambda}{m-1}\left(1{+}\frac{m_2}{m(m-1)}\right)\left(1{+}m^{k+1}\right)\right]
1044: % \leq \Phi(\lambda)
1045: % %\\ \leq \Phi(\lambda) \leq \sum_{k=1}^{+\infty}\frac{1}{m^k} g_k(\lambda)H(\lambda/(m-1))
1046: % \end{equation}
1047: % with
1048: % \[
1049: % g_k(\lambda) \stackrel{\text{def.}}{=}\E\left(\rule{0mm}{4mm}e^{-\lambda T_{k}}\left(1{-}e^{-\lambda T_{k}}\right)\right).
1050: % \]
1051: % and, for $x>0$,
1052: % \begin{align*}
1053: % H(x)&\stackrel{\text{def.}}{=}\sum_{n>0} e^{-xm^n}=\int_{xm}^{+\infty} \sum_{n>0} \ind{u>xm^n} e^{-u}\,du
1054: % =\int_{xm}^{+\infty} \lfloor\log_m (u/x)\rfloor e^{-u}\,du\\
1055: % &=\int_{xm}^{+\infty} \{\log_m (u/x)\}e^{-u}\,du+\int_{xm}^{+\infty} \log_m(u) e^{-u}\,du
1056: % -\log_m(x) e^{-xm},
1057: % \end{align*}
1058: % by plugging this decomposition into Equation~\eqref{eqaux}, by using again
1059: % Proposition~\ref{asympprop}, one gets that, for $\lambda$ converging to $0$, $\Phi(\lambda)/-\log_m\lambda$
1060: % is lower bounded by
1061: % \[
1062: % \sum_{k=1}^{+\infty}
1063: % \frac{1}{m^k} \E\left(\rule{0mm}{4mm}e^{-\lambda T_{k}}\left(1{-}e^{-\lambda T_{k}}\right)\right).
1064: % \]
1065: % By using Inequality~\eqref{CS}, the above
1066: % expressions $T_k$ can be replaced by $W m^{k+1}/(m-1)$ so that with the help of
1067: % Proposition~\ref{asympprop} one gets the relation
1068: % \begin{equation}\label{eq3}
1069: % \liminf_{\lambda\searrow 0}\frac{\rho_2(\lambda)}{\lambda(\log_m\lambda)^2}\geq 2.
1070: % \end{equation}
1071:
1072: % \paragraph{\em Upper Bound}
1073: % Since, for $k\geq 1$, $T_k\geq 1$, one has
1074: % \[
1075: % \phi_k(\lambda)\leq \overline{\phi}(\lambda) \stackrel{\text{def.}}{=}
1076: % e^{\lambda}\sum_{n>0}\E\left(\frac{Z_{n}}{m^{n}} e^{-\lambda Z_{n}} \right),
1077: % \]
1078: % by using the fact that the derivative of $x\to xe^{-\lambda x}$ is
1079: % bounded by $1$, from Inequality~\eqref{CS} one gets that
1080: % \[
1081: % \sum_{n>0}\frac{1}{m^n}\E\left(\left|Z_{n} e^{-\lambda Z_{n}}-m^nWe^{-\lambda m^nW}\right| \right)
1082: % \leq \frac{\Var(1-W)}{\sqrt{m}-1} \sum_{n>0}\frac{1}{m^{(n-1)/2}}<+\infty.
1083: % \]
1084: % Since $\overline{\phi}(\lambda) $ is diverging as $\lambda$ goes to $0$, it has the same
1085: % asymptotic behavior as
1086: % \[
1087: % \sum_{n>0} \E\left(We^{-m^n \lambda W}\right)
1088: % \]
1089: % which is equivalent to $-\log_m(\lambda)$ by Proposition~\ref{asympprop}. This estimation and
1090: % Relation~\eqref{eq3} give the asymptotic expansion~\eqref{rate2}. The proposition is
1091: % proved.
1092: % \end{proof}
1093:
1094:
1095: \section{The Depth Biased Model}
1096: \label{biased}
1097: In this section, it is assumed that conditionally on the tree, for $n\geq 0$, a node at
1098: depth $n$ is chosen with probability $(1-\exp(-(\alpha/m)^n))$ for some
1099: $\alpha\in[0,1)$. The mean number of selected nodes at depth $n$ in the tree is equal to
1100: $m^n (1-\exp(-(\alpha/m)^n))\sim \alpha^n$ and the total number of selected nodes in the
1101: whole tree $\mathcal{N}(\mathcal{T})$ is such that
1102: $$
1103: \frac{1}{1-\alpha} -\frac{1}{2(1-\alpha^2/m)} \leq \E(\mathcal{N}(\mathcal{T})) = \sum_{n=0}^\infty m^n (1-e^{-(\alpha/m)^n})\leq \frac{1}{1-\alpha},
1104: $$ in particular the mean number of selected nodes $\mathcal{N}(\mathcal{T}) \sim
1105: 1/(1-\alpha)$ when $\alpha \to 1$. The behavior of the size $R(\alpha)$ of the sampled
1106: tree is used to estimate the speed of the exploration process, when the number of selected
1107: nodes becomes large. We first give the expression of the mean value $\E(R(\alpha))$ of the
1108: size of the sampled tree.
1109:
1110: \begin{lemma}
1111: The mean value of the size of the sampled tree in the depth biased model is given by
1112: \begin{equation}
1113: \label{relfond1}
1114: \E(R(\alpha)) = \sum_{n=0}^\infty m^n \left(1-\E\left(\exp\left(-\left(\frac{\alpha}{m}\right)^n\sum_{i=0}^\infty \alpha^i \frac{Z_i}{m^i}\right)\right)\right).
1115: \end{equation}
1116: \end{lemma}
1117:
1118: \begin{proof}
1119: As in the previous section, for $n\geq 0$ and $1\leq \ell\leq Z_n$, the symbol ${\cal T}^{n,\ell}$
1120: denotes the sub-tree of ${\cal T}$ whose root is $(n,\ell)$. The node $(n,\ell)$ is in the sampled tree if ${\cal N}({\cal T}^{n,\ell})\neq 0$.
1121: \cbstart Since nodes at a given depth are selected independently one of each other, we have
1122: $$
1123: \P\left({\cal N}({\cal T}^{n,\ell})\not=0 \mid {\cal T}, (n,\ell) \in {\cal T}\right) =1 - \exp\left(-\left(\frac{\alpha}{m}\right)^n\sum_{i=0}^\infty \alpha^i \frac{Z^{(n,\ell)}_i}{m^i}\right),
1124: $$
1125: where $Z_i^{(n,\ell)}$ is the number of descendants of $(n,\ell)$ at generation $i$ and
1126: where we have used the fact that the sub-tree ${\cal T}^{n,\ell}$ has the same offspring
1127: distribution as the original tree $\mathcal{T}$. Hence,
1128: $$
1129: \P\left({\cal N}({\cal T}^{n,\ell})\not=0 \mid (n,\ell) \in {\cal T}\right) = 1 - \E\left(\exp\left(-\left(\frac{\alpha}{m}\right)^n\sum_{i=0}^\infty \alpha^i \frac{Z_i}{m^i}\right)\right).
1130: $$
1131: \cbend
1132: It follows that the size of the sampled tree given by
1133: \begin{equation}
1134: R(\alpha) =\sum_{n=0}^{+\infty} \sum_{\ell=1}^{Z_{n}}\ind{{\cal N}({\cal T}^{\ell,n})\not=0}
1135: \end{equation}
1136: and its mean value is, by using the independence in the selection of nodes, \cbstart
1137: $$
1138: \E(R(\alpha)) = \sum_{n=0}^{+\infty} \E(Z_n)\P\left({\cal N}({\cal T}^{n,1})\not=0\right),
1139: $$
1140: %%where $\mathcal{T}^n$ is a subtree of $\T$ rooted at a node of the $n$th generation of $\T$,
1141: Equation~\eqref{relfond1} follows.\cbend
1142: \end{proof}
1143:
1144: The growth rate of the exploration process is defined by the ratio
1145: \[
1146: \frac{\E\left(R(\alpha)\right)}{\E({\cal N}({\cal T}))} =\frac{1}{\eta(\alpha)} \sum_{n=0}^{+\infty} (1-\alpha)m^n
1147: \left(1-\E\left(\exp\left(-\left(\frac{\alpha}{m}\right)^n\sum_{i=0}^\infty \alpha^i \frac{Z_i}{m^i}\right)\right)\right),
1148: \]
1149: where $\eta(\alpha)=(1-\alpha)\E({\cal N}({\cal T})) \to 1$ when $\alpha \to 1$.
1150:
1151: \begin{theorem}\label{oscil}
1152: If $\E(G^2)<+\infty$, as $\alpha\nearrow 1$, the following limit relation holds
1153: \[
1154: \lim_{\alpha \to 1}\frac{\E\left(R(\alpha)\right)}{\E({\cal N}({\cal T}))^2} =1.
1155: \]
1156: \end{theorem}
1157:
1158: \begin{proof}
1159: Let us first introduce the function
1160: $$
1161: H(\alpha) = \sum_{n=0}^{+\infty} (1-\alpha)m^n \left(1-\E\left(\exp\left(-\left(\frac{\alpha}{m}\right)^n\frac{W}{1-\alpha}\right)\right)\right),
1162: $$
1163: where $W$ is defined by Equation~\eqref{defW}. We have
1164: \begin{eqnarray}
1165: \left|H(\alpha) - \eta(\alpha)\frac{\E\left(R(\alpha)\right)}{\E({\cal N}({\cal T}))}
1166: \right| &\leq& (1-\alpha) \sum_{n=0}^\infty \alpha^n \left|\sum_{i=0}^\infty \alpha^i
1167: \E\left(\frac{Z_i}{m^i} - W\right) \right|\label{eq0}\\
1168: & \leq &\sum_{i=0}^\infty \alpha^i \E\left(\left| \frac{Z_i}{m^i} - W \right|\right)
1169: \label{eqtech} \\
1170: &\leq& \mathrm{Var}(W) \sum_{i=0}^\infty \left(\frac{\alpha}{\sqrt{m}}\right)^i =\frac{\mathrm{Var}(W) }{1-\frac{\alpha}{\sqrt{m}}},\notag
1171: \end{eqnarray}
1172: where we have used Inequality~\eqref{CS} in the last step.
1173:
1174: Let us define the family of non-negative random variables $\mathcal{H}_\alpha$, $0<\alpha<1$ by
1175: $$
1176: \mathcal{H}_\alpha = \sum_{n=0}^{+\infty} (1-\alpha)^2m^n \left(1-\exp\left(-\left(\frac{\alpha}{m}\right)^n\frac{W}{1-\alpha}\right)\right).
1177: $$
1178: We have $(1-\alpha)H(\alpha)= \E(\mathcal{H}_\alpha )$.
1179:
1180: Let us fix some $\varepsilon >0$. Since $W>0$ a.s., we can define the quantity
1181: $$n(W,\alpha)=\max\left(\left\lceil
1182: \log_{m/\alpha}\left(\frac{W}{(\varepsilon(1-\alpha))}\right)\right\rceil, 0\right).$$
1183: For $n\geq n(W,\alpha)$,
1184: $$
1185: \left( \frac{\alpha}{m} \right)^n\frac{W}{1-\alpha} <\varepsilon.
1186: $$
1187: By using the fact that for $x\geq 0$, $1-e^{-x} \geq x - x^2/2$, we have
1188: $$
1189: \mathcal{H}_\alpha \geq \sum_{n=n(W,\alpha)}^{+\infty}
1190: (1-\alpha)^2m^n
1191: \left(1-\exp\left(-\left(\frac{\alpha}{m}\right)^n\frac{W}{1-\alpha}\right)\right) \geq \alpha^{n(W,\alpha)} W(1-\varepsilon).
1192: $$ Since the above inequality is valid for all $\varepsilon >0$ and
1193: $\alpha^{n(W,\alpha)}$ converges to $1$ as $\alpha\nearrow 1$, it follows that
1194: $\liminf_{\alpha\to 1}\mathcal{H}_\alpha \geq W$ a.s.
1195:
1196: Since $1-e^{-x} \leq x$ for $x\geq 0$, we have
1197: $$
1198: \mathcal{H}_\alpha \leq W \quad \mbox{a.s.}
1199: $$
1200: and then $\limsup_{\alpha\to 1}\mathcal{H}_\alpha \leq W$ a.s. Hence, $\limsup_{\alpha\to 1}\mathcal{H}_\alpha = W$ a.s. Since the family $(\mathcal{H}_\alpha)$ is non negative and bounded by $W$, which is integrable, we have
1201: $$
1202: \lim_{\alpha\to 1} \E(\mathcal{H}_\alpha )= \E(W)=1
1203: $$
1204: and the result follows by using Inequality~\eqref{eqtech}.
1205: \end{proof}
1206:
1207: When $\alpha <1$ the selected node are closed to the root and only a small fraction of the
1208: whole is discovered. When $\alpha \nearrow 1$, we can select nodes deeper in the tree but
1209: roughly only one node is selected in average at each level. The above result indicates
1210: that the average size of the discovered tree grows as the square of the average
1211: number of selected nodes.
1212:
1213:
1214: \bibliographystyle{amsplain}
1215: \bibliography{main}
1216:
1217: \end{document}
1218:
1219: