1: 

2: %6 Sep 04 version of MDST total length paper, by Penrose and Wade.

3: 

4: %\documentclass{article}

5: \documentclass[12pt]{article}

6: %\documentclass[11pt]{article}

7: 

8: 

9: % Big letters version

10: %\documentclass[12pt]{article}

11: %\renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.15}

12: 

13: % small letters version

14: %\documentclass{article}

15: %\renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.5}

16: 

17: \evensidemargin 0cm

18: \oddsidemargin 0cm

19: \topmargin 0cm

20: \textwidth 16cm

21: \textheight 21.5cm

22: 

23: %\evensidemargin -1cm

24: %\oddsidemargin -1cm

25: %\topmargin -3.2cm

26: %\topmargin -2cm

27: %\textwidth 17cm

28: %\textheight 25cm

29: 

30: 

31: \usepackage{amssymb}

32: \usepackage{graphicx}

33: \usepackage{epsfig}

34: \usepackage{color}

35: \include{psfig}

36: 

37: \newcommand{\eq}[1]{$(\ref{#1})$}

38: 

39: 

40: 

41: \newcommand{\ud}{\mathrm{d}}

42: \newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}[section]

43: \newtheorem{proposition}{Proposition}[section]

44: \newtheorem{lemma}{Lemma}[section]

45: \newtheorem{corollary}{Corollary}[section]

46: \newtheorem{definition}{Definition}[section]

47: \newcommand{\bean}{\begin{eqnarray*}}

48: \newcommand{\eean}{\end{eqnarray*}}

49: \newcommand{\bea}{\begin{eqnarray}}

50: \newcommand{\eea}{\end{eqnarray}}

51: \newcommand{\tod}{\stackrel{{\cal D}}{\longrightarrow}}

52: \newcommand{\eqd}{\stackrel{{\cal D}}{=}}

53: \newcommand{\toP}{\stackrel{P}{\longrightarrow}}

54: \newcommand{\toas}{\stackrel{{\rm a.s.}}{\longrightarrow}}

55: \newcommand{\inL}{\stackrel{L^1}{\longrightarrow}}

56: \newcommand{\inLL}{\stackrel{L^2}{\longrightarrow}}

57: \newcommand{\rem}{\noindent \textbf{Remark. }}

58: \newcommand{\rems}{\noindent \textbf{Remarks. }}

59: \newcommand{\proof}{\noindent \textbf{Proof. }}

60: %\def\Exp{{\mathbb{E}}}

61: \def\Exp{E}

62: %\def\Pr{{\mathbb{P}}}

63: \def\Pr{P}

64: \def\Var{{\mathrm{Var}}}

65: \def\Cov{{\rm Cov}}

66: \def\R{{\bf R }}

67: \def\Z{{\bf Z }}

68: \def\1{{\bf 1 }}

69: \def\bx{{\bf x }}

70: \def\bz{{\bf z }}

71: \def\bw{{\bf w }}

72: \def\by{{\bf y }}

73: \def\N{{\bf N }}

74: \def\NN{{\cal N }}

75: \def\po{\preccurlyeq}

76: \def\potp{\stackrel{\theta,\phi}{\preccurlyeq}}

77: \def\postar{\preccurlyeq^*}

78: \def\GD{{\rm GD}}

79: \def\0{{\bf 0}}

80: \def\SS{{\cal S}}

81: \def\RR{{\cal R}}

82: \def\QQ{{\cal Q}}

83: \def\X{{\cal X}}

84: \def\YY{{\cal Y}}

85: \def\DD{{\cal D}}

86: \def\ZZ{{\cal Z}}

87: \def\WW{{\cal W}}

88: \def\FF{{\cal F}}

89: \def\GG{{\cal G}}

90: \def\TT{{\cal T}}

91: \def\VV{{\cal V}}

92: \def\bX{\mathbf{X}}

93: \def\tL{\tilde{L}}

94: \def\tLL{\tilde{\cal L}}

95: \def\tM{\tilde{M}}

96: \def\tD{\tilde{D}}

97: \def\tF{\tilde{F}}

98: \def\bV{\mathbf{V}}

99: \def\bU{\mathbf{U}}

100: \def\bW{\mathbf{W}}

101: \def\bZ{\mathbf{Z}}

102: \def\Po{{\cal P}}

103: \def\H{{\cal H}}

104: \def\LL{{\cal L}}

105: \def\MM{{\cal M}}

106: \def\UU{{\cal U}}

107: \def\card{{\rm  card}}

108: \def\dist{{\rm  dist}}

109: \def\diam{{\rm  diam}}

110: %\def\R{\mathbb{R}}

111: \def\nnu{{\nu}}

112: \def\BB{{\cal B}}

113: \def\eps{{\varepsilon}}

114: \def\gth{{g_{\theta}}}

115: \def\gwon{{g_{1}}}

116: \def\dgth{{g'_{\theta}}}

117: \def\dgwon{{g'_{1}}}

118: \def\gtwo{{g_{2}}}

119: \def\Gth{{G_{\theta}}}

120: \def\dinf{{\Delta ( \infty )}}

121: 

122: \def\Comment#1{

123: \marginpar{$\bullet$\quad{\tiny #1}}}

124: \def\tDone{\tD_1}

125: \def\tFone{\tF_1}

126: \def\Falph{F_\alpha}

127: \def\Dalph{D_\alpha}

128: \def\tFalph{\tF_\alpha}

129: \def\tDalph{\tD_\alpha}

130: \def\Walph{W_\alpha}

131: \def\Yalph{Y_\alpha}

132: \def\tLone{\tilde \LL^1}

133: \def\tLalph{\tilde \LL^\alpha}

134: \def\Lalph{\LL^\alpha}                                                                                

135: %\author{Mathew D. Penrose and Andrew R. Wade} 

136: \title{{\bf On the total length of the random minimal directed spanning tree}}

137: \author{Mathew D. Penrose$^{1}$ and Andrew R. Wade$^{2}$ 

138: %\\ {\normalsize{\em University of Bath and University of Durham}} 

139: }

140:                                                                                

141: \date{September 2004}

142: \begin{document}

143:                                                                                

144: \footnotetext[1]{ Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Bath,

145: Bath, BA2 7AY, England: {\texttt m.d.penrose@bath.ac.uk} }

146:                                                                                

147: \footnotetext[2]

148: { Department of Mathematical Sciences, University

149: of Durham, South Road, Durham DH1 3LE, England: {\texttt

150: a.r.wade@durham.ac.uk} }

151:                                                                                

152: 

153: 

154: 

155: 

156: 

157: 

158: 

159: \maketitle 

160: \abstract{ In Bhatt and Roy's minimal directed spanning tree (MDST)

161:  construction for a random partially ordered set of

162:  points in the unit square,

163:  all edges must respect the ``coordinatewise'' partial order

164: and there must be a directed path from each vertex to a minimal

165: element. We study the asymptotic behaviour of the total length of this

166: graph with power weighted edges. The limiting distribution is

167: given by the sum of a normal component

168: away from the boundary and a contribution

169: introduced by the boundary effects, which can be characterized

170: by a fixed point equation, and is reminiscent of limits

171: arising in the probabilistic analysis of

172: certain algorithms. As the exponent

173: of the power weighting

174: increases, the distribution undergoes a phase

175: transition from the normal contribution being

176: dominant to the boundary effects dominating. In the

177: critical case where the weight is simple Euclidean length,

178: both effects contribute significantly to the limit law.

179: We also give a law of large

180: numbers for the total weight of the graph. } \\

181: 

182: \noindent

183: {\bf Key words and phrases}: Spanning tree; nearest neighbour graph;

184: weak convergence; fixed-point equation; phase transition; fragmentation process.   

185: 

186: \section{Introduction}

187: 

188: Recent interest in graphs, generated

189: over random point sets 

190: consisting of independent uniform points in the unit square

191:  by connecting nearby points

192: according to some deterministic rule, has been

193: considerable. Such graphs include the geometric graph, the nearest

194: neighbour graph and the minimal-length spanning tree. Many aspects

195: of the large-sample asymptotic theory for such graphs,

196: when they are locally determined in a certain sense, are by now quite

197: well understood. See for example

198: \cite{KL,penbook,penyuk1,penyuk2,SY,steelebook,yukbook}.

199: 

200: One such graph is the \textit{minimal directed spanning tree} 

201: (or MDST for short), which was introduced

202: by Bhatt and Roy in~\cite{bhattroy2002}.

203: In the MDST, each point $\bx$ of a finite (random) subset $\SS$

204: of $(0,1]^2$ is connected by a directed edge to the nearest

205: $\by \in \SS \cup \{(0,0)\}$ such that $\by \neq \bx$ and 

206: $\by \preccurlyeq^* \bx$, where

207: $\by \preccurlyeq^* \bx$ means that

208: each component of $\bx -\by$ is nonnegative.

209: See Figure \ref{mdstfig} for a realisation of

210:  the MDST on simulated random points.

211: 

212: Motivation comes from the

213: modelling of communications or drainage networks

214: (see \cite{bhattroy2002,rooted,rodriguez}). For example,

215: consider the problem of designing a set of canals

216: to connect a set of hubs, so as to minimize their total length

217: subject to a constraint that all canals must flow downhill.

218: The mathematical formulation given above for this

219:  constraint can lead to significant boundary effects due

220: to the possibility  of long edges occurring near 

221: the lower and left boundaries of the unit square;

222:  these boundary effects distinguish

223: the MDST qualitatively from the standard minimal spanning tree and the

224: nearest neighbour graph for point sets in the plane.

225: Another difference is the fact that there is no

226: uniform upper bound on vertex degrees in the MDST.

227: 

228: In the present work, we consider the total length of the MDST on

229: random points in $(0,1]^2$, as the number of points becomes large.

230: We also consider the total length of the {\em minimal

231: directed spanning forest} (MDSF), which is the  MDST

232: with edges incident to the origin removed

233: (see Figure \ref{mdstfig} for an example). 

234: In \cite{bhattroy2002}, Bhatt and Roy mention that the total

235: length is an object of considerable interest, although they

236: restrict their analysis to the length of the edges joined to the origin

237: (subsequently also examined in~\cite{rooted}).

238: A first order result for the total length of the MDST

239: or MDSF is a law of large numbers; we 

240: derive this in Theorem \ref{llnthm} for

241:  a family of MDSFs indexed by partial orderings

242:  on $\R^2$, which include $\preccurlyeq^*$ as a special case.

243: 

244: This paper is mainly concerned with establishing second order results, i.e.,

245: weak convergence results for the distribution of the total length, suitably 

246:  centred and scaled.  For the length of edges from points

247:  in the region away from the boundary, we prove a central limit theorem.

248: The boundary effects are significant, and near the

249: boundary the MDST can be described in terms of a one-dimensional,

250: on-line version of the MDST  which we call the directed

251:  linear tree (DLT), and which we examine in Section 

252: \ref{secdlt}. In the DLT, each point in a sequence of

253: independent uniform random points in an interval is

254: joined to its nearest neighbour to the left, amongst

255: those points arriving earlier in the sequence.

256: This DLT 

257: is of separate interest in relation to, for example,

258:  network modelling and molecular fragmentation (see

259:  \cite{boll}, \cite{bertoin}, and references therein).

260: 

261: In Theorem \ref{dltthm} we establish that

262:  the limiting distribution of the centred total length of the DLT

263:  is characterized by a distributional fixed-point equation, which resembles

264: those encountered in the probabilistic analysis of algorithms such

265: as Quicksort~\cite{hoare}. Such fixed-point distributional

266: equalities, and the so-called `divide and conquer' or recursive algorithms

267: from which they arise, have received considerable attention recently; see, for

268: example,~\cite{hwang1998,neinrusch,rosler0,rosler}.

269: 

270: We consider power-weighted edges. Our weak convergence results

271: (Theorem \ref{mainth})

272: demonstrate that, depending on the value chosen for the weight

273: exponent of the edges, there are two regimes in which either the boundary

274: effects dominate or those edges away from the boundary are dominant, and that

275: there is a critical value (when we take simple

276: Euclidean length as the weight)

277: for which neither effect dominates.

278: 

279: In the related paper~\cite{rooted}, we give results dealing 

280: with the weight of the

281: edges joined to the origin, including weak convergence results,

282: in which the limiting distributions are given in terms of

283: some generalized Dickman distributions.

284: Subsequently, it

285: has been shown~\cite{blp} that this two dimensional case is rather

286: special -- in higher dimensions the corresponding limits 

287: are normally

288: distributed. \cite{rooted} also deals with the maximum edge

289:  length of the MDST (the maximum length of those edges incident

290:  to the origin was dealt with in~\cite{bhattroy2002}).

291: 

292: In the next section we give formal definitions of the MDST and MDSF,

293:  and state our main results (Theorems \ref{llnthm} and \ref{mainth}) 

294: on the total length of the MDST and MDSF. The 

295:  results on the DLT which we present in Section \ref{secdlt},

296: and  the

297: general central limit theorems  

298: which we present in Section \ref{secgeneral}, 

299: are of some independent interest.

300: 

301: 

302: \begin{figure}[h!]

303: \begin{center}

304: \includegraphics[angle=0, width=0.8\textwidth]{mdstpics}

305: %\includegraphics[angle=0, width=\textwidth]{mdstpics}

306: \end{center}

307: \caption{Realizations of the MDSF (left) and MDST

308:  on 100 simulated random points in the unit square, under

309:  the partial ordering $\postar$.}

310: \label{mdstfig}

311: \end{figure}

312: 

313: 

314: \section{Definitions and main results} \label{con}

315: We work in the same framework as \cite{rooted}. Here we briefly

316: recall the relevant terminology. See \cite{rooted} for more detail.

317: 

318: Suppose $V$ is a finite set endowed with a partial ordering

319: $\preccurlyeq$. % (see e.g.~\cite{kolmogorovformin1975}).

320: A {\em minimal element}, or {\em sink}, of $V$ is a vertex 

321: $v_0 \in V$ for which there

322: exists no $v\in V \setminus \{v_0\}$ such that $v \preccurlyeq v_0$.

323: Let $V_0$ denote the set of all sinks of $V$.

324: 

325: The partial ordering induces a directed graph

326: $G=(V,E)$, with vertex set $V$ and

327: with edge set $E$ consisting of all ordered pairs

328: $(v,u)$ of distinct elements of $V$ such that $u \preccurlyeq v$.

329: A {\em directed spanning forest (DSF)} on $V$ 

330: is a subgraph $T=(V_T,E_T)$

331: of $(V,E)$ such that (i) $V_T=V$ and $E_T \subseteq E$, and  (ii)

332:  for each vertex $v \in V \setminus V_0$

333: there exists a unique directed path in

334: $T$ that starts at $v$ and ends at some sink

335: $u \in V_0$.  In the case where  $V_0$ consists of a

336: single sink,  we refer to any   DSF on $V$ as a

337:  \emph{directed spanning tree (DST)} on $V$.

338: If we ignore the orientation of edges then \cite{rooted}

339:  a DSF on $V$ is indeed a

340: forest and, if  there is just one sink, then

341: any DST on $V$ is a tree.

342: 

343: Suppose the directed graph $(V,E)$ 

344: carries a {\em weight function} on its edges, i.e.,

345:  a function $w:E

346: \to [0,\infty)$.  If $T$ is a DSF on $V$, we set $w(T):=

347:  \sum_{e \in E_T} w(e)$.

348: A {\em minimal directed spanning forest (MDSF)}

349: on $V$ (or, equivalently, on $G$), is a directed spanning forest $T$

350: on $V$ 

351:  such that $w(T) \leq w(T')$

352: for every DSF $T'$ on $V$.

353: If $V$ has a single sink, then a minimal

354: directed spanning forest on $V$ is called a

355:  {\em minimal directed spanning tree (MDST)} on $V$.

356: 

357: 

358: For $v\in V$, 

359: we say that $u\in V \setminus \{v\}$

360:  is a \emph{directed nearest neighbour} of $v$

361: if $u \preccurlyeq v$ and $w(v,u) \leq w(v,u') $ for all

362: $ u' \in V\setminus  \{ v \} $ such that $ u' \preccurlyeq v$.

363: For each $v\in V \setminus V_0$,

364: let $n_v$ denote  a directed nearest neighbour of $v$ (chosen

365: arbitrarily if $v$ has more than one directed nearest neighbour).

366: Then \cite{rooted} the subgraph

367:   $(V,E_M)$ of $(V,E)$, obtained by taking

368: $

369: E_M := \{ (v,n_v): v \in V \setminus V_0 \},

370: $

371: is a MDSF of $V$. Thus, if all edge-weights are distinct, the MDSF

372: is unique,  and is

373:  obtained by connecting each non-minimal vertex to its directed

374: nearest neighbour. \\

375: 

376: For what follows, we consider a general type of partial ordering

377: of $\R^2$, denoted

378: $\stackrel{\theta,\phi}{\preccurlyeq}$, specified by the angles

379: %$0 \leq \theta < \theta+\phi \leq \pi$.

380: $\theta \in [0 ,2 \pi)$ and $\phi \in (0,\pi ] \cup \{2\pi\}$.

381: For $\mathbf{x} \in

382: \R^2$, let $C_{\theta,\phi}(\mathbf{x})$ be the closed cone with

383: vertex $\mathbf{x}$ and boundaries given by the rays from

384: $\mathbf{x}$ at angles $\theta$ and $\theta+\phi$, measuring

385: anticlockwise from the upwards vertical. The partial order is such

386: that, for $\mathbf{x}_1, \mathbf{x}_2 \in \R^2$,

387: \bea

388:  \mathbf{x}_1 \stackrel{\theta,\phi}{\preccurlyeq} \mathbf{x}_2

389: \textrm{ iff } \mathbf{x}_1 \in C_{\theta,\phi} (\mathbf{x}_2) .

390: \label{0719}

391: \eea

392: We shall use $\preccurlyeq^*$ as shorthand

393: for the special case $\stackrel{\pi/2,\pi/2}{\preccurlyeq}$,

394: which is of particular interest, as in~\cite{bhattroy2002}.

395: In this case

396: $u \postar v$ for $u=(u_1,u_2),v=(v_1,v_2) \in E$ if and only if

397: $u_1 \leq v_1$ and $u_2 \leq v_2$.

398: The

399: symbol $\preccurlyeq$ will denote a general partial order on

400: $\R^2$. 

401: 

402: We do not permit here the case $\phi=0$,  which

403: would almost surely give us a disconnected point set.

404: Nor do

405: %Note that if

406:  we allow $\pi < \phi < 2\pi$, since in this case 

407: the

408: directional relation (\ref{0719})

409: is not a partial order, since the transitivity property

410: (if $u \preccurlyeq v$ and $v \preccurlyeq w$ then $u \preccurlyeq w$)

411: fails for $\pi < \phi < 2\pi$. 

412: We shall, however, allow the

413: case $\phi=2\pi$ which leads to the standard nearest

414: neighbour (directed) graph.

415: 

416: The weight function is given by power-weighted Euclidean distance,

417: i.e., for $(u,v) \in E$ we assign weight $w(u,v) = \|u-v\|^\alpha $

418: to the edge $(u,v)$, where $\|\cdot\|$ denotes the Euclidean norm

419: on $\R^2$, and $\alpha >0$ is an arbitrary fixed parameter.

420: Thus, when $\alpha =1$ the weight of an edge is simply 

421: its Euclidean length.

422: Moreover, we shall assume that $V \subset \R^2$ is given by $V=

423: \mathcal{S}$ or $V= \SS^0 := \SS \cup \{ \0 \} $, where

424: $\0$ is the origin in $\R^2$ and

425:  $ \SS$ is generated in a {\em random} manner.

426: The random point set $\SS$ will usually be either the set of

427: points given by a homogeneous Poisson point process $\Po_n$ of

428: intensity $n$ on the unit square $(0,1]^2$, or a binomial point

429: process $\X_n$ consisting

430: of $n$ independent uniformly distributed points on $(0,1]^2$.

431: 

432: Note that in

433: this random setting,

434: %with probability one $V_0 = \{\0\}$ and

435: each point of $\SS$ almost surely

436:  has  a unique directed nearest neighbour, so

437: that $V$ has a unique MDSF, which does not

438: depend on the choice of $\alpha$.  Denote by $\LL^\alpha(\SS)$ the total

439: weight of all the edges in the MDSF on $\SS$, and let

440:  $\tilde \LL^\alpha(\SS):= \LL^\alpha(\SS)-\Exp[\LL^\alpha(\SS)]$, 

441: the centred total weight. 

442: 

443: Our first result presents laws of large numbers for the

444:  total edge weight for the

445: general partial order $\potp$ and general $0<\alpha<2$.

446: We state the result for $n$ points uniformly distributed

447: on $(0,1]^2$, but the proof carries through to other distributions

448: (see the start of Section \ref{seclln}). 

449: 

450: 

451: 

452: 

453: \begin{theorem} \label{llnthm} 

454: Suppose $0 < \alpha < 2$.

455: Under the general partial

456: order $\potp$, with $0 \leq \theta < 2\pi$ and

457: $0 < \phi \leq \pi$ or $\phi = 2\pi$, it is the case that

458: \bea

459: n^{(\alpha/2)-1} \LL^\alpha ( \X_n ) \inL 

460: (2/\phi)^{\alpha/2} \Gamma( 1+\alpha/2), 

461: ~~~ {\rm as }~ n\to

462: \infty.

463: \label{0728e}

464: \eea

465: Also, 

466: when the partial order is $\postar$, (\ref{0728e}) remains true with the addition

467: of the origin, i.e.~with $\X_n$

468: replaced by $\X_n^0$.

469: \end{theorem}

470: \rem In the special case $\alpha=1$, the limit in

471: (\ref{0728e}) is $\sqrt{ \pi / (2 \phi)}$. This limit is 1 when

472: $\phi=\pi/2$. Also, for $\phi=2\pi$ we have the standard

473: nearest neighbour (directed) graph (that is, every point is joined to its

474: nearest neighbour by a directed edge), and this limit is then $1/2$. 

475: This result (for $\alpha =1, \phi=2\pi$) is stated without

476: proof (and attributed to Miles \cite{Miles})

477: in \cite{avrambertsimas1993}, but we have 

478: %Results of this type date back at least to Miles \cite{Miles};

479: %see also \cite{penyuk2}, and page 101 of \cite{yukbook}. However,

480: %we have 

481: not previously seen the limiting constant 

482: derived explicitly, either in \cite{Miles} or anywhere else. \\ 

483: 

484: Our main result (Theorem \ref{mainth})

485: presents convergence in distribution 

486: for the case where the partial order is $\postar$;

487: the limiting distributions are of a different type in 

488: the three cases $\alpha=1$ (the same

489: situation as \cite{bhattroy2002}),  $0<\alpha < 1$, and

490: $\alpha >1$.  We define these 

491: limiting distributions

492:  in Theorem \ref{mainth},

493: in terms of distributional fixed-point equations.

494: These fixed-point equations are of the form

495: \bea

496: \label{0701a}

497: X \eqd \sum_{r=1}^k A_r X^{\{r\}} + B ,

498: \eea

499: where $k \in \N$,

500: $X^{\{r\}}$, $r=1,\ldots,k$, are

501: independent copies of the random variable $X$,

502:  and $(A_1,\ldots,A_k,B)$

503: is a random vector, independent of

504:  $( X^{\{1\}}, \ldots, X^{\{k\}})$,

505: satisfying the  conditions

506: \bea

507: \label{0701b}

508: \Exp \sum_{r=1}^k | A_r |^2 < 1 , ~~~~\Exp [B] =0, ~~~~\Exp [B^2] < \infty.

509: \eea

510: %for some $s$ with $0<s \leq 3$.  

511:  Theorem 3 of R\"osler \cite{rosler0} 

512: (proved using the contraction mapping theorem;

513: see also \cite{neinrusch,rosler})

514: says that if (\ref{0701b}) holds, 

515: there is a unique square-integrable distribution

516: with mean zero satisfying the fixed-point equation (\ref{0701a}), and

517: this will guarantee uniqueness of solutions to all

518:  the distributional

519: fixed-point equalities

520:  considered in the sequel.

521: 

522: Define the random variable $\tDone$,

523: to have the distribution that is the unique solution

524: to the distributional fixed-point

525: equation

526: \bea

527: \label{0628a}

528:  \tDone \eqd U \tDone^{\{1\}} +(1-U)

529: \tDone^{\{2\}} +U \log{U} +(1-U) \log(1-U) +U ,

530: \eea

531: where

532: $U$ is uniform on $(0,1)$ and independent of the other variables on the right.

533: We shall see later (in Propositions \ref{dconverge} and \ref{1020d})

534:  that $\Exp [\tDone] =0$ and $\Var[\tDone] = 2 -\pi^2/6$;

535: higher order moments are given recursively by eqn (\ref{0709c}).

536: 

537: 

538: 

539: 

540: For $\alpha >1$, let 

541: $\tDalph$ denote a random variable with

542:  distribution characterized

543: by the fixed-point equation

544: \bea

545: \label{0628b}

546:  \tDalph \eqd U^\alpha \tDalph^{\{1\}} +(1-U)^\alpha

547: \tDalph^{\{2\}} +\frac{\alpha}{\alpha-1}U^\alpha +

548: \frac{1}{\alpha-1}(1-U)^\alpha-\frac{1}{\alpha-1},

549: \eea

550: where again

551: $U$ is uniform on

552: $(0,1)$ and independent of the other variables on the right.

553: Also for $\alpha>1$, let $\tFalph$ denote a

554:  random variable with distribution characterized

555: by the fixed-point equation

556: \bea

557: \label{0628d}

558:  \tFalph \eqd U^\alpha \tFalph +(1-U)^\alpha

559: \tDalph +\frac{U^\alpha}{\alpha(\alpha-1)}

560: + \frac{(1-U)^\alpha}{\alpha-1} -\frac{1}{\alpha(\alpha-1)}  ,

561: \eea

562: where $U$ is uniform on $(0,1)$, $\tDalph$

563: has the distribution given by (\ref{0628b}), and

564: the $U$, $\tDalph$ and $\tFalph$ on the right are independent.

565: In Section \ref{secdlt} we shall see that the

566: random variables $\tDalph$, $\tFalph$ for

567: $\alpha>1$ arise as centred versions of random 

568: variables (denoted $\Dalph$, $\Falph$ respectively) satisfying

569: somewhat simpler fixed point equations.

570: Thus $\tDalph$ and $\tFalph$ both have mean zero;

571: their variances are given by eqns (\ref{0701g}) and (\ref{0701i})

572: below.

573: 

574: 

575: Let $\NN(0,s^2)$ denote the normal distribution 

576: with mean zero and variance $s^2$.

577: 

578: 

579: 

580: \begin{theorem} \label{mainth}

581: Suppose the weight exponent is $\alpha > 0$

582: %$1 \leq \alpha \leq 2$

583: and the partial order is $\postar$.

584: There exist constants $0 < t_\alpha^2 \leq s_\alpha^2$

585: such that,

586: for normal random variables 

587: $\Yalph \sim \mathcal{N}(0,s_\alpha^2)$ and  $\Walph

588: \sim \mathcal{N}(0,t_\alpha^2)$:

589: %\begin{itemize}

590: % \item[(i)]

591: 

592: (i)  As $n

593: \to \infty$,

594: \begin{eqnarray} n^{(\alpha-1)/2} \tLalph ( \Po^0_n )

595: \tod \Yalph & {\rm and } & n^{(\alpha-1)/2} \tLalph ( \X^0_n )

596: \tod \Walph ~~~  (0 < \alpha < 1);~~

597: \label{0727a}  \\

598: \tLone ( \Po^0 _n ) \tod \tDone^{\{1\}}

599:  + \tDone^{\{2\}} +Y_1   &  {\rm and } &

600: \tLone ( \X^0 _n ) \tod \tDone^{\{1\}}

601:  + \tDone^{\{2\}} +W_1 ; ~~~~ 

602: \label{0727b} \\

603: \tLalph ( \Po^0 _n ) \tod \tDalph^{\{1\}}

604:  + \tDalph^{\{2\}}   &  {\rm and } &

605: \tLalph ( \X^0 _n ) \tod \tDalph^{\{1\}}

606:  + \tDalph^{\{2\}} ~~~ (\alpha > 1).~~

607: \label{0727c}

608: \end{eqnarray}

609: Here all the random variables in the limits are independent, and

610: $\tDalph^{\{i\}}$, $i=1,2$ are independent copies of the random

611: variable $\tDalph$ defined at (\ref{0628a}) for $\alpha=1$

612: and (\ref{0628b}) for $\alpha >1$.

613: 

614: (ii)  As $n \to \infty$,

615: \bea

616: n^{(\alpha-1)/2} \tLalph ( \Po_n )

617: \tod \Yalph & {\rm and } & n^{(\alpha-1)/2} \tLalph ( \X_n )

618: \tod \Walph ~~~ (0 < \alpha < 1); ~~ 

619: \label{0727d} \\

620: \tLone ( \Po_n ) \tod \tDone^{\{1\}}

621:  + \tDone^{\{2\}} +Y_1  & {\rm and } &

622: \tLone ( \X_n ) \tod \tDone^{\{1\}}

623:  + \tDone^{\{2\}} +W_1 ;~~~~ 

624: \label{0727e} \\

625: \tLalph ( \Po_n ) \tod \tFalph^{\{1\}}

626:  + \tFalph^{\{2\}}  & {\rm and } &

627: \tLalph ( \X_n ) \tod \tFalph^{\{1\}}

628:  + \tFalph^{\{2\}} ~~~ (\alpha > 1) ~~

629: \label{0727f} .

630: \eea

631:  Here all the random variables in the limits

632: are independent, and $\tDone^{\{i\}}$, $i=1,2$,

633: are independent copies of $\tDone$ with

634: distribution defined at (\ref{0628a}),

635: and for $\alpha>1$, $\tFalph^{\{i\}}$, $i=1,2$, are independent

636: copies of 

637: %a random variable 

638: $\tFalph$ with distribution

639: defined at 

640: (\ref{0628d}).

641: \end{theorem}

642: 

643: \rems

644: The normal random variables $\Yalph$ or $\Walph$

645: arise from the edges

646: away from the boundary (see Section \ref{ltot}).

647: The non-normal variables (the $\tD$s and $\tF$s)

648: arise from the edges very close to the boundary, where the MDSF

649: is asymptotically close to the `directed linear forest'

650: discussed in Section \ref{secdlt}.

651: 

652: Theorem \ref{mainth}

653:  indicates a phase transition

654: in the character of the limit law as $\alpha$ increases.

655: The normal contribution (from the points away from the boundary)

656: dominates for $0<\alpha < 1$, while the boundary contributions dominate

657: for $\alpha > 1$. In the critical case $\alpha=1$, neither effect dominates

658: and both terms contribute significantly to the asymptotic behaviour. 

659: 

660: Noteworthy in the case $\alpha =1$

661: is the fact that by (\ref{0727b}) and (\ref{0727e}),

662: the limiting distribution is

663: the same for $\tLone(\Po_n) $ as for $\tLone(\Po_n^0)$,

664: and the same for $\tLone(\X_n)$ as for $\tLone(\X_n^0)$.

665: Note, however, that the difference $\tLone(\Po_n)-\tLone(\Po_n^0)$

666: is the (centred) total length of edges incident to the origin,

667: which is not negligible, but itself converges in distribution

668: (see \cite{rooted}) to a non-degenerate

669: random variable, namely a centred generalized Dickman random

670: variable with parameter $2$ (see (\ref{0629g}) below).

671: As an extension of Theorem \ref{mainth},

672: it should be possible to show that the joint distribution

673: of $(\tLone(\Po_n),\tLone(\Po_n^0))$ converges to that

674: of two coupled random variables, both having the distribution

675: of $\tDone$, whose difference has the centred generalized Dickman 

676: distribution with parameter 2. Likewise for the joint distribution

677: of $(\tLone(\X_n),\tLone(\X_n^0))$. 

678: 

679: Of particular interest

680: is the distribution of the variable $\tDone$ 

681: appearing in Theorem \ref{mainth}. 

682:  In Section \ref{subsecalphone},

683: we give a plot (Figure \ref{pdffig}) of the probability density function

684: of this distribution, estimated by simulation. Also,

685: we can use the fixed-point equation (\ref{0628a}) 

686:  to calculate the moments of $\tDone$ recursively. Writing

687: \[ f(U) := U \log U + (1-U) \log (1-U) + U, \]

688: and setting $m_k := \Exp[\tDone^k]$, 

689: we obtain

690: \bea

691: \label{0709c}

692:  m_k = \Exp[ (f(U))^k ] + \sum_{i=2}^k {k \choose i} \sum_{j=0}^i

693: {i \choose j}

694: \Exp [ (f(U))^{k-i} U^j (1-U)^{i-j} ]

695: m_j m_{i=j} .

696: \eea

697: The fact that $m_1=0$ simplifies things a little, and we can

698: rewrite this as

699: \bean

700: m_k = \Exp[ (f(U))^k ] + \sum_{i=1}^k {k \choose i} \left[

701:  m_i \Exp[ (f(U))^{k-i}(U^i+(1-U)^i)] ~^{~^{~^{~^{~^{~^{~^{~^{~}}}}}}}} \right.

702: ~~~~

703: \\

704: \left. +

705: \sum_{j=2}^{i-2}

706: {i \choose j}

707: \Exp [ (f(U))^{k-i} U^j (1-U)^{i-j} ]

708: m_j m_{i-j} \right].

709: \eean

710: So, for example, when $k=3$ we obtain $m_3 \approx 0.15411$,

711: which shows $\tDone$ is not Gaussian and 

712: is consistent with the skewness of the plot

713: in Figure \ref{pdffig}.  \\

714: 

715: 

716: The remainder of this paper is organized as follows.

717: After discussion of the DLT in Section \ref{secdlt},

718: in Section \ref{secgeneral} we present general

719: limit theorems in geometric probability, which

720: we shall use in obtaining our main results for

721: the MDST.

722:  Theorem \ref{llnthm} is proved in Section \ref{seclln}

723: (this proof does not use the results of Section \ref{secdlt}).

724: The proof of Theorem \ref{mainth} is prepared in

725: Sections \ref{ltot} and \ref{bdry}, and completed in

726: Section \ref{totallength}. In these proofs, we repeatedly

727: use {\em Slutsky's theorem}

728:  (see e.g.~\cite{penbook})

729:  which says that

730: if $X_n \to X$ in distribution and $Y_n \to 0$ in

731: probability, then $X_n +Y_n \to X $ in distribution.

732: 

733: 

734: 

735: \section{The directed linear forest and tree}

736: \label{secdlt}

737: 

738: The directed linear forest (DLF)  and  directed linear tree (DLT)

739: are for us a tool

740: for the analysis of the limiting behaviour of

741: the contribution to the total weight of the random

742: MDSF/MDST from edges near the boundary of the unit

743: square.

744:  In the present section we derive

745: the properties of the DLF that we need (in particular, Theorem

746: \ref{dltthm}); subsequently,

747:  in Theorem \ref{thmbdry}, we shall see that the total 

748:  weight of edges from the points near

749: the boundaries, as $n \to \infty$,

750:  converges in distribution to the limit of the

751: total weight of the DLF.

752: 

753: 

754:     The  DLT is also of some intrinsic interest.

755: It is a one-dimensional directed analogue of the

756: so-called `on-line nearest neighbour graph', which is of interest

757: in the study of networks such as the world wide web 

758: (see, e.g.~\cite{boll};

759: and~\cite{mdp} for more on the on-line nearest neighbour graph).

760: Moreover, it is constructed via a fragmentation process

761: similar to those seen in, for example, \cite{bertoin}; the

762: tree provides a historical representation of the fragmentation

763: process.

764: 

765: For any finite sequence $\mathcal{T}_m = ( x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_m ) \in  (0,1]^m$,

766: we construct the directed linear forest (DLF) as follows.

767: We start with the unit interval $(0,1]$

768: and insert the points $x_i$ in order, one at a time, starting with $i=1$.

769: At the insertion of each point, we join the new point to its nearest neighbour

770: among those points already present that lie to the {\em left} of the

771:  point (provided that such a point exists). In other words,

772: for each point $x_i$, $i \geq 2$, we join $x_i$ by a directed edge to the point

773: $\max \{ x_j : 1 \leq  j < i, \; x_j < x_i \}$. If 

774: $ \{ x_j : 1 \leq  j < i, \; x_j < x_i \}$ is empty, we do not add

775: any directed edge from $x_i$.

776: In this way we construct a `directed linear forest', which we denote by

777:  $\mathrm{DLF} \left( \mathcal{T}_m \right)$.

778:  We denote the total

779: weight (under weight function with exponent $\alpha$) of 

780:  $\mathrm{DLF} \left( \mathcal{T}_m \right)$ by

781: $D^\alpha ( \mathcal{T}_m )$, that is, we set

782: $$

783:  D^\alpha \left( \mathcal{T}_m \right):= \sum_{i=2}^m 

784: %(x_i - \max \{x_j: 1 \leq j < i, x_j < x_i \})^\alpha{\bf 1}\{x_i \neq

785: %\min \{ x_j: 1 \leq j \leq i \} \}.

786: (x_i - \max \{ x_j: 1 \leq j < i, x_j < x_i \} )^\alpha{\bf 1}\{

787: \min \{x_j: 1 \leq j < i \} < x_i \}.

788: $$

789: 

790: Further, given $\mathcal{T}_m$, let

791: $\mathcal{T}^0_m$ be the sequence

792:  $( x_0,x_1,\ldots,x_m )$

793: where the initial term is $x_0 := 0$. Then the DLF on

794: $\mathcal{T}^0_m$ is constructed in the same way, where now

795: for each $i \geq 1$, we join $x_i$ by an edge to the point

796: $\max \{ x_j : 0 \leq  j < i, \; x_j < x_i \}$.  But now we see that $x_1$ will

797: always be joined to $x_0=0$, and $x_2$ will be joined either to $x_1$

798: (if $x_2 > x_1$) or to $x_0$, and so on.  In this way we construct

799:  a `directed linear tree' (DLT) on vertex set

800:  %${\cal T}_m^0$ 

801:  $\{ x_0,x_1,\ldots,x_m \}$

802: with $m$ edges.

803: Denote the total weight of this tree with weight exponent $\alpha $

804: by $D^\alpha (\mathcal{T}_m^0)$; that is, set

805: $$

806:  D^\alpha \left( \mathcal{T}_m^0 \right):= \sum_{i=1}^m 

807: (x_i- \max\{ x_j: 0 \leq j < i, x_j < x_i \})^\alpha.

808: $$

809: We shall be  mainly interested in the case where $\mathcal{T}_m$

810: is a random vector in $(0,1]^m$.

811: In this case, 

812: set

813: $\tD^\alpha \left( \mathcal{T}_m \right) := D^\alpha \left( \mathcal{T}_m

814: \right) - \Exp \left[ D^\alpha \left( \mathcal{T}_m \right)

815: \right]$ the centred total weight of the DLF,

816: and

817: $\tD^\alpha \left( \mathcal{T}_m^0 \right) = D^\alpha \left( \mathcal{T}_m^0

818: \right) - \Exp \left[ D^\alpha \left( \mathcal{T}_m^0 \right)

819: \right]$ the centred total weight of the DLT.

820: % In the case where the components

821: % of $\mathcal{T}_m$ are independent uniform random variables on

822: %$(0,1]$, we write $\mathcal{T}_m=\mathcal{U}_m$.

823: 

824: We take $\mathcal{T}_m$ to be a vector of

825: uniform  variables.

826: Let $(X_1,X_2,X_3,\ldots)$ be a sequence of independent

827: uniformly distributed 

828: random variables   in $(0,1]$, and for $m \in \N$ set 

829:  $\UU_m := ( X_1, X_2, \ldots, X_m )$.

830: % where all the $X_i$ are independent and uniformly distributed on $(0,1]$.

831: We consider $D^\alpha(\UU_m)$ and $D^\alpha(\UU_m^0)$. For these

832: variables, we establish asymptotic behaviour of the mean value

833: in Propositions \ref{dltmoms} and \ref{dlfmoms},

834: along with the following convergence results, which

835: are the principal results of this section.

836: 

837: For $\alpha >1$, let 

838: $\Dalph$ denote a random variable with

839:  distribution characterized

840: by the fixed-point equation

841: \bea

842: \label{0628bb}

843:  \Dalph \eqd U^\alpha \Dalph^{\{1\}} +(1-U)^\alpha

844: \Dalph^{\{2\}} +U^\alpha ,

845: \eea

846: where 

847: $U$ is uniform on

848: $(0,1)$ and independent of the other variables on the right.

849: Also for $\alpha>1$, let $\Falph$ denote a

850:  random variable with distribution characterized

851: by the fixed-point equation

852: \bea

853: \label{0628dd}

854:  \Falph \eqd U^\alpha \Falph +(1-U)^\alpha

855: \Dalph   ,

856: \eea

857: where $U$ is uniform on $(0,1)$, $\Dalph$

858: has the distribution given by (\ref{0628bb}), and

859: the $U$, $\Dalph$ and $\Falph$ on the right are independent.

860: The corresponding centred

861: random variables  $\tDalph := \Dalph -\Exp[\Dalph]$ and

862: $\tFalph := \Falph - \Exp [ \Falph]$

863: satisfy the fixed-point equations (\ref{0628b}) and

864: (\ref{0628d}) respectively. The solutions to \eq{0628b}

865: and \eq{0628d} are unique by the criterion given at

866: \eq{0701b}, and hence the solutions to \eq{0628bb} and \eq{0628dd}

867: are also unique.

868: 

869: 

870: 

871: \begin{theorem} \label{dltthm}

872: \begin{itemize}

873: \item[(i)]

874: As $m\to \infty$ we have

875:  $\tD^1(\UU_m^0) \inLL \tDone$ and $\tD^1(\UU_m) \inLL \tFone$

876: where $\tDone$ has the distribution 

877: given by the fixed-point equation (\ref{0628a}),

878: and $\tFone$  has the same distribution 

879: as $\tDone$. 

880: Also, the variance of $\tDone$ (and hence also of

881: $\tFone$) is $2 -\pi^2/6 \approx 0.355066$.

882: Finally, $\Cov(\tDone,\tFone) = (7/4)-\pi^2/6 \approx

883: 0.105066$.

884: \item[(ii)] For $\alpha>1$, as $m\to \infty$ we have

885: $D^\alpha(\UU_m^0) \to \Dalph$, almost surely and in $L^2$,

886: and

887:  $D^\alpha(\UU_m) \inLL \Falph$, almost surely and in $L^2$,

888:  where the distributions of

889: $\Dalph$, $\Falph$ are given by the fixed-point equations 

890: (\ref{0628bb})

891: and (\ref{0628dd}) respectively.

892: Also, $\Exp[\Dalph]= (\alpha-1)^{-1}$ and

893:  $\Exp[\Falph]= (\alpha(\alpha-1))^{-1}$, 

894: while

895:  $\Var(\Dalph)$ and $\Var(\Falph)$ are

896: given by (\ref{0701g}) and (\ref{0701i}) respectively.

897: \end{itemize}

898: \end{theorem}

899: \proof 

900: Part (i) follows from

901:  Propositions \ref{dconverge},

902:  \ref{1020d} 

903: and

904:  \ref{ffixed}

905: below.

906: Part (ii) follows from

907: Propositions \ref{1119f} and  \ref{1125a} below.

908: We prove these results in the following sections.

909:  $\square$ \\

910: 

911: An interesting property of the DLT, which we use

912: in establishing fixed-point equations for limit distributions,

913: is its {\em self-similarity} (scaling property). In terms of the total

914: weight, this says that for any $t \in (0,1)$, if

915: $Y_1,\ldots,Y_n$ are independent and uniformly distributed on $(0,t]$,

916: then the distribution

917: of $D^\alpha(Y_1,\ldots,Y_n)$ is the same as that of

918: $t^\alpha D^\alpha(X_1,\ldots,X_n)$.  

919: 

920: 

921: 

922: 

923: \subsection{The mean total weight of the DLF and DLT} \label{dltproperties}

924: 

925: 

926: 

927: First we consider the rooted case, i.e.~the DLT on $\UU^0_m$.

928: For $m=1,2,3,\ldots$

929: denote by $Z_m$ the random variable given by the gain in length

930: of the tree on the addition of one point ($X_m$) to an existing $m-1$

931: points in the DLT on a sequence of uniform random variables

932: $\UU^0_{m-1}$, i.e.~with the conventions

933: $D^1 (\UU_0^0)=0$ and 

934: $X_0 =0$,

935: we set

936: \bea

937: Z_m := D^1(\UU_m^0)-D^1(\UU_{m-1}^0) = 

938: X_m- \max\{ X_j: 0 \leq j < m, X_j < X_m \}.

939: \label{0728j}

940: \eea

941: Thus, with weight exponent $\alpha$, the $m$th edge to be added

942: has weight $Z_m^\alpha$.

943: 

944: \begin{lemma} \label{Zmdist} %\begin{itemize}

945: % \item[(i)]

946: (i)  $Z_m$ has distribution function $F_m$ given by

947:  $F_m(t)=0$ for $t<0$, $F_m(t)=1$ for $t>1$, and

948: $ F_m(t) = 1-(1-t)^m $  for $ 0 \leq t \leq 1$.

949: % \item[(ii)] 

950: 

951: (ii)

952: For $\alpha >0$, 

953:  $Z_m^\alpha$ has expectation and variance

954: \begin{equation} \label{zexpvar}

955: \Exp[Z_m^\alpha]=\frac{m! \Gamma(1+\alpha)}{\Gamma(1+\alpha+m)}

956: , ~~~ \Var[Z_m^\alpha] = \frac{m! \Gamma(1+2\alpha)}{\Gamma(1+2\alpha+m)}

957: - \left( \frac{m! \Gamma(1+\alpha)}{\Gamma(1+\alpha+m)}\right)^2.

958: %\frac{m}{(m+1)^2(m+2)}

959: \end{equation} 

960: In particular,

961: \bea

962: \label{0630b}

963:  \Exp[Z_m]=

964: \frac{1}{m+1} ; ~~ \Var[Z_m] = \frac{m}{(m+1)^2(m+2)}. 

965: \eea

966: 

967: (iii)

968: %\item[(iii)]

969: For $\alpha >0$,

970: as $m \to \infty$ we have

971:  \begin{equation} \label{asymZm}

972: \Exp[Z_m^\alpha]

973: \sim \Gamma (\alpha+1) m^{-\alpha}, \;

974: \Var[Z_m^\alpha] \sim \left( \Gamma(2\alpha+1) - (\Gamma(\alpha+1))^2 \right)

975: m^{-2\alpha} . \end{equation}

976: 

977: (iv)

978: %\item[(iv)] 

979: As $m \to \infty$,

980: $mZ_m$ converges in distribution, 

981:  to an exponential

982:  with parameter $1$.

983: %\end{itemize}

984: \end{lemma}

985: \proof For $0 \leq t \leq 1$ we have

986: \[ \Pr[Z_m > t]  =  \Pr [ 

987: X_{m}> t 

988: \textrm{ and none of }

989: X_1,\ldots,X_{m-1} \textrm{ lies in } (X_{m}-t,X_{m}) 

990: ]  =  (1-t)^{m} , \]

991: %Then by setting $s=t^{1/\alpha}$ we obtain

992: %which gives us (\ref{0629e}), proving (i).

993: and (i) follows.

994: We then obtain (ii)

995: since for any $\alpha >0$ and for $k=1,2$,

996: \[

997:  \Exp[Z_m^{k\alpha}] = \int_0^1 \Pr [ Z_m > t^{1/(k \alpha)} ]

998:  \ud t = \int_0^1

999: ( 1-t^{1/k\alpha})^m \ud t =

1000: \frac{m! \Gamma(1+k\alpha)}{\Gamma(1+k\alpha+m)}.

1001: \]

1002: Then (iii) follows by Stirling's formula, which yields

1003: $$

1004: \Exp[Z_m^{k\alpha}] = \Gamma(1+k\alpha)

1005:  m^{-k\alpha} (1+O(m^{-1})).

1006: $$

1007: For (iv), we have from (i) that, for $t \in [0,\infty)$,

1008: and $m$ large enough so that $(t/m) \leq 1$,

1009:  \[ \Pr[mZ_m \leq t]

1010: = F_m \left( \frac{t}{m} \right) = 1- \left( 1 -

1011: \frac{t}{m} \right)^m \to  1-e^{-t} , \textrm{ as } m \to \infty.

1012: \]

1013: But $1-e^{-t}$, $t \geq 0$

1014:  is the exponential distribution function with

1015: parameter 1. $\square$ \\

1016: 

1017: The following result gives the asymptotic 

1018: behaviour of the expected total weight of the DLT.

1019: Let $\gamma$ denote Euler's constant, so that

1020: \bea

1021: \label{0708b}

1022:  \left( \sum_{i=1}^k  \frac{1}{i} \right) - \log k = \gamma +O(k^{-1}).

1023: \eea

1024: 

1025: 

1026: \begin{proposition} \label{dltmoms}

1027: As $m \to \infty$ the expected total weight of the DLT under $\alpha$-power 

1028: weighting on

1029: $\mathcal{U}^0_m$ satisfies

1030: \begin{eqnarray} 

1031: \Exp[ D^\alpha(\UU_m^0) ] & \sim &

1032: \frac{\Gamma(\alpha+1)}{1-\alpha} m^{1-\alpha} ~~~  (0<\alpha<1); 

1033: \label{0720a}

1034: \\

1035: \Exp[ D^1(\UU_m^0) ] - \log{m}   & \to & \gamma-1; 

1036: \label{0720b}\\

1037: \Exp[ D^\alpha(\UU_m^0) ] & = & \frac{1}{\alpha-1}

1038: +O(m^{1-\alpha}) ~~~ (\alpha>1). \label{0720c}

1039:  \end{eqnarray} 

1040: \end{proposition} 

1041: \textbf{Proof.}

1042: We have \[ \label{eqn100a} \Exp[D^\alpha(\UU_m^0)] = \sum_{i=1}^m

1043: \left( \Exp [ D^\alpha(\UU_i^0) ] - \Exp[D^\alpha(\UU_{i-1}^0)]

1044: \right) = \sum_{i=1}^m \Exp[Z^\alpha_i] .

1045: \]

1046:  In the case  where $\alpha=1$, $E[Z_i] = (i+1)^{-1}$ by (\ref{0630b}),

1047: and  (\ref{0720b}) follows

1048: by (\ref{0708b}).

1049:  For general $\alpha>0$, $\alpha \neq 1$,

1050: from (\ref{zexpvar}) we have that \begin{equation} \label{1117a}

1051: \Exp[D^\alpha(\UU_m^0)] = \Gamma(1+\alpha) \sum_{i=1}^m

1052: \frac{\Gamma(i+1)}{\Gamma(1+\alpha+i)} = \frac{1}{\alpha-1} -

1053: \frac{\Gamma(1+\alpha) \Gamma(m+2)}{(\alpha-1) \Gamma(m+1+\alpha)}

1054: . \end{equation} By Stirling's formula, the last term satisfies

1055: \begin{equation}

1056:  \label{1117b}

1057:  -\frac{\Gamma(1+\alpha) 

1058: \Gamma(m+2)}{(\alpha-1)

1059: \Gamma(m+1+\alpha)} = -\frac{\Gamma(1+\alpha)}{\alpha-1}

1060: m^{1-\alpha} (1+O(m^{-1})),

1061:  \end{equation} 

1062: which tends to zero as $m \to \infty$ for $\alpha >1$,

1063: to give us (\ref{0720c}). For $\alpha <1$, we have (\ref{0720a}) from

1064: (\ref{1117a}) and (\ref{1117b}).  $\square$ \\

1065: 

1066: Now consider the unrooted case, i.e., the directed linear

1067: forest.  For $\mathcal{U}_m$  as above

1068:  the total weight of the DLF is denoted $D^\alpha ( \UU_m)$,

1069: and the centred total weight is $\tD^\alpha (\UU_m) :=

1070: D^\alpha (\UU_m)- \Exp [D^\alpha (\UU_m)]$. We

1071: then see that

1072: \bea

1073:  D^\alpha ( \UU_m^0 ) = D^\alpha ( \UU_m) + \LL^\alpha_0( \UU_m^0) , 

1074: \label{0714b}

1075: \eea

1076:  where $\LL^\alpha_0( \UU_m^0)$ is the total weight of

1077: edges incident to 0 in the DLT on $\UU_m^0$.

1078: 

1079: The following lemma says that $\LL^\alpha_0( \UU_m^0)$

1080: converges to a random variable that has

1081: the generalized Dickman distribution with

1082: parameter $1/\alpha$ (see \cite{rooted}), that is,

1083: the distribution of a random variable $X$ which satisfies

1084: the distributional fixed-point equation

1085: \bea

1086: \label{0629g}

1087:  X \eqd U^{\alpha} (1+X) ,\eea

1088: where $U$ is uniform on $(0,1)$ and independent of the

1089: $X$ on the right. We recall

1090:  from Proposition 3 of \cite{rooted} that if

1091: $X$ satisfies (\ref{0629g}) then

1092: \bea

1093: \label{0630j}

1094: \Exp[X] = 1/\alpha, \textrm{ and } \Exp[ X^2] = (\alpha+2)/(2\alpha^2).

1095: \eea

1096: \begin{lemma} \label{dickmanlem} Let $\alpha>0$.

1097: There is a random variable  $\LL^\alpha_0$  with

1098: the generalized Dickman distribution with parameter

1099: $1/\alpha$, such that

1100: as $m \to \infty$,

1101: we have that

1102: $ \LL^\alpha_0( \UU_m^0) \to 

1103: \LL^\alpha_0 $, almost surely and in $L^2$.

1104: \end{lemma} \textbf{Proof.} 

1105: Let $\delta_D(\UU_m^0)$ denote the degree of the origin in the

1106: directed linear tree on $\UU^0_m$, so that

1107: $\delta_D(\UU_m^0)$ is the number of lower records in 

1108: the sequence $(X_1,\ldots, X_m)$. Then

1109: \bea

1110: \label{0629f}

1111:  \LL_0^\alpha (\UU_m^0) = U_1^\alpha +(U_1U_2)^\alpha

1112:  + \cdots + ( U_1 \cdots U_{\delta_D(\UU_m^0)} )^\alpha ,

1113: \eea

1114: where $(U_1, U_2, \ldots)$ is a certain

1115: sequence of independent uniform random variables on $(0,1)$,

1116: namely the ratios between successive lower records of

1117: the sequence $(X_n)$.

1118: The sum

1119: $

1120: % \LL_0^\alpha := 

1121: U_1^\alpha +(U_1U_2)^\alpha + (U_1U_2U_3)^\alpha + \cdots  

1122: $

1123:  has nonnegative terms and finite expectation, so it

1124: converges almost surely to a limit which we denote

1125:  $\LL_0^\alpha$.

1126:  Then $\LL_0^\alpha$

1127:  has the generalized Dickman distribution

1128:  with parameter $1/\alpha$ (see Proposition 2 of \cite{rooted}).

1129: 

1130: 

1131: Since $\delta_D(\UU_m^0)$ tends to infinity almost surely as $m \to \infty$,

1132: we have $\LL_0^\alpha(\UU_m^0) \to \LL_0^\alpha$ almost surely.

1133: Also, $\Exp [ (\LL_0^\alpha)^2 ]

1134: < \infty$, by (\ref{0630j}),

1135: and $(\LL_0^\alpha -\LL_0^\alpha (\UU_m^0))^2 \leq (\LL_0^\alpha)^2$

1136: for all $m$. Thus $\Exp [ (\LL_0^\alpha (\UU_m^0) -\LL_0^\alpha )^2 ] \to 0$

1137: by the dominated convergence theorem, and so we have the $L^2$

1138: convergence as well. $\square$

1139: 

1140: \begin{proposition} \label{dlfmoms}

1141: As $m \to \infty$ the expected total weight of the DLF under

1142:  $\alpha$-power weighting on

1143: $\mathcal{U}_m$ satisfies

1144: \begin{eqnarray} 

1145: \Exp[ D^\alpha(\UU_m) ] & \sim &

1146: \frac{\Gamma(\alpha+1)}{1-\alpha} m^{1-\alpha} ~~~  (0<\alpha<1); 

1147: \label{0720d}

1148: \\

1149: \Exp[ D^1(\UU_m) ] -\log{m}   & \to & \gamma -2

1150: % ~~~  

1151: %(\alpha=1)

1152: ; \label{0720e}

1153: \\

1154: \Exp[ D^\alpha(\UU_m) ] & \to & \frac{1}{\alpha(\alpha-1)} ~~~

1155: (\alpha>1). \label{0720f}

1156:  \end{eqnarray}

1157: \end{proposition}

1158: \proof

1159: By (\ref{0714b}) we have

1160:  $  \Exp[

1161: D^\alpha(\UU_m) ] = \Exp[ D^\alpha(\UU_m^0) ] -

1162:  \Exp[ \LL_0^\alpha(\UU_m^0) ]. 

1163: $ 

1164: By

1165:   Lemma \ref{dickmanlem} and

1166:  (\ref{0630j}),

1167: \[ \Exp [ \LL_0^\alpha ( \UU_m^0 )] \longrightarrow \Exp [ \LL_0^\alpha ] = 1/\alpha.\]

1168: We then obtain (\ref{0720d}), (\ref{0720e}) and (\ref{0720f})

1169:  from Proposition \ref{dltmoms}. $\square$

1170: 

1171: \subsection{Orthogonal increments for $\alpha =1$}

1172: In this section we shall show (in Lemma \ref{covz}) 

1173: that when $\alpha =1$, the variables $Z_i, i \geq 1$ are

1174: mutually orthogonal, in the sense of having zero covariances,

1175: which will be used later on to establish convergence of the

1176: (centred) total length of the DLT.  

1177: To prove this, we first need further notation.

1178: 

1179: 

1180: Given  $X_1,\ldots,X_m$, let us denote the   order statistics

1181: of $X_1,\ldots,X_m$, taken in increasing order,

1182:  as  

1183: \linebreak

1184: $ X_{(1)}^m, X_{(2)}^m, \ldots, X_{(m)}^m $. Thus 

1185: $ ( X_{(1)}^m, X_{(2)}^m, \ldots,

1186: X_{(m)}^m ) $ is a nondecreasing sequence, forming

1187:  a permutation of the original

1188: $(X_1, \ldots, X_m)$.

1189: Denote the existing

1190: $m+1$ intervals

1191: between points by

1192: $I_j^{m}:= \left( X_{(j-1)}^m, X_{(j)}^m \right)$ for $j=1,2,\ldots,m+1$,

1193: where we set $X_{(0)}^m:=0$ and $X_{(m+1)}^m:=1$. Let the widths of

1194: these intervals (the spacings) be

1195: \[ S_j^m := \left| I_j^m \right| = X_{(j)}^m-X_{(j-1)}^m , \]

1196:  for $1 \leq j \leq

1197: m+1$. Then $0 \leq S_j^m < 1$ for $1 \leq j \leq m+1$, and

1198: $\sum_{j=1}^{m+1} S_j^m = 1$. That is, the vector $\left(

1199: S_1^m,S_2^m, \ldots,S_{m+1}^m \right)$ belongs to the

1200: $m$-dimensional simplex, $\Delta_m$. 

1201: Note that only $m$ of the $S_j^m$ are

1202: required to specify the vector.

1203: 

1204: We can arrange the spacings themselves  $(S_j^m, 1 \leq j \leq m+1)$ into

1205: increasing order to give $S_{(1)}^m,$ $S_{(2)}^m ,$ $\ldots,$

1206: $S_{(m+1)}^m$. Then let $\mathcal{F}_S^m$ denote the sigma field

1207: generated by these ordered spacings, so that

1208: \bea

1209: \label{0629d}

1210:  \mathcal{F}_S^m = \sigma \left(

1211: S_{(1)}^m,\ldots,S_{(m+1)}^m \right) .

1212: \eea

1213: The following interpretation of $\mathcal{F}_S^m $ 

1214: may be helpful. The set $(0,1)\setminus\{X_1,\ldots,X_m\}$

1215: consists almost surely of $m+1$ connected components (`fragments')

1216: of total length 1, and $\mathcal{F}_S^m $ is the 

1217: $\sigma$-field generated by the collection of lengths

1218: of these fragments, ignoring the order in which they appear.

1219: 

1220: By definition, the value of $Z_m$ must be one of the

1221: (ordered) spacings $S^m_{(1)}, \ldots, S^m_{(m+1)}$.

1222: The next result says that, given the values of these 

1223: spacings, each of the possible values for $Z_m$

1224: are equally likely.

1225: 

1226: \begin{lemma} \label{0222q}

1227: For 

1228: $m \geq 1$ we have

1229: \bea

1230: \label{0526a}

1231: \Pr \left[ \left. Z_m = S^m_{(i)} \right| \FF_S^m \right] = \frac{1}{m+1}

1232: ~~~{\rm a.s.},

1233: \textrm{ for $i=1,\ldots,m+1$}.

1234: \eea

1235: Hence,

1236: \bea

1237: \Exp \left[ Z_m \left|

1238: \mathcal{F}_S^m \right. \right] = \frac{1}{m+1} \sum_{i=1}^{m+1} 

1239: S_{(i)}^m 

1240: = \frac{1}{m+1} .

1241: \label{0526b}

1242: \eea

1243: \end{lemma}

1244: \textbf{Proof.} First we note that $\left( X_{(1)}^m, \ldots,

1245:  X_{(m)}^m \right)$

1246: is uniformly distributed over

1247:  \[ \left\{ ( x_1, \ldots, x_m ) : 0 \leq x_1 \leq x_2

1248: \leq \ldots \leq x_m \leq 1 \right\} . \] Now \[ \left(

1249: \begin{array}{c} S_1^m \\ S_2^m \\ S_3^m \\ \vdots \\ S_m^m 

1250: \end{array} \right)

1251: = \left( \begin{array}{cccccc} 1 & 0 & 0 & \ldots & 0 & 0 \\

1252: -1 & 1 & 0 & \ldots & 0 & 0 \\

1253: 0 & -1 & 1 & \ldots & 0 & 0 \\

1254: \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots & \vdots \\

1255: 0 & 0 & 0 & \ldots & -1 & 1 \end{array} \right) \left(

1256: \begin{array}{c} X_{(1)}^m \\ X_{(2)}^m \\ X_{(3)}^m \\ \vdots

1257: \\ X_{(m)}^m \end{array} \right) . \]

1258: The $m$ by $m$ matrix here has determinant 1. Hence $\left( S_1^m,

1259: \ldots , S_m^m \right)$ is uniform over \[ \left\{ \left( x_1,

1260: \ldots, x_m \right) : \sum_{j=1}^m x_j \leq 1; x_j \geq 0 , \;

1261: \forall \; 1 \leq j \leq m \right\}.\] Then $\left(

1262: S_1^m, \ldots , S_{m+1}^m \right)$ is uniform over the

1263: $m$-dimensional simplex $\Delta_m$.

1264: In particular, the $S_j^m$ are exchangeable.

1265: Thus given $S_{(1)}^m, \ldots, S_{(m+1)}^m$, i.e.~$\mathcal{F}_S^m$, the

1266: actual values of $S_1^m, \ldots, S_{m+1}^m$ are equally

1267: likely to be any permutation of $S_{(1)}^m, \ldots, S_{(m+1)}^m$, and

1268: given $S_1^m, \ldots, S_{m+1}^m$

1269: the value of $Z_m$ is equally likely to be any of $S_{1}^m,

1270: \ldots, S_{m}^m$ (but cannot be $S_{m+1}^m$).

1271: 

1272: Hence, given $S^m_{(1)},\ldots,S^m_{(m+1)}$ the probability

1273: that $Z_m = S^m_{(i)}$ is $(1/m) \times m/(m+1) = 1/(m+1)$,

1274: i.e.~we have (\ref{0526a}), and then 

1275:  (\ref{0526b})

1276: follows since $\sum_{j=1}^{m+1} S_{(j)}^m =1$.

1277: $\square$

1278: 

1279: 

1280: 

1281: \begin{lemma}

1282: \label{0526c}

1283: Let $1 \leq m < \ell$.

1284: Given $\mathcal{F}_S^m$,  

1285:  $Z_\ell$ and $Z_m$ are

1286: conditionally independent. \end{lemma}

1287: \textbf{Proof.} Given

1288: $\mathcal{F}_S^m$, we have $S_{(1)}^m,\ldots,S_{(m+1)}^m$,

1289: and by (\ref{0526a}),

1290: the (conditional)

1291: distribution of $Z_m$ is uniform on

1292: $\{S_{(1)}^m,\ldots,S_{(m+1)}^m\}$.

1293: The conditional distribution of $Z_\ell$, $\ell > m$,

1294:  given $\FF_S^m$, depends only on $S_{(1)}^m,\ldots,S_{(m+1)}^m$ and

1295:  not which

1296: one of them $Z_m$ happens to be. Hence $Z_m$ and $Z_\ell$ are

1297: conditionally independent. $\square$

1298: 

1299: \begin{lemma} \label{covz} 

1300: For $1 \leq m < \ell$,

1301: %$\alpha=1$, 

1302: the random variables $Z_m,Z_\ell$

1303: satisfy

1304: $\Cov \left[ Z_m,Z_\ell \right] = 0$.

1305: \end{lemma}

1306: \textbf{Proof.} From Lemmas  \ref{0526c} and 

1307: \ref{0222q},

1308:  \bean

1309:  \Exp \left[ Z_m Z_\ell |

1310: \mathcal{F}_S^m \right] & = & \Exp \left[ Z_m | \mathcal{F}_S^m

1311: \right] \Exp \left[ Z_\ell | \mathcal{F}_S^m \right]  =

1312: \frac{1}{m+1} \Exp \left[ Z_\ell | \mathcal{F}_S^m \right], 

1313: \eean

1314: and by taking expectations we obtain

1315: \bean

1316: \Exp \left[ Z_m Z_\ell \right] & = & \frac{1}{m+1} \Exp

1317: \left[ Z_\ell \right] = \frac{1}{m+1} \cdot \frac{1}{\ell+1} = \Exp [ Z_m ]

1318: \cdot \Exp [Z_\ell].

1319: \eean

1320: Hence the covariance of $Z_m$ and $Z_\ell$ is zero. $\square$ \\

1321: 

1322: \rems

1323: (i) Calculations yield, for example, that

1324: $\Exp[D^1(\UU_1^0)]=\Exp[Z_1]=1/2$, $\Exp[D^1(\UU_2^0)]=5/6$, and

1325: $\mathrm{Var}[Z_1]=1/12$, $\mathrm{Var}[Z_2]=1/18$,

1326: $\mathrm{Var}[D^1(\UU_2^0)]=5/36$. \\

1327: 

1328: (ii) The orthogonality structure of the $Z_m^\alpha$ is unique to the

1329: $\alpha=1$ case. For example, it can be shown that, for $\alpha>0$, 

1330: \[

1331: \Exp[Z_1^\alpha] \Exp[Z_2^\alpha] =

1332:  \frac{2}{(1+\alpha)^2(2+\alpha)} , \textrm{

1333: and } \Exp[Z_1^\alpha Z_2^\alpha] = \frac{1}{2(1+\alpha)^2 } \left( 1+ \frac

1334: {2 \Gamma (\alpha +2)^2}{\Gamma (2 \alpha +3)} \right).

1335:  \] 

1336: Then 

1337: \[

1338: \mathrm{Cov}[Z_1^\alpha,Z_2^\alpha] = \frac{(\alpha-2) \Gamma(2\alpha+3)

1339: +2(\alpha+2) \Gamma (\alpha+2)^2}{2(\alpha+1)^2 (\alpha+2)

1340: \Gamma(2\alpha +3)} , 

1341: \]

1342: and this quantity is zero only if $\alpha=1$; it is positive for $\alpha>1$ 

1343: and negative for $0<\alpha<1$. 

1344: 

1345: 

1346: \subsection{Limit behaviour for $\alpha >1$} \label{alphagr1}

1347: 

1348: %\subsection{The rooted case: the DLT}

1349: We now consider the limit distribution of the

1350: total weight 

1351: of the

1352: DLT and DLF.

1353:  In the present

1354: section we consider the case of $\alpha$-power weighted

1355: edges with $\alpha >1$;

1356: that is, we prove part (ii) of Theorem \ref{dltthm}.

1357: To describe the moments of the limiting distribution of

1358:  $D^\alpha(\UU_m^0)$ and $D^\alpha(\UU_m)$, we introduce the notation

1359:  \bea

1360:  J(\alpha) := \int_0^1 u^\alpha (1-u)^\alpha

1361:  \ud u = 2^{-1-2\alpha} \sqrt{\pi} \frac{ \Gamma

1362: (\alpha+1)}{\Gamma (\alpha+3/2)} . 

1363: %\label{Jdef})

1364: \label{Jdef}

1365: \eea 

1366: We start with the rooted case ($D^\alpha(\UU_m^0)$), and subsequently 

1367: consider the unrooted case ($D^\alpha(\UU_m)$).

1368: 

1369: \begin{proposition} \label{1119f} Let $\alpha>1$. 

1370: Then there exists a random variable $\Dalph$

1371: such that as $m \to \infty$ we have

1372: $D^\alpha(\UU_m^0) \to \Dalph$ almost surely and in $L^2$.

1373: Also, the random variable $\Dalph$ 

1374: satisfies the distributional fixed-point equality (\ref{0628bb}).

1375: Further,

1376: $\Exp[ \Dalph] = 1/(\alpha-1)$ and

1377: \bea

1378: \label{0701g}

1379:  \Var [ \Dalph ] =

1380: \frac{\alpha \left( \alpha -2 + 2(2\alpha+1) J(\alpha) \right)}

1381: {(\alpha-1)^2(2\alpha-1)}.

1382: \eea

1383: \end{proposition}

1384: %

1385: \textbf{Proof.} 

1386: Let $Z_i$ be the length of the $i$th edge of the DLT,

1387:   as defined at (\ref{0728j}).

1388: Let $ D_\alpha := \sum_{i=1}^\infty

1389: Z_i^\alpha . $

1390: The sum converges almost surely since

1391: it has non-negative terms

1392: and, by (\ref{asymZm}), has finite expectation for $\alpha >1$.

1393: By (\ref{asymZm}) and Cauchy-Schwarz, there

1394: exists a constant $0<C<\infty$ such that

1395: \bean

1396: \Exp[ D_\alpha^2 ] = \sum_{i=1}^\infty \sum_{j=1}^\infty

1397: \Exp [ Z_i^\alpha Z_j^\alpha ] \leq C \sum_{i=1}^\infty \sum_{j=1}^\infty

1398: i^{-\alpha} j^{-\alpha} < \infty, \eean

1399: since $\alpha>1$. The $L^2$ convergence

1400: then follows from the dominated convergence

1401: theorem.

1402: 

1403:  Taking $U= X_1 $ here, by the self-similarity of the DLT we have that 

1404: \bea

1405:  D^\alpha (\UU_m^0) \eqd U^\alpha

1406: D_{\{1\}}^\alpha (\UU_{N}^0) +(1-U)^\alpha D_{\{2\}}^\alpha

1407: (\UU_{m-1-N}^0) +U^\alpha, 

1408: \label{0714h}

1409: \eea

1410:  where

1411:  $N \sim \textrm{Bin} (m-1, U)$,

1412: given $U$, 

1413: and, given $U$ and $N$, $D^\alpha_{\{1\}}(\UU_N^0)$ and

1414:  $D^\alpha_{\{2\}}(\UU_{m-1-N}^0)$ 

1415: are independent with the distribution of $D^\alpha(\UU_N^0)$ and

1416:  $D^\alpha(\UU_{m-1-N}^0)$, respectively. 

1417: As $m \to \infty$, $N$ and $m-N$ both tend to

1418: infinity almost surely, and so, by taking

1419: $m \to \infty$ in (\ref{0714h}), we obtain 

1420: the fixed-point equation (\ref{0628bb}).

1421: 

1422: The identity $E[\Dalph] = (\alpha -1)^{-1}$

1423: is obtained either from  (\ref{0720c}) of

1424: Proposition \ref{dltmoms}, or by taking expectations in (\ref{0628bb}).

1425:  Next, if we set $\tDalph = \Dalph- \Exp[ \Dalph]$, (\ref{0628bb})

1426:  yields (\ref{0628b}). 

1427:  Then,

1428:  using the definition (\ref{Jdef}) of $J(\alpha)$,

1429: the fact that $\Exp[ \tDalph]=0$, and independence,

1430: we obtain from (\ref{0628b})

1431: that

1432: \bean

1433: \Exp [ \tDalph^2 ] & = & \frac{2\Exp [ \tDalph^2 ]}{2\alpha +1}

1434: + \frac{\alpha^2+1}{(\alpha-1)^2 (2\alpha+1)}

1435:  + \frac{2\alpha J(\alpha)}{(\alpha-1)^2}-\frac{1}{(\alpha-1)^2},

1436: \eean

1437: and rearranging this gives (\ref{0701g}). $\square$ \\

1438: 

1439: 

1440:  Recall from Lemma  \ref{dickmanlem} 

1441: that $\LL_0^\alpha$ is the limiting weight of edges 

1442: attached to the origin in the DLT on uniform points.

1443: Combining this fact with Proposition \ref{1119f},

1444: we obtain a similar result to the latter for the

1445: unrooted case as follows:

1446: 

1447: 

1448: 

1449: \begin{proposition} \label{1125a} 

1450:  Let $\alpha > 1$. There is a random variable

1451: $\Falph$,

1452:  satisfying the

1453: distributional fixed-point equality (\ref{0628dd}),

1454: such that

1455: $ D^\alpha ( \UU_m ) 

1456: \to \Falph$, as $n \to \infty$, almost surely and in $L^2$. 

1457: Further, $\Exp[ \Falph] = 1/(\alpha(\alpha-1))$, and

1458: \bea

1459: \label{0701i}

1460:  \Var [ \Falph ] = \frac{1}{2\alpha} \Var [ \Dalph ]

1461: + \frac{ \alpha + 2(2\alpha+1) J(\alpha)-2}{2\alpha^2 (\alpha-1)^2} ,

1462: \eea

1463: where $J(\alpha)$ is given by (\ref{Jdef}) and

1464: $\Var[\Dalph]$ by (\ref{0701g}). 

1465: \end{proposition}

1466: \proof

1467: By Lemma \ref{dickmanlem} and Proposition \ref{1119f},

1468: there are random variables $\Dalph$ and $\LL_0^\alpha$ such

1469: that as $m \to \infty$ we have $D^\alpha ( \UU_m^0 ) \inLL \Dalph$

1470: and $  \LL^\alpha_0 (\UU_m^0) \inLL \LL_0^\alpha$, also

1471: with almost sure convergence in both cases.  Hence, setting

1472: $\Falph := \Dalph - \LL^\alpha_0 $, we have by (\ref{0714b}) that

1473: \begin{eqnarray}

1474: D^\alpha (\UU_m) 

1475: =  D^\alpha (\UU_m^0) - \LL^\alpha_0 (\UU_m^0) 

1476: \to \Falph, ~~~~{\rm a.s.~~ and~in~}L^2.

1477: \label{0715} 

1478: \end{eqnarray} 

1479: 

1480: Next, we show that $\Falph$ satisfies

1481: the distributional fixed-point equality (\ref{0628dd}).

1482: The self-similarity of the DLT implies that

1483:  \bea

1484:  D^\alpha (\UU_m) \eqd U^\alpha D^\alpha

1485: (\UU_{N}) +(1-U)^\alpha D^\alpha (\UU_{m-1-N}^0), 

1486: \label{0728k}

1487: \eea 

1488:  where $N \sim

1489: \textrm{Bin} (m-1, U)$, given $U$, and

1490: $ D^\alpha (\UU_{N})$ and $D^\alpha (\UU_{m-1-N}^0)$

1491: are independent, given $U$ and $N $.

1492: As $m \to \infty$, $N$ and

1493: $m-N$ both tend to infinity almost surely,  so taking

1494: $m\to \infty$ in (\ref{0728k}), using Proposition

1495: \ref{1119f} and 

1496: eqn (\ref{0715}), we obtain the fixed-point equation (\ref{0628dd}). 

1497: 

1498: The identity $\Exp[\Falph]= \alpha^{-1}(\alpha-1)^{-1}$

1499: is obtained either by (\ref{0720f}), or by taking expectations in

1500:  (\ref{0628dd}) and using the formula for $E[\Dalph]$  in

1501:   Proposition \ref{1119f}. Then with $\tFalph : = \Falph - \Exp [\Falph]$,

1502: we obtain (\ref{0628d}) from (\ref{0628dd}), and

1503: using independence and the fact that $\Exp[ \tFalph]=

1504: \Exp[\tDalph]=0$ we obtain

1505: \[

1506: \frac{2\alpha}{2\alpha+1} \Exp[ \tFalph^2]

1507: = \frac{\Exp[ \tDalph^2]}{2\alpha+1} + \frac{2\alpha J(\alpha)-1}{\alpha^2 (\alpha-1)^2}

1508: +\frac{\alpha^2+1}{\alpha^2(\alpha-1)^2(2\alpha+1)},\]

1509: which yields (\ref{0701i}).  $\square$ \\

1510: 

1511: {\bf Examples.}

1512: When $\alpha=2$ we have that $\Exp[D_2]=1$ and

1513: $J(2)=1/30$, so that $\Var[D_2] = 2/9$.

1514: Also, $\Exp[F_2]=1/2$ and $\Var[F_2]=7/72 \approx 0.0972$.

1515: 

1516: 

1517: \subsection{Limit behaviour for $\alpha =1$}

1518: \label{subsecalphone}

1519: 

1520: Unlike in the case $\alpha > 1$, for $\alpha =1$ the mean of the total

1521: weight $D^1(\UU_m^0)$ diverges as $m \to \infty$

1522:  (see Proposition \ref{dltmoms}),

1523: so clearly there is no limiting distribution

1524: for $D^1(\UU_m^0)$. Nevertheless, by using the

1525: orthogonality of the increments of the sequence

1526: $(D^1(\UU_m^0),m \geq 1)$, we are able

1527: to show

1528: that the {\em centred} total weight $\tD^1(\UU_m^0)$ does converge

1529: in distribution (in fact, in $L^2$) to a limiting

1530: random variable,

1531: and likewise for the unrooted case; this is our next result.

1532: 

1533: Subsequently, we shall 

1534:  characterize the distribution of the limiting

1535: random variable (for both the rooted and unrooted cases)

1536: % $\tD^1$ (and  also

1537: %the limit  in the unrooted case) 

1538: by

1539: a fixed-point identity, and thereby complete the proof of

1540: Theorem \ref{dltthm} (i).

1541: %show that both

1542: %this random variable 

1543: %have the distribution given by (\ref{0628a}).

1544: 

1545: \begin{proposition} \label{dconverge}

1546: (i) As $m \to \infty$,

1547: the random variable $\tD^1(\UU_m^0)$ converges in $L^2$ to a

1548: limiting random variable $\tDone$, with

1549: $\Exp[\tDone]=0$ and $\Var [ \tDone ] = 2 - \pi^2/6$.

1550: In particular,

1551: $

1552:  \Var \left[ D^1(\UU_m^0)

1553: \right] \to 2 - \pi^2/6$ as $m \to \infty$. 

1554: 

1555: (ii) As $m \to \infty$, $\tD^1(\UU_m) $ converges in $L^2$ 

1556: to the limiting random variable $\tFone : = \tDone -\LL_0^1+1$.

1557: \end{proposition}

1558: \proof

1559: Adopt the convention $D^1(\UU_0^0)=0$.

1560: By the orthogonality of the

1561: $Z_j$ (Lemma \ref{covz}) and (\ref{0630b}),

1562: for $0 \leq \ell < m$,

1563: \bean

1564: \Var \left[ \tD^1(\UU_m^0) - \tD^1 (\UU_\ell^0) \right]

1565: & = & \Var \sum_{j=\ell+1}^m \left( Z_j - \Exp [Z_j] \right) \\

1566: & = & \sum_{j=\ell+1}^m \frac{j}{(j+1)^2(j+2)} \longrightarrow 0

1567: \textrm{ as } m,\ell \to \infty.

1568: \eean

1569: Hence $\tD_1(\UU_m^0)$ is a Cauchy sequence in $L^2$,

1570: and so converges in $L^2$ to a limiting random variable,

1571: which we denote $\tDone$.

1572: Then $\Exp[\tDone] = \lim_{m \to \infty} \Exp[ \tD_1(\UU_m^0)] =0$,

1573: and

1574: \bean

1575:  \Var [ \tDone] = 

1576: \lim_{m \to \infty} \Var \left[ \tD^1(\UU_m^0) \right]

1577: =

1578:  \sum_{j=1}^\infty \frac{j}{(j+1)^2(j+2)}

1579: \nonumber \\

1580: = \sum_{j=1}^\infty \left[ \frac{2}{j+1} - \frac{2}{j+2} \right]

1581: - \sum_{j=1}^\infty \frac{1}{(j+1)^2} = 1 - \left( \frac{\pi^2}{6}

1582: -1 \right)

1583: = 2-\frac{\pi^2}{6} .  

1584: \eean

1585: It remains to prove part (ii), the convergence for

1586: the centred total length of the DLF

1587: $\tD^1 (\UU_m)$. We have by (\ref{0714b}) that

1588: \begin{eqnarray}

1589: \tD^1 (\UU_m) & =

1590: & \tD^1 (\UU_m^0) - \LL_0^1 (\UU_m^0)+\Exp[ \LL_0^1 (\UU_m^0)]

1591:  %\nonumber\\ & \inLL &

1592: \inLL

1593: \tDone - \LL^1_0 + 1 , \nonumber \end{eqnarray}

1594: where the convergence follows by 

1595: Lemma \ref{dickmanlem} and part (i). 

1596:  Thus $\tD^1 ( \UU_m)$

1597: converges in $L^2$ as $m \to \infty$. $\square$ \\

1598: 

1599: 

1600: 

1601: 

1602: For the next few results it is more convenient to consider the DLF

1603: defined on a Poisson  number of points. 

1604: Let $(X_1,X_2,\ldots)$ be a sequence of independent 

1605: uniformly distributed random variables in $(0,1]$, and let

1606: $(N(t),t\geq 0)$ be the counting process of a homogeneous Poisson process

1607: of unit rate in $(0,\infty)$, independent of $(X_1,X_2,\ldots)$.

1608: Thus $N(t)$ is a Poisson variable with parameter $t$.

1609: As before, let $\UU_m =(X_1,\ldots,X_m)$, and 

1610: (for this section only) let

1611:  $\Po_t := \UU_{N(t)}$. Let

1612:  $\Po_t^0 := \UU_{N(t)}^0$,

1613: so that

1614:  $\Po_t^0 = (0,X_1,X_2,\ldots,X_{N(t)})$. 

1615: 

1616: We construct the DLF and DLT on $X_1, X_2, \ldots,X_{N(t)}$ as before.

1617: Let $\tD^1(\Po_t^0) = D^1(\Po_t^0) - \Exp \left[ D^1(\Po_t^0)

1618: \right]$ and $\tD^1(\Po_t) = D^1(\Po_t) - \Exp \left[ D^1(\Po_t)

1619: \right]$.

1620: We aim to show that the limit distribution for $\tD^1(\Po_t^0)$

1621: is the same as for $\tD^1(\UU_m^0)$, and likewise in the unrooted

1622: case.  We shall need the following result.

1623: 

1624: \begin{lemma} \label{1120a} As $t \to \infty$, \begin{equation}

1625: \frac{\ud}{\ud t} \Exp[D^1 (\Po_t)] = \frac{1}{t} + O(t^{-2}); 

1626: %\textrm{ and }

1627: {\rm ~~ and ~~ }

1628: \frac{\ud}{\ud t} \Exp[D^1 (\Po_t^0)] = \frac{1}{t} + O(t^{-2}).

1629: \end{equation} \end{lemma}

1630: \textbf{Proof.} 

1631: The point set $\{X_1,\ldots,X_{N(t)}\}$ is a homogeneous

1632: Poisson point process in $(0,1)$, so we have

1633: \bean

1634:  \frac{\ud}{\ud t} \Exp[D^1 (\Po_t)] & = &

1635: \Exp[\textrm{length of new arrival}] \\ & = & \int_0^1

1636: \ud u \Exp[\textrm{dist.~to next pt.~to the left of $u$ in

1637: $\mathcal{P}_t$}] \\

1638: & = &

1639: \int_0^1 \ud u

1640: \int_0^u st e^{-ts} \ud s

1641: = \frac{1}{t} + \frac{2}{t^2} \left( e^{-t} - 1 \right) +\frac{e^{-t}}{t}

1642: \\ & = & \frac{1}{t} + O \left( t^{-2} \right).

1643: \eean

1644: Similarly, 

1645: \bean

1646: \frac{\ud}{\ud t} \Exp[D^1 (\Po_t^0)] & = &

1647:  \int_0^1

1648: \ud u \Exp[\textrm{dist.~to next pt.~to the left of $u$ in

1649: $\Po_t \cup \{ 0 \}$}]

1650: \\ & = &

1651: \int_0^1 \ud u

1652: \int_0^u \Pr[\textrm{dist.~to next pt.~to the left} > s] \ud s

1653: \\ & = & \int_0^1 \ud u \int_0^u e^{-ts} \ud s

1654: = \frac{1}{t}+\frac{e^{-t}-1}{t^2}

1655: \\ & = &

1656: \frac{1}{t} + O \left( t^{-2} \right). \; \square

1657: \eean

1658: 

1659: \begin{lemma}

1660: \label{0630c}

1661: (i) As $t \to \infty$, $\tD^1(\Po_t^0)$

1662:  converges in distribution

1663:  to $\tDone$, the $L^2$ large-$m$ limit of

1664: $\tD^1(\UU_m^0)$.

1665: 

1666: (ii) As $t\to \infty$, $\tD^1(\Po_t)$ converges in distribution to

1667: $\tFone$, the $L^2$ large-$m$ limit of $\tD^1(\UU_m)$.

1668: \end{lemma} \proof (i) From Proposition~\ref{dconverge}, we have

1669: $

1670:  \tD^1 (\UU_m^0) \inLL \tDone

1671: $

1672:  as $m \to \infty$.

1673: Let $a_t := \Exp[D^1(\Po_t^0)]$ and $\mu_m :=\Exp[D^1(\UU_m^0)]$. 

1674: Since $\mu_m = \Exp \sum_{i=1}^m Z_i = \sum_{i=1}^m (1+i)^{-1}$ by

1675: (\ref{0630b}), for any positive integers $\ell, m$  we have

1676: \bea 

1677: \left| \mu_{m} - \mu_{\ell } \right| =

1678: \sum_{j= \min ( m, \ell ) +1}^{\max ( m, \ell ) }

1679: \frac{1}{j+1} \leq \log\left( 

1680: \frac{ \max(m,\ell)+1 }{ \min(m,\ell)+1 }

1681: \right) = \left| \log\left( 

1682: \frac{ m+1 }{ \ell+1 }

1683: \right)

1684: \right|.

1685: \label{0720g}

1686:  \eea

1687: %The number of arrivals up to time $t$, $N_t$, is Poisson with

1688: %parameter $t$.

1689: Note the distributional equalities

1690:  \bea

1691: \mathcal{L} \left( D^1(\Po_t^0) | N(t) = m \right) = \mathcal{L}

1692: \left( D^1(\UU_m^0) \right) ; \nonumber \\

1693: \mathcal{L} \left( D^1(\Po_t^0) - \mu_{N(t)} | N(t) = m \right) =

1694: \mathcal{L} \left( \tD^1( \UU_m^0) \right)  \label{0720h}.

1695: \eea

1696: 

1697:  First we aim to show that

1698: $ a_t - \mu_{\lfloor t \rfloor} \to 0 $

1699: as

1700: $ t \to \infty$.

1701:  Set $p_m(t) :=

1702: e^{-t} \frac{t^m}{m!}$.

1703: Then we

1704: can write

1705:  \bea \label{eq200} a_t -\mu_{\lfloor t \rfloor } & = & 

1706: \sum_{m=0}^\infty

1707: p_m(t) (\mu_m - \mu_{\lfloor t \rfloor } ) \nonumber \\ & = & 

1708: \!\! \sum_{\left| m-\lfloor t \rfloor \right| \leq

1709: t^{3/4}} \!\! p_m(t) (\mu_m -\mu_{\lfloor t \rfloor} )

1710:  + \!\! \sum_{\left| m-\lfloor t \rfloor

1711: \right| > t^{3/4}}  \!\! p_m(t) (\mu_m - \mu_{\lfloor t\rfloor}) .

1712:  \eea

1713:  We examine these two sums

1714: separately. First consider the sum for $|m-\lfloor t \rfloor |

1715: \leq t^{3/4}$. By (\ref{0720g}), we have

1716: %

1717: \bean

1718: \sup_{m: | m - \lfloor t \rfloor | \leq t^{3/4}}

1719: \left| \mu_m - \mu_{\lfloor t \rfloor} \right|

1720: \leq \max \left(  

1721: \log{ \left( \frac{\lfloor t

1722:  \rfloor+1+t^{3/4}}{\lfloor t \rfloor+1} \right) } ,

1723: \log \left( \frac{\lfloor t \rfloor+1}{\lfloor t \rfloor+1-t^{3/4}} \right)

1724: \right) \nonumber \\

1725: =O \left(t^{-1/4} \right)

1726: \to 0 \textrm{ as } t \to \infty.

1727: \eean

1728: Hence the first sum in (\ref{eq200}) tends to zero as $t \to \infty$.

1729: To estimate the second sum, observe that

1730: \begin{eqnarray} \label{1119c} \sum_{\left| m -

1731: \lfloor t \rfloor \right|

1732: > t^{3/4}}  \!\!\!\! p_m(t) (\mu_m  - \mu_{\lfloor t \rfloor })

1733: & \leq &  \sum_{\left|

1734: m - \lfloor t \rfloor \right| > t^{3/4}} \!\!\!\! p_m(t) (m +t) 

1735: \nonumber \\

1736: & = & \Exp \left[ (N(t) +t) \1 {\{ |N(t)-\lfloor t \rfloor| >

1737: t^{3/4} \} } \right] \nonumber\\ & \leq & \left( \Exp \left[

1738: (N(t)+t)^2 \right] 

1739: %\right)^{1/2} \left(

1740: \cdot \Pr \left[ \left| N(t) -

1741: \lfloor t \rfloor \right| > t^{3/4} \right] \right)^{1/2} \!\!\!. ~~~~

1742: \end{eqnarray} 

1743: By Chernoff bounds on the tail probabilities of a Poisson

1744: random variable (e.g.~Lemma 1.4 of 

1745:  \cite{penbook}), 

1746: the expression (\ref{1119c}) is $O(t \exp(-t^2/18))$ and so tends to zero. 

1747: Hence the second sum in (\ref{eq200}) tends to zero, and thus

1748:  \bea

1749: \label{0630d}

1750:  a_t - \mu_{\lfloor t

1751: \rfloor} 

1752:  \to 0 \textrm{ as } t \to \infty .

1753: \eea

1754: 

1755:  Now we show that $\tD^1(\Po_t^0) \tod \tDone$ as $t \to\infty$. We have

1756: \begin{equation}

1757: \label{0630g}

1758: \tD^1(\Po_t^0) = \left( D^1(\Po_t^0) - \mu_{N(t)} \right) +

1759: \left( \mu_{N(t)} - \mu_{\lfloor t \rfloor} \right) + \left(

1760: \mu_{\lfloor t \rfloor} -a_t \right) .

1761: \end{equation} 

1762: The final bracket tends to zero,

1763: %is $O(t^{-1/4})$, from

1764: by (\ref{0630d}).

1765: Also, by (\ref{0720h}) and the fact that

1766:  $N(t) \to \infty \textrm{ a.s.}$ as $t \to \infty$, we have

1767:  \[

1768: D^1(\Po_t^0) - \mu_{N(t)} \tod \tDone . 

1769: \]

1770: Finally, using 

1771: (\ref{0720g}),

1772:  we have

1773: \bean \left| \mu_{N(t)} - \mu_{\lfloor t \rfloor} \right|

1774: & \leq & \left| \log \frac{ N(t)+1}{\lfloor t \rfloor+1}

1775: \right| 

1776:  \toP 0 ,

1777: \eean

1778: as $t \to \infty$, since $N(t)/ \lfloor t \rfloor \toP 1$.

1779: So Slutsky's theorem

1780: applied to (\ref{0630g}) yields

1781: $\tD^1(\Po_t^0) \tod \tDone$ as $t \to\infty$, completing

1782: the proof of (i)

1783: 

1784: The proof of (ii) follows in the same way as that of (i),

1785: except that in (\ref{0720g}) the first equals sign 

1786:  is replaced by an inequality $\leq$. This does not

1787: affect the rest of the proof. 

1788: %with some slight modifications.

1789: $\square$ \\

1790: 

1791: The next two propositions complete the proof of Theorem \ref{dltthm}.

1792: 

1793: 

1794: 

1795: \begin{proposition} \label{1020d}

1796: The limiting random variable $\tDone$ of Proposition

1797: \ref{dconverge} (i) satisfies the fixed-point

1798: equation (\ref{0628a}).

1799: \end{proposition} \proof

1800: For integer $n >0$,

1801: let $T_n :=\min \{ s: N(s) \geq n\}$, the $n$th  arrival

1802: time of the  Poisson process with counting process $N(\cdot)$.

1803: Set $T:= T_1$, and set $U:= X_1$

1804: (which is uniform on $(0,1)$).

1805: 

1806: By the Marking Theorem for Poisson processes \cite{kingman},

1807: the two-dimensional point process ${\cal Q} := \{(X_n,T_n): n \geq 1\}$

1808: is a homogeneous Poisson process of unit intensity

1809: on $(0,1)\times (0,\infty)$. Given the value of $(U,T)$,

1810: the restriction of ${\cal Q}$ to $(0,U]\times (T,\infty)$ and

1811: the restriction of ${\cal Q}$ to $(U,1]\times (T,\infty)$ are

1812: independent homogeneous Poisson processes on these regions.

1813: Hence, by scaling properties of the Poisson process

1814: (see the Mapping Theorem in \cite{kingman}) and of the DLT,

1815: writing $D^1_{\{i\}}(\cdot)$, $i=1,2$ for independent

1816: copies of $D^1 (\cdot)$, we have

1817: \bea \label{0128a0}

1818: D^1 (\Po_t^0)  & \eqd &  \left( U D^1_{\{1\}}

1819: (\Po_{U(t-T)}^0)+ (1-U) D^1_{\{2\}}(\Po_{(1-U)(t-T)}^0) +U \right)

1820: \1 \{t>T\}. ~~~ 

1821: \eea

1822: Let $a_s=0$ for $s\leq 0$, and $a_s=\Exp [ D^1 (\Po_s^0) ]$ for $s > 0$.

1823: Then $\tD^1(\Po_t^0) = D^1(\Po_t^0)-a_t$, so that

1824:  by (\ref{0128a0}),

1825: \bea

1826: \label{0128a}

1827:  \tD^1 (\Po_t^0)  & \eqd &  

1828:  \left( U \tD^1_{\{1\}} (\Po_{U(t-T)}^0)+ (1-U) \tD^1_{\{2\}}

1829: (\Po_{(1-U)(t-T)}^0) +U \right) \1 \{ t>T \}

1830: \nonumber\\ &  & +U \left( a_{U(t-T)}-a_t

1831: \right) +(1-U) \left( a_{(1-U)(t-T)} -a_t \right).

1832: \eea From Lemma \ref{1120a} we have

1833: $ \frac{\ud a_t}{\ud t} = \frac{1}{t}+O(t^{-2}). $

1834: Hence, if $T < t$, then

1835: \bean

1836:  & & a_t- a_{U(t-T)}  = \int_{U(t-T)}^t

1837: \frac{\ud a_s}{\ud s} \ud s

1838:  = \log{t} - \log \{U(t-T)\} +O\left( (U(t-T))^{-1} \right), 

1839: \eean

1840: and hence as $t \to \infty$,

1841: \bea

1842:  a_t-a_{U(t-T)} \to -\log U, ~~~{\rm a.s.} .

1843: \label{0714e}

1844: \eea

1845:  Since $P[T<t ] $ tends to 1, 

1846: by making $t \to \infty$ in 

1847:  (\ref{0128a}) and using Slutsky's theorem we obtain (\ref{0628a}).

1848: $\square$

1849: 

1850: \begin{proposition} \label{ffixed}

1851: The limiting random variable $\tFone$ of Proposition

1852: \ref{dconverge} (ii) satisfies the fixed-point

1853: equation (\ref{0628a}), and so has the same distribution

1854: as $\tDone$. Also, $\Cov(\tFone,\tDone) = (7/4)- \pi^2/6$.

1855: \end{proposition} \textbf{Proof.} The proof follows similar lines to

1856: that of Proposition \ref{1020d}. Once more let $a_s = \Exp [ D^1 (\Po_s^0) ]$, for

1857: $s \geq 0$, and $a_s=0$ for $s <0$.

1858: Let $b_s = \Exp [ D^1 (\Po_s) ]$ for $s > 0$, and $b_s=0$

1859: for $s \leq 0$, and let $T := \min\{t: N(t) \geq 1\}$,

1860: Then

1861:  \begin{eqnarray} D^1(\Po_t) & \eqd & \left( U

1862: D^1_{\{1\}} (\Po_{U(t-T)})+ (1-U) D^1_{\{2\}} (\Po_{(1-U)(t-T)}^0) \right)

1863: \1 \{t>T\} ,

1864: \label{0720j}

1865: \end{eqnarray}

1866: where $D^1_{\{1\}}(\cdot)$ and $D^1_{\{2\}}(\cdot)$ are

1867: independent copies of $D^1(\cdot)$. 

1868: Then $\tD^1(\Po_t) = D^1(\Po_t) - b_t$ and  

1869: $\tD^1(\Po_t^0) = D^1(\Po_t^0) - a_t$, so that

1870: (\ref{0720j}) yields

1871: \begin{eqnarray}

1872:  \tD^1 (\Po_t)  & \eqd &

1873:  \left( U \tD^1_{\{1\}}(\Po_{U(t-T)})+ (1-U) \tD^1_{\{2\}} 

1874: (\Po_{(1-U)(t-T)}^0)

1875: \right) \1 \{t>T\}

1876: \nonumber\\ &  & +U \left( b_{U(t-T)}-b_t \right) +(1-U) \left(

1877: a_{(1-U)(t-T)} -b_t \right). 

1878: \label{0714f}

1879: \end{eqnarray} From

1880: Lemma \ref{1120a} we have

1881: $\frac{\ud b_t}{\ud t} = \frac{1}{t}+O(t^{-2})$.

1882: Hence, by the same argument as used at (\ref{0714e}),

1883:  \[ b_t- b_{U(t-T)}   \to

1884:  -\log{U}  ~~~ {\rm a.s.} \]

1885: Also,

1886: $a_t -b_t = \Exp [\LL_0^1(\Po_t^0)]$ by (\ref{0714b}), so that

1887:  $\lim_{t \to \infty} (a_t-b_t) = 1$, by Lemma

1888: \ref{dickmanlem} and the fact that $\Exp[ \LL_0^1]=1$ (eqn (\ref{0630j})).

1889: Using also (\ref{0714e}) we find that

1890:  as $t \to \infty$,

1891: \[ a_{(1-U)(t-T)} - b_t 

1892: = (a_{(1-U)(t-T)} -a_t) + (a_t-b_t) 

1893: \to 1 + \log{(1-U)} , ~~~~{\rm a.s.}  \] Taking

1894: $t \to \infty$ in (\ref{0714f}),

1895: and using Slutsky's theorem, we obtain

1896: \bea

1897: \label{0713a}

1898:  \tFone  \eqd  U \tFone+ (1-U) \tDone +U \log {U}

1899: +(1-U) \log{(1-U)} +(1-U). \eea

1900: The change of variable $(1-U) \mapsto U$ then shows that $\tDone$

1901: as defined at (\ref{0628a}) satisfies (\ref{0713a}), and so by the uniqueness

1902: of solution, $\tFone$ has the same distribution as $\tDone$ and satisfies

1903: (\ref{0628a}).

1904: 

1905: To obtain the covariance of $\tFone$ and $\tDone$, observe from

1906: Proposition \ref{dconverge} (ii) that $\LL^1_0 = \tDone-\tFone + 1$,

1907: and therefore 

1908:  by (\ref{0630j}), we have that

1909: \bea

1910: 1/2 = \Var [\LL^1_0] = 

1911: \Var[\tDone]   + \Var[\tFone] - 2 \Cov(\tDone,\tFone).   

1912: \label{0817}

1913: \eea

1914: Since 

1915: $\Var[\tFone]=    \Var[\tDone] = 2 - \pi^2/6$ by

1916: Proposition \ref{dconverge} (i), rearranging (\ref{0817})

1917: we find that $\Cov(\tDone,\tFone) = (7/4)-\pi^2/6$.

1918:  $\square$ \\

1919: 

1920: 

1921: \begin{figure}[h!]

1922: \begin{center}

1923: \includegraphics[angle=270, width=0.8\textwidth]{pdf}

1924: \end{center}

1925: \caption{Estimated probability density function for $\tDone$.}

1926: \label{pdffig}

1927: \end{figure}

1928: 

1929: 

1930: 

1931: \rem

1932: Figure \ref{pdffig} is a plot of the estimated probability

1933: density function of $\tDone$. This was obtained by

1934: performing $10^6$ repeated

1935: simulations of the DLT on a sequence of

1936: $10^3$ uniform (simulated) random points on $(0,1]$. For each

1937: simulation, the expected value

1938: of $D^1(\UU_{10^3})$ (which is precisely $(1/2) + (1/3) + \cdots

1939: (1/1001)$ by Lemma \ref{Zmdist}) was subtracted

1940: from the total length of the simulated DLT

1941: to give an approximate realization of $\tDone$.

1942: The density function was then estimated from

1943: the sample of $10^6$ approximate realizations

1944: of $\tDone$, using a window width of $0.0025$.

1945: The simulated

1946: sample from which the density

1947: estimate

1948: for $\tDone$ was taken had sample mean $\approx -2 \times 10^{-4}$

1949: and sample variance $\approx 0.3543$, which are reasonably

1950: close to the expectation and variance of $\tDone$.

1951: 

1952: 

1953: 

1954: 

1955: 

1956: 

1957: \section{General results in geometric probability}

1958: \label{secgeneral}

1959: 

1960: Notions of {\em stabilizing} functionals

1961: of point sets have recently proved to be a useful basis for

1962: a general methodology for establishing  limit

1963: theorems

1964: for functionals 

1965: of random

1966: point sets in $\R^d$.

1967: In particular,  Penrose and Yukich \cite{penyuk1,penyuk2}

1968: provide general central limit theorems and laws of large numbers

1969: for stabilizing   functionals.

1970: One might hope to apply  these  results

1971:  in the case of the MDSF weight. 

1972: In fact we shall obtain our law of large numbers (Theorem

1973: \ref{llnthm}) by application of a result from 

1974: \cite{penyuk2}, but to obtain the central limit

1975: theorem  for edges away from the boundary in the MDSF and MDST,

1976: we need an extension of the general result in \cite{penyuk1}. It

1977: is these general results that we describe in the present section.

1978: 

1979: For our general results, we use the following notation.

1980: Let $d \geq 1$ be an integer. For $\X \subset \R^d$, 

1981: constant $a>0$, and ${\bf y} \in

1982: \R^d$, let ${\bf y}+a\X$ denote the transformed set $\{ {\bf y} + a\bx

1983: : \bx \in \X\}$. Let $\diam(\X) :=\sup \{ \|\bx_1-\bx_2\|:

1984: \bx_1,\bx_2 \in \X \}$, and let $\card(\X)$ denote the cardinality

1985: (number of elements) of $\X$ (when finite).

1986: 

1987: For $\bx \in \R^d$ and $r>0$, let $B(\bx;r)$ denote the closed Euclidean ball

1988: with centre $\bx$ and radius $r$, and let $Q(\bx;r)$ denote the

1989: corresponding $l_\infty$ ball, i.e., the $d$-cube $\bx + [-r,r]^d $. For 

1990: bounded measurable $R \subset \R^d$ let $|R|$ denote the Lebesgue measure 

1991: of $R$, let $\partial R$ denote the topological boundary of $R$ and

1992:  for $r>0$, set $\partial _r R := \cup_{\bx \in \partial R} 

1993: Q(\bx;r)$, the $r$-neighbourhood of the boundary of $R$.

1994: 

1995: \subsection{A general law of large numbers}

1996: \label{secgenlln}

1997: 

1998: Let $\xi ( \bx ; \X )$ be a measurable $\R_+$-valued function

1999: defined for all pairs $(\bx , \X)$, where $\X \subset \R^d$ is finite

2000: and $\bx \in \X$. Assume $\xi$ is translation invariant, that is,

2001:  for all $\by \in \R^d$,

2002:  $\xi( \by + \bx; \by+\X) = \xi (\bx ; \X)$.

2003: When $\bx \notin \X$, we abbreviate the notation

2004: $\xi(\bx;\X \cup \{\bx\})$ to $\xi(\bx;\X)$.

2005: 

2006: 

2007: 

2008: For our general law of large numbers, we use a notion

2009: of stabilization defined as follows.

2010: For any locally finite point set $\X \subset \R^d$ and any $\ell

2011: \in \N$ define

2012: \[ \xi^+(\X;\ell) := \sup_{k \in \N} \left( \mathrm{ess}

2013: \sup_{\ell,k} \left\{ \xi(\0;(\X \cap B(\0;\ell)) \cup \mathcal{A}

2014: \right\} \right) \textrm{, and}

2015: \]

2016: \[ \xi^-(\X;\ell) := \inf_{k \in \N} \left( \mathrm{ess}

2017: \inf_{\ell,k} \left\{ \xi(\mathbf{0};(\X \cap B(\0;\ell)) \cup

2018: \mathcal{A} \right\} \right) ; \] where $\mathrm{ess}

2019: \sup_{\ell,k}$ is the essential supremum, with respect to Lebesgue

2020: measure on $\R^{dk}$, over sets $\mathcal{A} \subset \R^d

2021: \backslash B(\0;\ell)$ of cardinality $k$. Define the {\em limit} of

2022: $\xi$ on $\X$ by

2023: \[ \xi_{\infty}(\X) := \limsup_{k \to \infty}

2024: \xi^+(\X;k)  . \] We say the functional $\xi$ \emph{stabilizes} on

2025: $\X$ if 

2026: \bea

2027:  \lim_{k \to \infty} \xi^+(\X;k) = \lim_{k \to \infty}

2028: \xi^-(\X;k) = \xi_{\infty} (\X)  .

2029: \label{stabeq}

2030: \eea

2031: 

2032:  For $\tau \in

2033: (0,\infty)$, let $\H_{\tau}$ be a homogeneous Poisson

2034: process of intensity $\tau$ on $\R^d$. 

2035: The following general law of large numbers 

2036: is due to Penrose and Yukich \cite{penyuk2}.

2037: We shall use it to prove Theorem \ref{llnthm}.

2038: \begin{lemma} \cite{penyuk2}

2039: \label{llnpenyuk} Suppose $q=1$ or $q=2$. Suppose $\xi$ is

2040: almost surely stabilizing on $\H_{\tau}$, with limit

2041: $\xi_{\infty}(\H_\tau)$, for all $\tau \in (0,\infty )$.

2042: Let $f$ be a probability density function on $\R^d$, and

2043: let $\X_n$ be the point process consisting of $n$ independent

2044: random $d$-vectors with common density $f$.

2045: If $\xi$ satisfies the moments condition \begin{equation}

2046: \label{0k715a}

2047:  \sup_{n

2048: \in \N} \Exp \left[ \xi \left( n^{1/d}\mathbf{X}_1;n^{1/d}

2049: \X_n \right) ^p \right] < \infty, \end{equation}

2050:  for some $p>q$, then

2051: as $n \to \infty$,

2052:  \begin{equation} \label{0k715b}

2053: n^{-1}

2054: \sum_{\bx \in \X_n} \xi( n^{1/d}\bx; n^{1/d} \X_n )

2055:  \stackrel{L^q}{\longrightarrow} \int_{\R^d} \Exp \left[

2056: \xi_{\infty} \left( \H_{f(\mathbf{x})} \right) \right]

2057: f(\mathbf{x}) \ud \mathbf{x} ,

2058: \end{equation} and the limit is finite. \end{lemma}

2059: %The proof of the result is given in~\cite{penyuk2}. 

2060: 

2061: \subsection{General central limit theorems}

2062: \label{subsecgenclt}

2063: 

2064: In the course of the proof of Theorem \ref{mainth}, we

2065: shall use

2066:  a modified form of a 

2067:  general central limit theorem obtained for

2068: functionals of geometric graphs  by

2069: Penrose and Yukich  \cite{penyuk1}. We recall

2070: the setup of \cite{penyuk1}. 

2071: As in Section \ref{secgenlln},

2072: let $\xi (\bx;\X) $ be a translation invariant real-valued functional

2073: defined for finite $\X \subset \R^d$ and $\bx \in \X$.

2074:  Then $\xi$ induces a translation invariant functional $H(\X;S)$

2075:  defined on all 

2076: finite point sets $\X \subset \R^d$ and all Borel-measurable

2077: regions $S \subseteq \R^d$  by 

2078: \bea

2079:  H (\X ; S) : = \sum_{\bx \in \X \cap S} \xi (\bx ; \X) .

2080: \label{0714}

2081: \eea

2082: It is this `restricted' functional that

2083:  interests us here, while \cite{penyuk1}

2084: is concerned rather with the global functional $H( \X; \R^d)$.

2085: In our particular application (the length of edges  of the MDST

2086: on random points in a square),

2087: the global functional fails to satisfy the conditions

2088: of the central limit theorems in \cite{penyuk1}, owing to

2089: boundary effects.  Here we generalize the result

2090: in \cite{penyuk1} to the

2091: `restricted' functional $H(\X;S)$. 

2092: It is this generalized result that  we can apply to the MDST,

2093:   when we take  $S$ to be a region `away from

2094: the boundary' of the square in which the random points are placed.

2095: 

2096: 

2097: We use a notion of stabilization for $H$ which

2098: is related to, but not equivalent to, the notion

2099: of stabilization of $\xi$ used in Section

2100: \ref{secgenlln}. Loosely speaking, $\xi$ is stabilizing

2101: if when a point inserted at the origin into a homogeneous

2102: Poisson process,  only nearby

2103:  Poisson points affect the inserted point;

2104:  for $H$ to be stabilizing we 

2105: require also that the the inserted

2106: point affects only nearby points.

2107: 

2108: For $B \subseteq \R^d$, let $\Delta(\X;B)$ denote the `add one

2109: cost' of the functional $H$ on the insertion of a point at the

2110: origin,

2111: \[ \Delta( \X;B) := H ( \X \cup \{ \0 \};B) - H (\X;B ) . \]

2112: Let $\Po := \H_1$ % i.e., let $\Po$ be 

2113: (a homogeneous Poisson point process of unit intensity on $\R^d$).

2114: Let $\QQ_n:= \Po \cap R_n$ 

2115: (the restriction of $\Po$ to  $R_n$).

2116: Adapting the ideas of~\cite{penyuk1}, we make the following definitions.

2117: \begin{definition} 

2118: \label{sstabdef}

2119: We say the functional $H$

2120:  is {\em strongly stabilizing} if

2121:  there exist almost

2122: surely finite random variables $R$ (a {\em radius of

2123: stabilization}) and $\Delta (\infty )$ such that, with

2124: probability 1, for any $B \supseteq B( \0 ; R )$,

2125: \[ \Delta ( \Po \cap  B(\0;R) \cup {\cal A}; B ) = \Delta

2126: (\infty ), ~ \forall \textrm{ finite } {\cal A} \subset \R^d \setminus

2127: B(\0;R) .\]

2128: \end{definition}

2129: 

2130: We say that the functional $H$ is \em polynomially bounded \em 

2131: if, for all $B \ni \0$,

2132: there exists a constant $\beta$ such that for all finite sets $\X

2133: \subset \R^d$,

2134: \bea \label{poly} \left| H(\X; B) \right| \leq \beta \left(\diam

2135: (\X) + \card (\X) \right)^{\beta} . \eea

2136: 

2137: We say that $H$ is \textit{homogeneous of order}

2138: $\gamma$ if for all finite $\X \subset \R^d$ and Borel $B \subseteq \R^d$,

2139: %on which $H$ is defined,

2140: and all $a\in \R$, $H (a\X ; aB) = a^{\gamma} H (\X ; B)$.

2141: 

2142: 

2143: 

2144: Let $(R_n, S_n)$, for $n=1,2,\ldots$, be a sequence of ordered pairs of

2145: bounded Borel

2146: subsets of $\R^d$, such that $S_n \subseteq R_n$ for all $n$.

2147: Assume that

2148:  for all $r>0$,

2149:  $n^{-1} | \partial_r R_n | \to 0$ and $n^{-1} | \partial_r S_n | \to 0$

2150: (the {\em vanishing relative boundary condition}).

2151: Assume also that

2152: % with the following conditions on $R_n, S_n$: that

2153:  $|R_n| = n$ for all $n$,

2154: and $|S_n|/n \to 1$ as $n \to \infty$;

2155: that 

2156:  $S_n$ tends to $\R^d$, in the sense that

2157:  $\cup_{n \geq 1} \cap_{m \geq n} S_m = \R^d$;

2158:  and

2159: that there

2160: exists a constant $\beta$ such that $\diam (R_n) \leq \beta n^\beta$

2161:  for all $n$

2162: (the {\em polynomial boundedness} condition on $(R_n,S_n)_{n \geq 1}$).

2163:   Subject to these conditions, the choice of

2164:  $(R_n, S_n)_{n \geq 1}$ is arbitrary.

2165: 

2166: Let $\bU_{1,n},\bU_{2,n},\ldots$ be i.i.d.~uniform random vectors on

2167: $R_n$. Let

2168:  \[ \UU_{m,n}=\{ \bU_{1,n},\ldots,\bU_{m,n} \}\] 

2169: (a binomial point process), and for Borel $A \subseteq \R^d$ with

2170: $0 < |A|< \infty$,

2171: let $\UU_{m,A}$ be the binomial point process of $m$

2172: i.i.d.~uniform random vectors on $A$.

2173: %Let $\Po_n$ be a homogeneous Poisson

2174: %process of intensity $1$ on $R_n$.

2175: 

2176: Let $\RR$ be the collection of all pairs $(A,B)$ with 

2177: $A, B \subset \R^d$ of

2178: the form $(A,B) = (\bx+R_n, \bx+ S_n ) $ with $ \bx \in \R^d$ and

2179: $ n\in \N$.

2180: That is, $\RR$ is the

2181: collection of all the $(R_n,S_n)$ and their translates. 

2182: 

2183: We say that the functional $H$ satisfies the 

2184: \em uniform bounded moments condition \em on $\RR$ if

2185: \bea \label{ubm} \sup_{(A,B) \in \RR : \0 \in A}

2186: \left(

2187: \sup_{|A|/2 \leq m \leq 3|A|/2} \{ \Exp [ \Delta (

2188: \UU_{m,A} ; B )^4 ] \}

2189:  %\right\}

2190:  \right)

2191:  < \infty . \eea

2192: 

2193: 

2194: We now state the general results, which extend

2195: those of Penrose and Yukich (Theorem 2.1 

2196: and Corollary 2.1 in~\cite{penyuk1}).

2197: 

2198: \begin{theorem}

2199: \label{genclt}

2200: Suppose that $H$ is strongly stabilizing,

2201:  is polynomially bounded (\ref{poly}), 

2202: and satisfies the uniform

2203: bounded moments condition (\ref{ubm}) on $\RR$.

2204: Then there exist constants

2205: $s^2$, $t^2$, with $0 \leq t^2 \leq s^2$, such that as $n\to

2206: \infty$,

2207: \begin{itemize} \item[(i)] $n^{-1}

2208: \Var\left( H \left( \QQ_n ; S_n \right) \right) \to s^2$;

2209: \item[(ii)] $n^{-1/2}\left(H\left(\QQ_n ; S_n  \right)-

2210: \Exp\left[ H \left(\QQ_n ; S_n  \right) \right] \right) \tod

2211:  \NN

2212: \left(0,s^2\right)$; \item[(iii)] $n^{-1} \Var \left( H \left(

2213: \UU_{n,n} ; S_n  \right)\right) \to t^2$; \item[(iv)]

2214: $n^{-1/2}\left(H\left(\UU_{n,n} ; S_n  \right) - \Exp \left[ H

2215: \left( \UU_{n,n} ; S_n  \right)\right]\right) \tod

2216:  \NN (0,t^2)$.

2217: \end{itemize} Also, $s^2$ and $t^2$ are

2218: independent of the choice of the $(R_n,S_n)$. Further, if the distribution

2219: of $\Delta(\infty)$ is nondegenerate, then $s^2\geq t^2>0$.

2220: \end{theorem}

2221: %For the proof of the theorem, see~\cite{penyuk1}.

2222: 

2223: Let $R_0$ be a fixed bounded Borel subset of $\R^d$ with $|R_0|=1$ and

2224: $| \partial R_0 | =0$. Let $(S_{0,n}, n \geq 1)$ be a sequence of

2225: Borel sets with

2226: $S_{0,n} \subseteq R_0$ 

2227: such that $|S_{0,n}| \to 1$ as $n\to \infty$ and

2228: for all $r >0$ we have

2229:  $| \partial_{n^{-1/d} r} S_{0,n} | \to 0$ as $n \to \infty$

2230: 

2231: Let $\RR_0$ be the collection of all pairs of the form

2232:  $(\bx + n^{1/d} R_0, \bx +n^{1/d} S_{0,n})$

2233:  with $n \geq 1$ and $\bx \in \R^d$.

2234: Let $\X_n$ be the binomial point process of $n$ i.i.d.~uniform

2235: random vectors on $R_0$, and let $\Po_n$ be a homogeneous

2236: Poisson point process of intensity $n$ on $R_0$.

2237: 

2238: \begin{corollary}

2239: \label{cltcor}

2240: Suppose $H$ is strongly stabilizing, satisfies the uniform

2241: bounded moments condition on $\RR_0$, is polynomially

2242: bounded and is homogeneous of order $\gamma$. 

2243: Then with $s^2, t^2$ as in Theorem \ref{genclt}

2244: we have that,

2245: as $n \to \infty$

2246: \begin{itemize}

2247:   \item[(i)] $n^{(2 \gamma/d)-1} \Var \left(

2248: H \left( \Po_n ; S_{0,n} \right) \right) \to s^2$; 

2249: \item[(ii)]

2250: $n^{(\gamma/d)-1/2} \left( H \left( \Po_n ; S_{0,n}  \right) - \Exp

2251: \left[ H \left( \Po_n ; S_{0,n}  \right) \right] \right) \tod \NN

2252: \left( 0, s^2 \right)$;

2253:  \item[(iii)]

2254:  $n^{(2 \gamma/d)-1} \Var \left(

2255: H \left( \X_n ; S_{0,n}  \right) \right) \to t^2$; \item[(iv)]

2256: $n^{(\gamma/d)-1/2} \left( H \left( \X_n ; S_{0,n}  \right) - \Exp

2257: \left[ H \left( \X_n ; S_{0,n}  \right) \right] \right) \tod \NN

2258: \left( 0, t^2 \right)$.

2259: \end{itemize} \end{corollary}

2260: \proof The corollary follows from Theorem \ref{genclt}

2261: by taking $R_n =

2262: n^{1/d} R_0$ and $S_n = n^{1/d} S_{0,n}$ (or suitable translates thereof),

2263: and scaling, since $H$ is homogeneous of order $\gamma$. $\square$

2264: 

2265: \subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{genclt}: the Poisson case}

2266: 

2267: 

2268: Let $\Po$ be a Poisson process of unit intensity on $\R^d$.

2269: We say the functional $H$ is {\em weakly stabilizing} on $\RR$ if

2270: there is a random variable $\dinf$ such that

2271:  \bea 

2272: \label{weakstab}

2273: \Delta ( \Po \cap A ; B) \toas \dinf, 

2274: \eea 

2275: as $(A,B) \to \R^d$ through

2276: $\RR$, by which we mean (\ref{weakstab}) holds whenever 

2277: $(A,B)$ is an $\RR$-valued sequence of the form

2278: $(A_n,B_n)_{n \geq 1}$, such that

2279: %$\cup_{n \geq 1} \cap_{m \geq n} A_n = \R^d$ and

2280: $\cup_{n \geq 1} \cap_{m \geq n} B_m = \R^d$. Note that

2281:  strong stabilization of $H$ implies

2282: weak stabilization of $H$.

2283: 

2284: We say the functional $H$ satisfies the {\em Poisson bounded

2285: moments condition} on $\RR$ if

2286: \bea \label{Pbmc} \sup_{(A,B) \in \RR:

2287: \0 \in A} \left\{ \Exp \left[ \Delta ( \Po \cap A ; B)^4 \right]

2288: \right\} < \infty . \eea

2289: 

2290: \begin{theorem}

2291: \label{0217c}

2292:  Suppose that $H$ is weakly stabilizing on $\RR$

2293: (\ref{weakstab}) and satisfies (\ref{Pbmc}). Then there exists

2294: $s^2 \geq 0$ such that as $n \to \infty$, $n^{-1} \Var [ H

2295: (\QQ_n; S_n)] \to s^2$ and 

2296: $n^{-1/2} ( H( \QQ_n; S_n) - \Exp [ H(\QQ_n; S_n)])

2297: \tod \NN (0,s^2)$.

2298: \end{theorem}

2299: Before proving Theorem \ref{0217c}, we require

2300: further definitions and a lemma.

2301: Let $\Po'$ be an independent copy of the Poisson process

2302:  $\Po$. For $\bx \in \Z^d$, set

2303: \[ \Po'' (\bx) = \left( \Po \setminus Q (\bx; 1/2) \right)

2304: \cup \left( \Po' \cap Q( \bx; 1/2 ) \right). \]

2305: Then given a translation invariant functional $H$

2306:  on point sets in $\R^d$, define

2307: \[ \Delta_{\bx} (A ; B) := H ( \Po''(\bx) \cap A ; B) -

2308:  H ( \Po \cap A ; B) ; \]

2309: this is the change in $H(\Po \cap A;B)$ when the Poisson

2310: points in $Q(\bx; 1/2)$ are resampled.

2311: 

2312: \begin{lemma} Suppose $H$ is weakly stabilizing on $\RR$. Then for all $\bx \in \Z^d$,

2313: there is a random variable $\Delta_{\bx} (\infty)$ such that for all $\bx \in \Z^d$,

2314: \bea

2315: \label{0219g}

2316:   \Delta_{\bx} (A;B) \toas \Delta_{\bx} (\infty),

2317: \eea

2318: as $(A,B) \to \R^d$ through $\RR$. Moreover, if $H$ satisfies

2319: (\ref{Pbmc}), then

2320: \bea

2321: \label{0219a}

2322:  \sup_{ (A,B) \in \RR, \bx \in \Z^d} \Exp 

2323: \left[ ( \Delta_{\bx} (A;B) )^4 \right] < \infty.

2324: \eea

2325: \end{lemma}

2326: \proof

2327: Set $C_0 = Q(\0; 1/2)$. By translation invariance, we need only consider

2328: the case $\bx = \0$, and thus it suffices to prove that the variables

2329:  $H ( \Po \cap A;B)

2330: - H (\Po \cap A \setminus C_0 ; B)$ converge almost surely as $(A,B) \to \R^d$ through $\RR$.

2331: 

2332: The number $N$ of points of $\Po$ in $C_0$ is Poisson with parameter $1$. 

2333: Let $\bV_1, \bV_2, \ldots, \bV_N$ be the points of $\Po \cap C_0$,

2334:  taken in an order chosen uniformly

2335: at random from the $N!$ possibilities. Then, provided $C_0 \subseteq A$,

2336: \[ H ( \Po \cap A ; B) - H ( \Po \cap A \setminus C_0 ;B)

2337: = \sum_{i=0}^{N-1} \delta_i (A;B), \]

2338: where

2339: \[ \delta_i (A;B)

2340: := H (( \Po \cap A \setminus C_0 ) \cup \{ \bV_1, \ldots, \bV_{i+1} \} 

2341: ;B) 

2342: - H ( ( \Po \cap A \setminus C_0 ) 

2343: \cup \{ \bV_1, \ldots, \bV_i \} 

2344: ;B) . \]

2345: Since $N$ is a.s.~finite, it suffices

2346:  to prove that each $\delta_i (A;B)$ converges almost surely

2347: as $(A,B) \to \R^d$ through $\RR$. Let $\bU$ be a uniform random vector on

2348:  $C_0$, independent of $\Po$. The distribution of the translated point 

2349: process $- \bV_{i+1} + \{ \bV_1, \ldots, \bV_i \} \cup

2350: ( \Po \setminus C_0 )$ is the same as the conditional distribution of $\Po$ given that the

2351: number of points in $- \bU + C_0 $ is

2352:  equal to $i$, an event of strictly positive

2353: probability. By assumption, this satisfies weak stabilization, which proves (\ref{0219g}).

2354: 

2355: Next we prove (\ref{0219a}). If $Q( \bx; 1/2) \cap A =

2356: \emptyset$ then $\Delta_\bx (A;B)$ is

2357: zero with probability 1.

2358: By translation invariance, it suffices to consider the $\bx = \0$ case,

2359: that is, to prove

2360: \bea \label{0219h}

2361: \sup_{(A,B) \in \RR : C_0 \cap A \neq \emptyset}

2362: \Exp \left[ \left( \Delta_{\0} (A;B) \right)^4 \right] < \infty.

2363: \eea

2364: The proof of this now follows the proof of (3.4) of \cite{penyuk1}, but with

2365: $\delta_i(A)$ replaced by $\delta_i(A;B)$ everywhere. 

2366: $\square$ \\

2367: %

2368: 

2369: \noindent

2370: \textbf{Proof of Theorem \ref{0217c}.} Here we can assume, without

2371: loss of generality, that $\QQ_n = \Po \cap R_n$. For $\bx \in

2372: \Z^d$, let $\FF_\bx$ denote the $\sigma$-field generated by the

2373: points of $\Po$ in $\cup_{\by \in \Z^d : \by \leq \bx} Q(\by;

2374: 1/2)$, where the order in the union is the lexicographic order on

2375: $\Z^d$.

2376: 

2377: Let $R'_n$ be the set of points

2378:  $\bx \in \Z^d$ such that $Q(\bx ;1/2) \cap R_n \neq \emptyset$.

2379:  Let $k_n = \card ( R'_n )$. Then we

2380: have that

2381: \[ R_n \subseteq \bigcup_{\bx \in R'_n} Q ( \bx ; 1/2 ) \subseteq

2382: R_n \cup \partial_1 (R_n) , \] so that

2383: \[ | R_n | \leq k_n \leq | R_n | + | \partial_1 (R_n) | . \]

2384: The vanishing relative boundary condition then implies that $k_n

2385:  / n \to 1$ as $n \to \infty$.

2386: 

2387: Define the filtration $( \GG_0, \GG_1, \ldots, \GG_{k_n} )$ as

2388: follows: let $\GG_0$ be the trivial $\sigma$-field, label the

2389: elements of $R'_n$ in lexicographic order as $\bx_1, \ldots,

2390: \bx_{k_n}$ and let $\GG_i = \FF_{\bx_i}$ for $1 \leq i \leq k_n$.

2391: Then $H (\QQ_n ; S_n) - \Exp [ H (\QQ_n ; S_n ) ] =

2392: \sum_{i=1}^{k_n} D_i$, where we set

2393: \bea

2394:  D_i = \Exp [ H (\QQ_n ; S_n) | \GG_i ] -

2395: \Exp [ H (\QQ_n ; S_n) | \GG_{i-1} ] = \Exp [ -\Delta_{\bx_i} (

2396: R_n ; S_n ) | \FF_{\bx_i} ] . 

2397: \label{0819}

2398: \eea

2399:  By orthogonality of martingale

2400: differences, $\Var [ H (\QQ_n ; S_n ) ] = \Exp \sum_{i=1}^{k_n}

2401: D_i^2 $. By this fact, along with a CLT for martingale differences

2402: (Theorem 2.3 of \cite{mcleish} or Theorem 2.10 of \cite{penbook}),

2403: it suffices to prove the

2404: conditions

2405: \bea

2406: \label{0217d} \sup_{n \geq 1} \Exp \left[ \max_{ 1

2407: \leq i \leq k_n} \left\{ k_n^{-1/2} |D_i |\right\} ^2 \right] <

2408: \infty,

2409: \\ \label{0217e}

2410: k_n^{-1/2} \max_{1 \leq i \leq

2411: k_n} |D_i| \toP 0, \eea and for some $s^2 \geq 0$,

2412: \bea

2413: \label{0217f}

2414: k_n^{-1} \sum_{i=1}^{k_n} D_i^2 \inL  s^2 .

2415: \eea

2416: 

2417: Using \eq{0219a}, and the representation \eq{0819} for $D_i$,

2418: we can verify \eq{0217d} and \eq{0217e} in just the same manner

2419: as for the equivalent estimates (3.7) and (3.8) in \cite{penyuk1}.

2420: 

2421: 

2422: 

2423: We now prove (\ref{0217f}). By 

2424:  (\ref{0219g}), for each $\bx \in \Z^d$ the variables $\Delta_{\bx}

2425: (A;B)$ converge almost surely to a limit, denoted $\Delta_{\bx} (\infty)$,

2426: as $(A,B) \to \R^d$ through $\RR$. For $\bx \in \Z^d$ and $(A,B) \in \RR$, let

2427: \[ F_{\bx} (A;B) = \Exp [ \Delta_{\bx} (A;B) | \FF_{\bx} ]; ~~~

2428: F_{\bx} = \Exp [ \Delta_{\bx} (\infty) | \FF_{\bx} ]. \]

2429: Then $(F_{\bx} , \bx \in \Z^d)$ is a stationary family of random variables.

2430: Set $s^2 = \Exp [ F^2_{\0}]$. We claim that the ergodic theorem

2431:  implies

2432: \bea \label{0322p}

2433:  k_n^{-1} \sum_{\bx \in R'_n} F_{\bx}^2 \inL s^2 . \eea

2434: The proof of this follows, with minor modifications,

2435:  the proof of the corresponding result

2436: (3.10) in \cite{penyuk1}.

2437: 

2438: We need to show that $F_{\bx}(R_n;S_n)^2$ approximates to $F_{\bx}^2$. We consider

2439: $\bx$ at the origin $\0$. For any $(A,B) \in \RR$, by Cauchy-Schwarz,

2440: \bea

2441:  \Exp [ | F_{\0} (A;B)^2 - F_\0^2 | ] \leq \left(

2442: \Exp[ (F_\0(A;B) + F_\0)^2 ] \right)^{1/2}

2443: \left(

2444: \Exp[ (F_\0(A;B) - F_\0)^2 ] \right)^{1/2}. 

2445: \label{0801}

2446: \eea

2447: By the definition of $F_\0$ and the conditional Jensen inequality,

2448: \bean

2449: \Exp [ (F_\0(A;B) + F_\0 )^2] & = & \Exp \left[

2450: \left( \Exp[ \Delta_\0 (A;B) + \Delta_\0 (\infty) | \FF_\0 ] \right)^2 \right] \\

2451: & \leq & \Exp [ \Exp [ (\Delta_\0 (A;B) + \Delta_\0 (\infty))^2 | \FF_\0 ]]

2452: \\

2453: = \Exp [ (\Delta_\0 (A;B) + \Delta_\0 (\infty) )^2] , \eean

2454: which is uniformly bounded by

2455: %the alternative stabilization

2456: (\ref{0219g})

2457: and

2458: (\ref{0219a}). Similarly,

2459: \bea

2460: \label{0325b}

2461: \Exp [ (F_\0(A;B) - F_\0 )^2]  \leq

2462:  \Exp [ (\Delta_\0 (A;B) - \Delta_\0 (\infty) )^2] ,

2463: \eea

2464: which is also uniformly bounded by (\ref{0219g}) and (\ref{0219a}).

2465: For any $\RR$-valued sequence $(A_n,B_n)_{n \geq 1}$

2466: with $\cup_{n \geq 1} \cap_{m \geq n} B_n = \R^d$,

2467: the sequence $(\Delta_\0 (A_n ;B_n) - \Delta_\0 (\infty))^2$

2468: tends to 0 almost surely by (\ref{0219g}), and is uniformly integrable by (\ref{0219a}), and therefore 

2469: %(see \cite{durrett}, Chapter 4, Theorem 5.2) 

2470: the expression (\ref{0325b})

2471: tends to zero so that by (\ref{0801}),

2472:  $\Exp[ |F_\0 (A_n;B_n)^2 - F_\0^2|] \to 0$.

2473: 

2474: Returning to the given sequence $(R_n,S_n)$, let $\eps >0$. By the vanishing relative boundary condition, we can choose $K_n$

2475: so that $\lim_{n \to\infty} K_n= \infty$ and $| \partial_{K_n} S_n | \leq

2476: \eps n$ for all $n$. 

2477: Let $S'_n$ be the set of $\bx \in \Z^d$ such that $Q_{1/2}(\bx)$

2478: has non-empty intersection with $S_n \setminus \partial_{K_n}(S_n)$.

2479: Using the conclusion of the previous paragraph and translation invariance,

2480:  it is not hard to deduce that

2481: \bea

2482:  \lim_{n \to \infty} \sup_{\bx \in S_n'} \Exp [ |F_{\bx} (R_n;S_n)^2

2483: -F_{\bx}^2 | ] = 0 . 

2484: \label{0727g}

2485: \eea

2486: Also, since we assume $|S_n | \sim n$ we have 

2487:  $\card(S'_n) \geq |S_n| - \eps n \geq (1-2 \eps)n$ for large enough $n$. 

2488: Using this with (\ref{0727g}),

2489:  the uniform boundedness of $\Exp [ |F_{\bx} (R_n;S_n)^2

2490: -F_{\bx}^2 | ]$ and the fact that $\eps$ can be taken arbitrarily small

2491: in the above argument, it is routine to deduce that

2492: \[ 

2493: k_n^{-1} \sum_{\bx \in R'_n} ( F_{\bx} (R_n;S_n)^2 - F^2_{\bx} ) \inL 0,

2494: \]

2495: and therefore (\ref{0322p}) remains true with $F_{\bx}$ replaced by 

2496: $F_{\bx}(R_n;S_n)$;

2497: that is, (\ref{0217f}) holds and the proof of Theorem 

2498: \ref{0217c} is complete. $\square$

2499: 

2500: 

2501: 

2502: \subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{genclt}: the non-Poisson case}

2503: 

2504: In this section we complete the proof of Theorem \ref{genclt}. 

2505: The first step

2506: is to show that the conditions of Theorem \ref{genclt} imply those

2507: of Theorem \ref{0217c}, as follows.

2508: 

2509: \begin{lemma}

2510: \label{0326a}

2511: If $H$ satisfies the uniform bounded moments condition (\ref{ubm}) and is

2512: polynomially bounded, then $H$

2513:  satisfies the Poisson bounded moments condition

2514: (\ref{Pbmc}). \end{lemma}

2515: \proof

2516: The proof follows, with minor modifications, that of

2517: Lemma 4.1 of \cite{penyuk1}.

2518: $\square$ \\

2519: 

2520: It follows from Lemma \ref{0326a} that if $H$ satisfies the 

2521: conditions of Theorem \ref

2522: {genclt}, then Theorem \ref{0217c} applies and we have the Poisson parts of

2523: Theorem \ref{genclt}. To de-Poissonize these limits we follow \cite{penyuk1}.

2524: Define

2525: \[ R_{m,n} := H ( \UU_{m+1,n} ; B) - H ( \UU_{m,n} ; B) .\]

2526: We use the following coupling lemma.

2527: 

2528: \begin{lemma}

2529: \label{0326b}

2530: Suppose $H$ is strongly stabilizing. Let $\eps >0$. Then there

2531: exists $\delta>0$ and $n_0 \geq 1$ such that for all $n \geq n_0$

2532: and all $m, m' \in [(1-\delta)n, (1+\delta)n]$ with $m < m'$, there exists

2533: a coupled family of variables $D, D', R, R'$ with the following

2534: properties:

2535: \begin{itemize}

2536: \item[(i)] $D$ and $D'$ each have the same distribution as

2537: $\Delta(\infty)$; \item[(ii)] $D$ and $D'$ are independent;

2538: \item[(iii)] $(R,R')$ have the same joint distribution as

2539: $(R_{m,n}, R_{m',n})$; \item[(iv)] $\Pr [ \{ D \neq R \} \cup \{

2540: D' \neq R' \} ] < \eps$.

2541: \end{itemize}

2542: \end{lemma}

2543: \proof

2544: Since we assume $|S_n|/|R_n| \to 1$, the probability that

2545: a random $d$-vector uniformly distributed over $R_n$ lies

2546: in $S_n$ tends to 1 as $n \to \infty$. Using this fact 

2547: the proof follows, with some minor modifications,

2548:  that of the corresponding result in \cite{penyuk1},

2549: Lemma 4.2. $\square$

2550: 

2551: \begin{lemma}

2552: \label{0331q} Suppose $H$ is strongly stabilizing and satisfies

2553: the uniform bounded moments condition (\ref{ubm}). Let $(h(n))_{n

2554: \geq 1}$ be a sequence with $n^{-1} h(n) \to 0$ as $n \to \infty$.

2555: Then \bea \label{0404p} & & \lim_{n \to \infty} \sup_{ |n-m| \leq

2556: h(n)} \left|

2557: \Exp R_{m,n} - \Exp \Delta ( \infty) \right| = 0; \\

2558: \label{0404q} &  & \lim_{n \to \infty} \sup_{ n-h(n) \leq m < m'

2559: \leq n+h(n)} \left|

2560: \Exp R_{m,n}R_{m',n} - (\Exp \Delta ( \infty))^2 \right| = 0; \\

2561: \label{0404r} &  & \lim_{n \to \infty} \sup_{ |n-m| \leq h(n)}

2562: \Exp R_{m,n}^2 < \infty . \eea \end{lemma}

2563: 

2564: \proof The proof follows that of Lemma 4.3 of \cite{penyuk1}. 

2565: $\square$ \\

2566: 

2567: \noindent \textbf{Proof of Theorem \ref{genclt}} Theorem

2568: \ref{genclt} now follows in the same way as Theorem 2.1

2569: in \cite{penyuk1},

2570: replacing $H ( \; \cdot \;)$ with $H ( \; \cdot \; ; S_n)$. 

2571: $\square$

2572: 

2573: 

2574: \section{Proof of Theorem \ref{llnthm}: Laws of large numbers} \label{seclln}

2575: 

2576: We now derive our law of large

2577: numbers for the total weight of the random MDSF on the unit

2578: square.

2579: We consider the general partial order

2580: $\stackrel{\theta,\phi}{\preccurlyeq}$, for $0 \leq \theta < 2\pi$

2581: and $ 0 < \phi \leq \pi$ or $\phi =2 \pi$.

2582:  Recall that $\by \potp \bx$ if $\by \in

2583: C_{\theta,\phi}(\bx)$, where $C_{\theta,\phi}(\bx)$ is the cone

2584: formed by the rays at $\theta$ and $\theta+\phi$ measured

2585: anticlockwise from the upwards vertical.

2586: 

2587: We consider the random point set 

2588: $\X_n$,

2589: the

2590: binomial point process of $n$ independent uniformly distributed

2591: points on $(0,1]^2$. However, the result 

2592:  (\ref{0728e}) also holds 

2593: (with virtually the same proof) if the points of $\X_n$

2594: are uniformly distributed on an arbitrary convex set

2595: in $\R^2 $ of unit area. If the points are 

2596: distributed in 

2597: $\R^2$ with a density function $f$ that has

2598: convex support and is bounded away from 0 and infinity

2599: on its support, then (\ref{0728e}) holds with a factor

2600: of $\int_{\R^2} f(\bx)^{(2-\alpha)/2} \ud \bx$ introduced into the

2601: right hand side (cf. eqn (2.9) of \cite{penyuk2}).

2602: 

2603: 

2604: 

2605: 

2606: 

2607: For the general partial order given by $\theta,\phi$ we apply 

2608: Lemma \ref{llnpenyuk} to obtain a law of

2609: large numbers for $\LL^\alpha ( \X_n )$. As a special case, we

2610: thus obtain a law of large numbers under the partial order

2611: $\preccurlyeq^*$  given

2612: by $\theta=\phi=\pi/2$.

2613: This method enables us to evaluate the limit explicitly, unlike

2614: methods based on the subadditivity of the functional 

2615: which may also be applicable here (see the remark at the end of this section).

2616: 

2617: 

2618: 

2619: In applying Lemma

2620: \ref{llnpenyuk} to the MDSF functional, we 

2621: take

2622: the dimension $d$ in the lemma to be $2$,

2623: and take   $f(\mathbf{x})$ (the underlying

2624: probability  density function in the lemma)

2625: to be 1 for 

2626: $\mathbf{x} \in (0,1]^2$ and zero elsewhere.

2627: %

2628: We take $\xi(\mathbf{x} ; \X)$ to be

2629: $d(\bx;\X)^\alpha$, where

2630: $d(\bx;\X)$ is

2631:  the distance from point $\mathbf{x}$ to its directed nearest

2632: neighbour in $\X$ under $\potp$, if such a neighbour exists, or

2633: zero otherwise. 

2634: Thus in our case

2635: \bea

2636:  \xi(\mathbf{x};\X) = \left( d(\mathbf{x};\X) \right)^\alpha ~~~ 

2637: {\rm with}~~~

2638: d (\bx ; \X) := \min

2639: \left\{ \| \bx - \by \| : \by \in \X \setminus \{ \bx \}, \by

2640: \preccurlyeq \bx \right\} 

2641: \label{0802}

2642: \eea

2643: with the convention that $\min \{ \} = 0$.

2644: We need to show this choice of $\xi$ satisfies the conditions

2645: of Lemma \ref{llnpenyuk}. As before, $\H_\tau$ denotes a homogeneous

2646: Poisson process on $\R^d$ of intensity $\tau$, now with $d=2$.

2647: 

2648: \begin{lemma} \label{stabil} 

2649: Let $\tau >0$.  Then $\xi$ is almost surely stabilizing on

2650: $\mathcal{H}_{\tau}$, in the sense of (\ref{stabeq}),

2651: with limit  

2652: $\xi_\infty(\H_\tau) = (d(\0;\H_\tau))^\alpha$.

2653: \end{lemma}

2654:  \proof 

2655: Let $R$ be the (random) distance from $\0$ to its directed nearest

2656: neighbour in $\H_\tau$, i.e.~$R = d( \0 ; \H_\tau )$. 

2657: %Then,

2658: Since $\phi>0$ and $\tau>0$, we have $0< R < \infty$  almost surely.

2659:  But then

2660: for any $\ell >R$, we have $\xi(\0; (\H_\tau \cap B(\0;\ell)) \cup

2661: {\cal A}) = R^\alpha$, for any finite ${\cal A} \subset \R^d \setminus

2662: B(\0;\ell)$. Thus $\xi$  stabilizes on $\H_\tau$ with limit

2663: $\xi_\infty(\H_\tau) =R^\alpha$.  $\square$ \\

2664: 

2665: Before proving that our choice of $\xi$ satisfies the

2666:  moments condition for Lemma \ref{llnpenyuk},

2667: we give a geometrical lemma.  For $B \subseteq \R^2$

2668: with $B$ bounded, and for $\bx \in B$, 

2669: write $\dist(\bx;\partial B)$ for $\sup\{r: B(\bx;r) \subseteq B\}$,

2670: and for $s >0$, define the region 

2671: \bea

2672: \label{Atpdef} 

2673: A_{\theta,\phi}(\mathbf{x},s;B) :=

2674: B( \mathbf{x}; s ) \cap B \cap C_{\theta,\phi}(\bx). 

2675: \eea

2676: %

2677: \begin{lemma}

2678: \label{lem0727}

2679: Let $B$ be a  convex bounded set in $\R^2$, and  let $\bx \in B$.

2680: If $A_{\theta,\phi} (\bx,s;B) \cap \partial B(\bx;s) \neq \emptyset$,

2681: and $s > \dist(\bx, \partial B)$, then 

2682: $$

2683: |A_{\theta,\phi}(\bx,s;B)| \geq   

2684: s

2685: \sin (\phi /2)  

2686:  \dist(x,\partial B)  /2.

2687: $$

2688: \end{lemma}

2689: \proof

2690: The condition

2691:  $A_{\theta,\phi} (\bx,s;B) \cap \partial B(\bx;s) \neq \emptyset$

2692: says that there exists $\by \in B \cap C_{\theta,\phi}(\bx,s)$

2693: with $\|\by - \bx\| = s$.

2694:  The line segment $\bx \by$ is contained in

2695: the cone $C_{\theta,\phi}(\bx)$; take a half-line ${\bf h}$ starting

2696: from $\bx$, at an angle $\phi/2$ to the line segment $\bx \by$

2697: and such that ${\bf h}$ is also contained in $ C_{\theta,\phi}(\bx)$.

2698: Let $\bz$ be the point in $\bf h$ at a distance $\dist(\bx,\partial B)$

2699: from $\bx$. Then the interior of the triangle $\bx \by \bz$ is entirely

2700: contained in  $A_{\theta,\phi}(\bx,s)$, and has area

2701: $s \sin (\phi /2)  \dist(x,\partial B)/2$. $\square$ 

2702: 

2703: 

2704: 

2705: 

2706: 

2707: 

2708: \begin{lemma} \label{lem0k715b} Suppose 

2709: $\alpha >0$.

2710: Then  $\xi$ given by (\ref{0802}) satisfies the

2711: moments condition (\ref{0k715a}) for any $p \in (1/\alpha,2 /\alpha]$.

2712: \end{lemma} \proof 

2713: Setting $R_n :=(0,n^{1/2}]^2$, we have

2714: \bea

2715:  \Exp \left[ \xi \left( n^{1/2}\mathbf{X}_1;n^{1/2} \X_n

2716: \right)^p \right]  =  

2717: \int_{R_n} \Exp \left[ \left( \xi

2718: (\mathbf{x};n^{1/2} \X_{n-1}) \right)^p \right] \frac{\ud \mathbf{x}}{n}

2719: %\nonumber

2720:  . 

2721: \label{0728}

2722: \eea 

2723: For $x \in R_n$ set $m(\bx) := \dist(\bx, \partial R_n)$.

2724: Let us divide $R_n$ into three regions 

2725: \bean

2726: R_n(1) & : = & \{\bx \in R_n: m(\bx) \leq n^{-1/2} \}; ~~~~

2727: R_n(2)  : =  \{\bx \in R_n:  m(\bx) > 1 \};

2728:  \\

2729: R_n(3) &  : = & \{\bx \in R_n: n^{-1/2} < m(\bx) \leq 1 \}.

2730: \eean

2731: %with $m(\bx) \leq n^{-1/2}$.

2732:  For all $\bx \in R_n$, we have

2733: $\xi(\bx;n^{1/2} \X_{n-1}) \leq (2n)^{\alpha/2}$, and hence,

2734: since $R_n(1)$ has area at most 4, we can

2735: bound the contribution to (\ref{0728}) from $\bx \in R_n(1)$ by 

2736: \bea

2737: \label{0728a}

2738: \int_{\bx \in R_n(1)} \Exp \left[ \left( \xi

2739: (\mathbf{x};n^{1/2}\X_{n-1}) \right)^p \right] \frac{\ud \mathbf{x}}{n}

2740: \leq  4 n^{-1} (2n)^{p\alpha /2} = 2^{2+ p\alpha/2}  n^{(p \alpha -2)/2}, 

2741: \eea

2742: which is bounded provided $p \alpha \leq 2$.

2743:  

2744: Now, for $\mathbf{x} \in R_n$, with $A_{\theta,\phi}(\cdot)$ defined

2745: at (\ref{Atpdef}),  

2746: we have

2747: \bea 

2748: \Pr \left[  d

2749: (\mathbf{x}; n^{1/2} \X_{n-1})  > s \right] & \leq & 

2750: \Pr \left[ n^{1/2} \X_{n-1}

2751:  \cap A_{\theta,\phi}(\bx,s;R_n) = \emptyset \right]

2752: \nonumber \\

2753:  & = & 

2754: \left(1 - \frac{|A_{\theta,\phi}(\bx,s;R_n)| }{n} \right)^{n-1}

2755: \nonumber \\

2756: & \leq &  \exp( 1 - |A_{\theta,\phi}(\bx,s;R_n)| ),

2757: \label{0728b} \eea 

2758: since $|A_{\theta,\phi}(\bx,s;R_n)|\leq n$.

2759: For $\bx \in R_n$ and $s>m(\bx)$, by Lemma \ref{lem0727} we have

2760:  $$

2761: \left| A_{\theta,\phi}(\mathbf{x},s;R_n)

2762:  \right| \geq \sin(\phi/2 ) s m(\bx)/2 ~~~{\rm if} ~~ 

2763: A_{\theta,\phi} (\bx,s;R_n) \cap \partial B(\bx;s) 

2764: \neq \emptyset,

2765: $$

2766: and also

2767: $$

2768: \Pr [ d(\bx;n^{1/2} \X_{n-1}) > s ] = 0 ~~~{\rm if}~~~

2769: A_{\theta,\phi} (\bx,s;R_n) \cap \partial B(\bx;s) 

2770: = \emptyset.

2771: $$

2772:  For $s \leq m(\bx)$, 

2773: we have that 

2774: $

2775:  \left|

2776: A_{\theta,\phi}(\mathbf{x},s;R_n) \right| =

2777: \frac{\phi}{2} s^2 \geq \sin (\phi/2)s^2. 

2778: $ 

2779: Combining these observations and (\ref{0728b}),

2780:  we obtain for all $\bx \in R_n$  and $s >0$ that 

2781: \bean 

2782: \Pr \left[  d

2783: (\mathbf{x}; n^{1/2} \X_{n-1})  > s \right] & \leq & 

2784: \exp \left( 1 - \sin (\phi/2) s \min (s, m(\bx) )/2 

2785: \right), ~~~ \bx \in R_n.

2786: \eean

2787: Setting $c =(1/2) \sin(\phi/2)$, we therefore have for $\mathbf{x} \in R_n$

2788: that

2789: \bea

2790:   \Exp \left[  \xi (\mathbf{x};n^{1/2} \X_{n-1})^p

2791: \right] 

2792: %\!\! 

2793: & = & 

2794: %\!\! 

2795: \int_0^\infty  

2796: \Pr  \left[  \xi (\mathbf{x}; n^{1/2} \X_{n-1})^p > r \right]

2797:  \ud r 

2798: \nonumber \\

2799: & = & \int_0^\infty \Pr \left[ d(\bx; n^{1/2} \X_{n-1})

2800: > r^{1/(\alpha p)} \right] \ud r

2801: \nonumber \\

2802: %\!\! 

2803: & \leq &

2804: % \!\! 

2805: \int_0^{m(\bx)^{\alpha p}} \ud r 

2806:  \exp {  \left(1 - c r^{2/(\alpha p)} \right) } 

2807: \nonumber \\

2808: && +

2809:  \int_{m(\bx)^{\alpha p }}^\infty \!\! \ud r

2810: \exp { \left(1 - c m(\bx)r^{1/(\alpha p)} \right) }

2811: \nonumber \\

2812: & = & O(1) + \int_{m(\bx)^2}^\infty 

2813: e^{1-cu} \alpha p u^{\alpha p-1} m(\bx)^{-p \alpha} \ud u

2814: \nonumber \\

2815: & = & O(1) + O(m(\bx)^{-\alpha p}).

2816: \label{0728d}

2817: \eea 

2818: For $\bx \in R_n(2)$, this bound is $O(1)$, and the area

2819: of $R_n(2)$ is less than $n$, so that the contribution

2820: to (\ref{0728}) from $R_n(2)$ satisfies

2821: \bea

2822: \label{0728c}

2823: \limsup_{n \to \infty}

2824: \int_{R_n(2)} \Exp \left[ \left( \xi

2825: (\mathbf{x};n^{1/2} \X_{n-1}) \right)^p \right] 

2826: \frac{\ud \mathbf{x}}{n}

2827: %\ud \bx 

2828: < \infty.

2829: \eea

2830: Finally, by (\ref{0728d}), there is a constant $c'$ such 

2831: that if $\alpha p >1$, 

2832: the contribution to (\ref{0728}) from $R_n(3)$ satisfies

2833: % is bounded by a constant times

2834: \bean

2835: \int_{R_n(3)} \Exp \left[ \left( \xi

2836: (\mathbf{x};n^{1/2} \X_{n-1}) \right)^p \right] \frac{\ud \mathbf{x}}{n}

2837: &\leq & 

2838:   c' n^{-1/2} \int_{y=n^{-1/2}}^1 y^{-\alpha p} \ud y 

2839: \\

2840: & \leq & \left( \frac{c' n^{-1/2}}{\alpha p-1} \right) n^{(\alpha p -1)/2}

2841: \eean

2842: which is bounded provided  $\alpha p \leq 2$.

2843: Combined with the bounds in (\ref{0728a}) and (\ref{0728c}),

2844: this shows that the expression (\ref{0728}) 

2845: is uniformly bounded, provided $1 < \alpha p \leq 2$.

2846: $\square$ \\

2847: 

2848: Following notation from Section \ref{subsecgenclt},

2849: for $k \in \N$, and for $a<b$ and $c<d$

2850:  let $\UU_{k,(a,b] \times (c,d]}$ denote the point process 

2851: consisting of

2852: $k$ independent  random vectors uniformly distributed

2853: on the rectangle $(a,b] \times (c,d]$.

2854: Before proceeding further,

2855: we recall 

2856: that

2857: if $M(\X)$ denotes the number of minimal elements (under the ordering

2858: $\postar$) of a point 

2859: set $\X \subset \R^2 $, then 

2860: \bea

2861: \Exp [ M(\UU_{k,(a,b]\times (c,d]}) ] =

2862: \Exp [ M(\X_k) ]

2863:  = 1 + (1/2) + \cdots + (1/k) \leq 1 + \log k. 

2864: \label{harmonicbd}

2865: \eea

2866: The first equality in (\ref{harmonicbd})  comes

2867: from some obvious scaling which shows that the

2868: distribution of 

2869: $ M(\UU_{k,(a,b]\times (c,d]}) $ does not depend on $a,b,c,d$.

2870: For  the second equality 

2871: in (\ref{harmonicbd}),

2872: see \cite{BNS} or the proof of 

2873: Theorem 1.1(a) of \cite{bhattroy2002}.  \\

2874: 

2875: \noindent \textbf{Proof of Theorem \ref{llnthm}.} 

2876: Suppose $\alpha <2$,

2877: and set $f(\cdot)$ to be the indicator of the unit square

2878: $(0,1]^2$. 

2879:  By Lemmas

2880: \ref{stabil} and \ref{lem0k715b}, our functional $\xi$,

2881: given at (\ref{0802}), satisfies the

2882: conditions of Lemma \ref{llnpenyuk} with $p= 2/\alpha$

2883: and $q=1$, with this choice of $f$. 

2884:  So by Lemma \ref{llnpenyuk},

2885: we have that

2886: \bea

2887: n^{(\alpha/2)-1} \LL^\alpha(\X_n) = 

2888:   n^{-1} 

2889: \sum_{\bx \in \X_n} \xi (n^{1/2}\mathbf{x};n^{1/2}\X_n) 

2890:  \nonumber \\

2891: \inL

2892: \int_{\R^2} \Exp \left[ \xi_\infty ( \H_{f(\mathbf{x})} ) \right]

2893: f( \mathbf{x} ) \ud \mathbf{x}  = \Exp \xi_\infty(\H_1).

2894: \label{0728f}

2895:  \eea

2896: Since the disk sector $C_{\theta,\phi}(\mathbf{x}) \cap B(\bx;r)$

2897: has area $(\phi/2) r^2$, by Lemma \ref{stabil} we have

2898:  \bean \Pr\left[ \xi_{\infty} (

2899: \H_1 ) >s \right] & = & \Pr \left[ \H_1 \cap

2900: C_{\theta,\phi}(\mathbf{0}) \cap B(\0;s^{1/\alpha}) = \emptyset \right] =

2901: \exp{\left(-(\phi/2) s^{2/\alpha}\right)}.

2902: \eean

2903: Hence, the limit in (\ref{0728f}) is

2904:  \[

2905:   \Exp \left[ \xi_{\infty} ( \H_1 ) \right]  =

2906: \int_0^{\infty} \Pr \left[ \xi_\infty \left( \H_1 \right)

2907: > s \right] \ud s

2908: = \alpha 2^{(\alpha-2)/2} \phi^{-\alpha/2} \Gamma( \alpha/2 ), 

2909: \]

2910: and this gives us (\ref{0728e}). Finally, in the case where $\potp=\postar$,

2911: (\ref{0728e}) remains true when $\X_n$ is replaced by $\X_n^0$, since

2912: \bea

2913: \label{0806a}

2914:  \Exp [n^{(\alpha/2)-1} | \LL^\alpha (\X_n^0) - \LL^\alpha (\X_n)| ]

2915: \leq 2^{\alpha/2} n^{(\alpha/2)-1} \Exp [ M(\X_n)] ,

2916: \eea

2917: where $M(\X_n)$ denotes the number of minimal elements of $\X_n$. By (\ref{harmonicbd}),

2918: $\Exp[ M(\X_n)] \leq 1+\log n$, and hence the right hand side of (\ref{0806a})

2919: tends to 0 as $n \to \infty$ for $0<\alpha<2$. This gives us (\ref{0728e})

2920: with $\X_n^0$ under $\postar$.   

2921:  $\square$ \\

2922: 

2923: 

2924: 

2925: \noindent \textbf{Remark.} A law of large numbers for Euclidean

2926: functionals of many random geometric structures can be treated by

2927: the boundary functional approach of Yukich~\cite{yukbook}. It

2928: can be shown that the MDSF satisfies some, but possibly not all, of the

2929: appropriate conditions that would allow this approach to be

2930: successful. The MDSF functional is subadditive, its corresponding

2931: boundary functional is superadditive, and the functional and its

2932: boundary functional are sufficiently `close in mean'. However, it

2933: is not clear that the functional is `smooth', since

2934: the degree of the graph is not bounded.

2935: 

2936: 

2937: 

2938: 

2939: 

2940: 

2941: 

2942: 

2943: 

2944: 

2945: 

2946: \section{Central limit theorem away from the boundary} 

2947: \label{ltot}

2948: 

2949: While it should be possible to adapt the 

2950: argument of the present section to more general partial orders,

2951: from now on we take the partial order $\preccurlyeq$ 

2952: on $\R^2$ to be $\postar$.

2953: For each $n$, define the region

2954:  $S_{0,n} := (n^{\eps -1/2},1]^2$, 

2955: where $\eps \in (0,1/2)$ is a small

2956:  constant to be chosen later.  

2957: In this section, 

2958:  we use the general central limit theorems

2959: of Section \ref{subsecgenclt} to

2960:  demonstrate a central limit theorem for the contribution to the

2961:  total weight

2962: of the MDSF, under $\postar$, from edges away from the

2963:  boundary, that is from points in the

2964: region $S_{0,n}$.

2965: 

2966: Given $\alpha >0$,

2967: consider the MDSF total weight functional $H = \LL^\alpha$ on

2968: point sets in $\R^2$. 

2969: For $\bx \in \X$, let the directed nearest

2970: neighbour distance $d( \bx ; \X)$ and

2971: the corresponding $\alpha$-weighted functional

2972:  $\xi(\bx;\X)$

2973: be  given by (\ref{0802}), where now we take $\preccurlyeq$ to be

2974: $\postar$.

2975: For $R \subseteq \R^2$, set

2976: \bea

2977:  \LL^\alpha ( \X;R ) = \sum_{\bx \in \X\cap R} \xi (\bx ; \X) ,

2978: \label{0714a}

2979: \eea

2980: and set $\LL^\alpha(\X):= \LL^\alpha(\X;\R^2)$.

2981: 

2982: Let $\X_n$ be the binomial point process of $n$ i.i.d.~uniform

2983: random vectors on $(0,1]^2$, and let $\Po_n$ be the homogeneous

2984: Poisson process of intensity $n$ on $(0,1]^2$. The main result of

2985: this section is the following.

2986: 

2987: \begin{theorem} \label{CLT}

2988: Suppose that $\alpha>0$ and the partial order is $\postar$.

2989:  Then there exist constants $0<t_\alpha \leq

2990: s_\alpha$, not depending on the choice of $\eps$,

2991: such that, as $n \to \infty$,

2992: \begin{itemize}  \item[(i)] $n^{\alpha-1} \Var \left[

2993: \LL^\alpha \left( \X_n ; S_{0,n} \right) \right] \to t_\alpha^2$;

2994: \item[(ii)]

2995: $n^{(\alpha-1)/2} \tLalph

2996:  \left( \X_n ; S_{0,n} \right) 

2997:  \tod \NN \left( 0, t_\alpha^2 \right)$;

2998: \item[(iii)] $n^{\alpha-1}

2999: \Var \left[ \LL^\alpha \left( \Po_n ; S_{0,n} \right) \right]

3000: \to s_\alpha^2$;

3001: \item[(iv)] $n^{(\alpha-1)/2} 

3002: \tLalph \left( \Po_n ; S_{0,n} \right) 

3003: \tod \NN

3004: \left( 0, s_\alpha^2 \right)$.

3005: \end{itemize} \end{theorem}

3006: 

3007: The following corollary states that 

3008: Theorem \ref{CLT} remains true in the rooted

3009: cases too, i.e.~with $\X_n$ replaced by $\X^0_n$ and

3010: $\Po_n$ replaced by $\Po^0_n$.

3011: 

3012: \begin{corollary} \label{0804c}

3013: Suppose that $\alpha>0$ and the partial order is $\postar$.

3014:  Then, with $t_\alpha$, $s_\alpha$

3015: as given in Theorem \ref{CLT}, we have that as $n \to \infty$,

3016: \begin{itemize} \item[(i)] $n^{\alpha-1} \Var \left[

3017: \LL^\alpha \left( \X_n^0 ; S_{0,n} \right) \right] \to t_\alpha^2$;

3018: \item[(ii)]

3019: $n^{(\alpha-1)/2} \tLalph

3020:  \left( \X_n^0 ; S_{0,n} \right) \tod \NN \left( 0, t_\alpha^2 \right)$;

3021: \item[(iii)] $n^{\alpha-1}

3022: \Var \left[ \LL^\alpha \left( \Po_n^0 ; S_{0,n} \right) \right]

3023: \to s_\alpha^2$;

3024: \item[(iv)] $n^{(\alpha-1)/2} 

3025: \tLalph \left( \Po_n^0 ; S_{0,n} \right) 

3026: \tod \NN

3027: \left( 0, s_\alpha^2 \right)$.

3028: \end{itemize} \end{corollary}

3029: \proof

3030: For each region $R \subseteq [0,1]^2$ and

3031: point set ${\cal S} \subset [0,1]^2$

3032: with $\0 \in {\cal S}$, let $\LL_0^\alpha ( {\cal S} ; R)$ denote

3033: the total weight of the edges incident to $\0$

3034: in the MDST on ${\cal S}$ from points

3035: in $R$.  Then

3036:  $\Lalph ( \Po_n^0 ; S_{0,n} ) $ equals

3037: $\Lalph ( \Po_n ; S_{0,n} ) + \LL_0^\alpha ( \Po_n^0 ; S_{0,n} )$,

3038: so that

3039: \bea

3040:  \Var [   \Lalph ( \Po_n^0 ; S_{0,n} ) ]  - 

3041:  \Var [   \Lalph ( \Po_n ; S_{0,n} ) ]

3042: = 2 \Cov [ \Lalph ( \Po_n ; S_{0,n} ) , \LL_0^\alpha ( \Po_n^0 ; S_{0,n} ) ]

3043: \nonumber \\

3044: +

3045:  \Var[ \LL_0^\alpha ( \Po_n^0 ; S_{0,n} ) ]. 

3046: \label{0817a}

3047: \eea

3048: 

3049: 

3050:  Let $N_n$ denote the number of points of $\Po_n$, and 

3051: let $E_n$ denote the event

3052: that at least one point of $\Po_n \cap S_{0,n}$ is

3053: joined to $\0$ in the MDST on $\Po_n^0$. Then 

3054: \bean

3055: %\label{0804i}

3056: \Pr[E_n] \leq \Pr \left[ (0,n^{\eps-1/2}]^2 \cap \Po_n =

3057: \emptyset \right] = \exp (-n^{2\eps}) ,

3058: \eean

3059: and $\LL_0^\alpha(\Po_n^0; S_{0,n}) \leq 2^{\alpha/2} N_n \1_{E_n} $.

3060: Thus by the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, 

3061: %from (\ref{0804j}) and (\ref{0804i}) 

3062: for some finite constant $C$

3063: we have

3064: \bea

3065:  \Var \left[ \LL_0^\alpha ( \Po_n^0 ; S_{0,n} ) \right]

3066:  \leq \Exp \left[ 

3067: %\left|

3068:  \LL_0^\alpha ( \Po_n^0 ; S_{0,n} )^2 

3069: %\Lalph ( \Po_n ; S_{0,n} ) \right|

3070:  \right]

3071: \leq 

3072: %2^{\alpha}

3073: C 

3074: %n^{\alpha+3}

3075: n^2  \exp (-n^{2\eps}/2) ,

3076: \label{0817b}

3077: \eea

3078: and combining this with (\ref{0817a}),

3079: Theorem \ref{CLT} (iii) and

3080:  the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality 

3081: shows that

3082: $$

3083: n^{\alpha-1} 

3084: ( \Var

3085: \left[   \Lalph ( \Po_n^0 ; S_{0,n} ) \right]  - 

3086:  \Var \left[   \Lalph ( \Po_n ; S_{0,n} ) \right] )

3087: \to 0,

3088: $$

3089: so that from Theorem \ref{CLT} (iii) we obtain

3090: the corresponding rooted result (iii).

3091: Also, since (\ref{0817b}) implies $n^{\alpha-1} 

3092:  \Var \left[ \LL_0^\alpha ( \Po_n^0 ; S_{0,n} ) \right]$ tends to zero,

3093:  from Theorem \ref{CLT} (iv) and Slutsky's theorem we obtain

3094:  the corresponding

3095: rooted result (iv).

3096: 

3097: 

3098: The binomial results (i) and (ii) follow in the same manner as above,

3099:  with slight

3100: modifications. $\square$ \\

3101: 

3102: To prove Theorem \ref{CLT}, we demonstrate that our functional

3103:  $\LL^\alpha$ satisfies

3104: suitable versions of the conditions of Theorem \ref{genclt} and

3105: Corollary \ref{cltcor}. First, we see that $\LL^\alpha$ is polynomially

3106: bounded (see (\ref{poly})), since

3107: \[ \LL^\alpha ( \X ; B) \leq \left( \diam ( \X ) \right)^\alpha

3108: \card ( \X ) .\] Also, $\LL^\alpha$ is homogeneous of order $\alpha$.

3109: 

3110: \begin{lemma} \label{stab}

3111: $\LL^\alpha$ is strongly stabilizing, in the sense of Definition

3112: \ref{sstabdef}.

3113: \end{lemma}

3114: \proof

3115:  To prove stabilization it is sufficient to show that there

3116: exists an almost surely finite random variable $R$, the radius of

3117: stabilization, such that the add one cost is unaffected by changes

3118: in the configuration at a distance greater than $R$ from the added

3119: point. We show that there exists such an $R$.

3120: 

3121: For $s>0$ construct eight disjoint triangles

3122: $T_j (s), 1 \leq j \leq 8$, by splitting the square $Q(\0;s)$

3123: into eight triangles via drawing

3124: in the diagonals of the square and the $x$ and $y$ axes.

3125: Label the triangle with vertices $(0,0),(0,s),(s,s)$ as

3126: $T_1 (s)$ and then label increasingly in a clockwise

3127: manner. See Figure \ref{fig9}. Note that $T_j (t) \subset T_j (s) $ for $t<s$.

3128: \begin{figure}[h]

3129: \centering

3130: \input{fig9.pstex_t}

3131: \caption{The triangles $T_1(s), \ldots, T_8(s)$, $s>0$. }

3132: \label{fig9}

3133: \end{figure}

3134: Let the random variable $S$ be the minimum $s$ such that the

3135: triangles $T_j (s), 1 \leq j \leq 8$, each contain at least one

3136: point of

3137: $\Po$. Then $S$ is almost surely finite.

3138: 

3139: We claim that $R=3S$ is a radius of stabilization for $\LL^\alpha

3140: $, that is any points at distance $d \geq 3S$ from the origin have

3141: no impact on the set of added or removed edges when a point is

3142: inserted at the origin.

3143: 

3144: First, $\0$ can have no point

3145: at a distance of at least $3S$ away as its directed nearest neighbour,

3146: since there will be points in $T_5$ and $T_6$ within a distance of at most

3147: $\sqrt{2} S$ of $\0$.

3148: 

3149: We now need to show that no point at a distance at least $3S$ from $\0$

3150: can have the origin as its directed nearest neighbour. Clearly, for the

3151: partial order $\postar$, we need only consider

3152: points in the region $(0,\infty)^2$.

3153: 

3154: Consider a point $(x,y)$ in the first quadrant, such that $\| (x,y)\| \geq 3S$.

3155: Consider the disk sector

3156: \[ D_{(x,y)} := B \left( (x,y), \|(x,y)\| \right) \cap \left\{ {\bf w }: {\bf w}

3157: \postar (x,y) \right\} .\]

3158: We aim to show that given any $(x,y)$ of the above form,

3159: at least one of the $T_j(S)$, $j=1,\ldots,8$, is contained in $D_{(x,y)}$, which

3160: implies that the origin cannot be the directed nearest neighbour of $(x,y)$.

3161: To demonstrate this, we show that given such an $(x,y)$, $D_{(x,y)}$ contains all

3162: three vertices of at least one of the $T_j(S)$.

3163: 

3164: First suppose $x>S$, $y>S$. Then we have that

3165: $T_1(S)$ and $T_2(S)$ are in $D_{(x,y)}$, since we have, for

3166: example,

3167: \bean \| (x,y) -\0 \|^2

3168: - \| (x,y) - (0,S) \|^2

3169: & = & \left( x^2 + y^2 \right) - \left( x^2 +(y-S)^2 \right)

3170: \\ & = & S (2y-S) > 0 .

3171: \eean

3172: By symmetry, the only other situation we need consider is when $0<x \leq S$. Then $y^2

3173: \geq 9S^2 - x^2 \geq 8S^2$, so $y \geq 2\sqrt{2} S$. Then we have that

3174: $T_8(S)$ is in $D_{(x,y)}$,

3175: since

3176: \bean

3177: \| (x,y) -\0 \|^2

3178: - \| (x,y) - (-S,S) \|^2

3179: & = & \left( x^2 + y^2 \right) - \left( (x+S)^2 +(y-S)^2 \right)

3180: \\ & = & 2S(y-x-S) \geq 4S^2 (\sqrt{2} -1) > 0. \; 

3181: \eean

3182: This completes the proof. 

3183: $\square$

3184: 

3185: \begin{lemma} \label{nondeg}

3186: The distribution of $\Delta (\infty )$ is non-degenerate.

3187: \end{lemma}

3188: \proof

3189:  We demonstrate the existence of two

3190:  configurations that occur with strictly positive probability

3191:  and give rise to different values for $\Delta(\infty)$.

3192: Note  that

3193: adding a point at the origin causes some new edges to be formed

3194: (namely those incident to the origin), and the possible deletion

3195: of some edges (namely the edges from points which have the origin as

3196: their directed nearest neighbour after its insertion).

3197: 

3198: 

3199: Let $\eta >0$, with $\eta < 1/3$. Later we shall impose further conditions

3200: on $\eta$.

3201: Again we refer to the construction in Figure \ref{fig9}. Let $E_1$

3202: denote the event that for

3203: each $i$, $1\leq i \leq 8$,

3204: there is a single point of $\Po$, denoted ${\bf W}_i$, in

3205: each of $T_i (\eta)$,

3206: and that there are no other points in $[-1,1]^2$.

3207: Suppose that $E_1$ occurs.

3208: Then, on addition of the origin, the only edges that

3209: can possibly  be removed are those from ${\bf W}_1$ and from ${\bf W}_2$

3210: (see the proof of Lemma \ref{stab}). These removed edges

3211: have length at most $\eta \sqrt{8}$, and hence

3212: \bea

3213: \Delta \geq - 2( \eta \sqrt{8})^\alpha := \delta_1, ~~~~{\rm on}~~ E_1.

3214: \label{0629a}

3215: \eea

3216: 

3217: Now let $E_2$ denote the event that there is a single point of $\Po$,

3218: denoted ${\bf Z}_1$,

3219:  in the square $(\eta,2\eta)\times(0,\eta)$,

3220: a single point denoted ${\bf Z}_2$ in the square

3221:  $(0,\eta)\times(\eta,2 \eta)$,

3222:  a single point denoted ${\bf W}$ in the square $(-1-\eta,-1) \times (-\eta,0)$, and no other point in $[-3,3]^2$. See Figure \ref{fige2}.

3223: \begin{figure}[h]

3224: \centering

3225: \input{fig8a.pstex_t}

3226: \caption{A possible configuration for event $E_2$. }

3227: \label{fige2}

3228: \end{figure}

3229: 

3230: %(A pic might help here. Maybe not

3231: %needed)

3232: %\Comment{pic?}

3233: Suppose that $E_2$ occurs. Now, on  addition of the origin,

3234: an edge of length at most $1+2\eta$ is added from the origin

3235: to ${\bf W}$. On the other hand, for $i=1,2$ the edge

3236: from ${\bf Z}_i$ to ${\bf W}$ (of length at least 1) is replaced

3237: by an edge from ${\bf Z}_i$ to the origin (of length at most

3238: $3 \eta$). It is also possible that some other edges from points

3239: outside $[-3,3]^2$ are replaced by shorter edges from these

3240: points to the origin. Combining the effect of all these

3241: additions and

3242: replacements of edges, we find that

3243: \bea

3244: \Delta \leq (1+ 2 \eta)^\alpha + 2((3 \eta)^\alpha - 1) := \delta_2,

3245: ~~~~{\rm on} ~~ E_2.

3246: \eea

3247: Given $\alpha$,

3248: by taking $\eta$ small enough we can arrange that $\delta_1 > -1/4$

3249: and $\delta_2 < -3/4$. With such a choice of $\eta $, events

3250: $E_1$ and $E_2$ both have strictly positive probability

3251: which shows that the distribution of $\Delta$ is non-degenerate.

3252: %

3253: $\square $ \\

3254: 

3255: For the next lemma, we set $R_0 := (0,1]^2$, 

3256: recalling that $S_{0,n}:= (n^{\eps-1/2},1]^2$ throughout this section,

3257: and let

3258: $\RR_0$ be as defined just before Corollary \ref{cltcor}.

3259: 

3260: 

3261: \begin{lemma} \label{ubmlem} $\LL^\alpha$

3262: satisfies the uniform bounded moments condition (\ref{ubm}) on $\RR_0$.

3263: \end{lemma}

3264: \proof Choose some $(A,B) \in \RR_0$ such that

3265:  $\0 \in A$, i.e., such that for some $n \in \N$ the set

3266: $A$ is a translate of 

3267: $(0,n^{1/2}]^2$

3268: % suitably translated so that it

3269:  containing the origin and $B$

3270: is the corresponding translate of $n^{1/2}S_{0,n}=(n^\eps,n^{1/2}]^2$.

3271: Note that $|A|=n$,

3272: and choose $m \in [n/2,3n/2]$. 

3273: %

3274: 

3275: Denote the $m$ independent random vectors on $A$ comprising

3276: $\UU_{m,A}$ by $\bV_1, \ldots ,\bV_m$.

3277: For contributions to

3278: $\Delta(\UU_{m,A};B)$

3279:  we are only interested in edges

3280: from points in the region $B$ away from the boundary of $A$, although the

3281: origin can be inserted anywhere in $A$. Contributions to

3282: %$\LL^\alpha ( \; \cdot \; ; B)$

3283: $\Delta(\UU_{m,A};B)$

3284:  come from the edges that are added

3285: or deleted on the addition of $\0$.

3286: We split $\Delta (\UU_{m,A};B)$ into two parts: the positive

3287: contribution from added edges, $\Delta^+ (\UU_{m,A};B)$, and the

3288: negative contribution, $\Delta^- (\UU_{m,A};B)$, from removed

3289: edges.

3290: 

3291:  By construction of the MDSF, the added edges are those that

3292:  have $\0$ as an end-point after it has been inserted.

3293: Thus an upper bound on $\Delta^+ (\UU_{m,A} ;B)$ is $L_{\max}^{\alpha}

3294: \delta(\0) + L_0^\alpha$, where $L_{\max}$ is the length of the

3295: longest edge  from a point of $\UU_{m,A} \cap B$ to $\0$,  

3296: and $\delta(\0)$ is the number of such edges

3297: (or zero if no such edge exists), 

3298: and $L_0$ is the length of the edge from $\0$,

3299: or zero if no such edge exists.

3300: 

3301: For $\bw \in A $ and $ \bx \in B$, %  in $\R^2 $,

3302:  with $\bw \postar \bx$, define the region

3303: $$

3304:  R(\bw,\bx) :=

3305: \{ {\bf y} \in A : {\bf y} \postar

3306: \bx, \|{\bf y}-\bx\| \leq \|\bw - \bx\| \}  .

3307: $$

3308: Since points in $B$ are distant at least 1 from the lower 

3309: or left boundary of $A$,

3310: by Lemma \ref{lem0727} there exists a constant

3311: %(depending on $\eps$)

3312: $0<C<\infty$ such that

3313: \bea

3314: | R(\bw, \bx )| \geq C \| \bx  - \bw \|,

3315: {\rm ~for~ all~} \bw \in A, \bx \in B ~{\rm with}~

3316: \bw \postar \bx

3317: ~{\rm and}~ \| \bx -\bw \| \geq 1.

3318: \label{0719d}

3319: \eea

3320: Suppose there is a point at $\bx$ with $\0 \postar \bx$.

3321:  Then, the probability of

3322: the event $E(\bx)$ that $\bx$ is joined to  the origin in the MDSF

3323: on $\UU_{m,A} \cup \{\0\}$ is

3324: \bea

3325:  \Pr[E(\bx)] & = & \Pr[ R(\0,\bx) \textrm{ empty} ]

3326: = \left( 1-\frac{|R(\0,\bx)|}{|A|}

3327: \right)^{m-1} \!\!\!\! 

3328: \nonumber \\

3329: & \leq &

3330: % \left( 1-\frac{|R(\0,\bx)|}{n}

3331: %\right)^{n/2-1} \!\!\!\! \leq \exp {(-|R(\0,\bx)|/3)} , 

3332:  \exp \left( (1-m) \left(\frac{|R(\0,\bx)|}{n}\right) \right) 

3333: % \!\!\!\! 

3334: \leq \exp {(1-|R(\0,\bx)|/2)} , 

3335: \label{0719a}

3336: \eea

3337: since $m \geq n/2$ and $|R(\0,\bx)| \leq n$.

3338: 

3339: We have that $ L_{\max}^\alpha \delta(\0) \leq

3340: \max_{i=1,\ldots,m} W_i , $ where \[ W_i =

3341: \|\bV_i\|^\alpha \; \card( B( \0; \| \bV_i\|) \cap \UU_{m,A} \cap \{

3342: {\bf y} : \0 \postar {\bf y} \}

3343:  ) \; {\bf

3344: 1} { \{ \bV_i \textrm{ joined to } \0 \textrm{ and } \bV_i \in B\} } .

3345: \]

3346: Let $N(\bx)$ denote the number of points of $\UU_{m-1,A}$ in

3347: $B(\0; \|\bx\|) \cap  \{ {\bf y} : \0 \preccurlyeq {\bf y} \}$. Then

3348: we obtain

3349: \bean

3350:  \Exp[ L_{\max}^{4 \alpha} \delta(\0)^4] \leq \Exp

3351: \sum_{i=1}^m W_i^4 = m \int_{B} \|\bx\|^{4\alpha} \Exp[

3352: (N(\bx)+1)^{4} {\bf 1} { \{ E(\bx) \}} ] \frac{\ud \bx}{|A|} .

3353: \eean

3354:  By the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality

3355: and the fact that $m \leq 3|A|/2$ by assumption, 

3356: \bea

3357:  \Exp

3358: [L_{\max}^{4\alpha} \delta(\0)^4] \leq \frac{3}{2} \int_{B}

3359: \|\bx\|^{4\alpha} (\Exp [(N(\bx) +1)^{8} ])^{1/2} \Pr

3360: [E(\bx)]^{1/2} \ud \bx .

3361: \label{0719b}

3362: \eea

3363: The mean of $N(\bx)$ is bounded by a constant times $\|\bx\|^2$ so

3364: $\Exp [(N(\bx) +1)^{8}] = O(\max(\|\bx\|^{16},1))$.

3365: This follows from the binomial moment generating function for

3366: $\mathrm{Bin}(n,p)$, from which we have

3367: for $\beta >0$ that $\Exp[X^\beta] \leq

3368: k_1 ( \Exp[X])^\beta$ if $pn>1$ and $\Exp[X^\beta] \leq k_2

3369:  \Exp[X]$ if $pn<1$, for some constants $k_1,k_2 >0$.

3370: 

3371: Combined with (\ref{0719d}), (\ref{0719a}) and (\ref{0719b}), 

3372: this shows that $\Exp [L_{\max}^{4\alpha} \delta(\0)^4] $ is

3373: bounded by a constant times

3374: \[

3375: \int_{\bx \in B: \|\bx\| \geq 1} \|\bx\|^{4 \alpha + 8}

3376:  \exp{ \left( -C \|\bx\|/4 \right)} \ud

3377: \bx + \int_{\bx \in B: \|\bx\|\leq 1} \|\bx\|^{4 \alpha}\ud \bx,

3378: \]

3379:  which is

3380: bounded by a constant that does not depend on

3381: the choice of $(A,B)$.

3382: 

3383: We need to consider $L_0$ only when $\0 \in B$.

3384: For $\bx \in \R^2$ with  $\bx \postar \0$, 

3385: let $E'(\bx)$ denote the event that $R(\bx,\0)$ is empty

3386: (i.e., contains no point of $\UU_{m-1,A}$).

3387: By (\ref{0719d}) and (\ref{0719a}), 

3388: for $\0 \in B$ we have

3389: \bean

3390: \Exp [ L_0^{4\alpha} ]

3391: %& = & \int_0^\infty \Pr[ L_0 > r^{1/(4\alpha)} ] \ud r

3392: %\\

3393:  & \leq & m

3394: \int_{\bx \in A: \bx \postar \0 }

3395:  \|\bx\|^{4 \alpha}

3396: P[E'(\bx)]\frac{\ud \bx}{|A|}

3397: %\int_0^{1/2} \int_0^{1/2}  \| x \|^4 \exp{ (-\pi \| x \|^2/12 ) } \ud x \ud y

3398: \\

3399: & \leq & \frac{3}{2}

3400: \left[

3401:  \int_{ \bx \in A: \bx \postar \0,

3402: \|\bx\| \geq 1 }

3403: \!\!\!\!

3404:  \|\bx\|^{4 \alpha} \exp(1-C\|\bx\|/2) \ud \bx

3405:   + \int_{ \bx \in A: \bx \postar \0,

3406: \|\bx\| \leq 1 } \!\!\!\! \|\bx\|^{4 \alpha}  \ud \bx

3407: \right]

3408: \eean

3409: which is bounded by a constant.

3410:  Thus $\Delta^+(\UU_{m,A};B)$ has bounded

3411: fourth moment.

3412: 

3413: Now consider the set of deleted edges.

3414: As at (\ref{0802}), 

3415: let $d(\bx;\UU_{m,A})$ denote the distance from $\bx$ to its

3416: directed nearest neighbour in $\UU_{m,A}$, or zero

3417: if no such point exists. Again use $E(\bx)$ for

3418: the event that $\bx$ becomes joined to $\0$ on the

3419: addition of the origin, and let $E''(\bV_i):= E(\bV_i) \cap

3420:  \{\bV_i \in B\}$. 

3421: %Let $\bU_{1},\ldots,\bU_{n}$

3422: %be the independent random $d$-vectors uniformly

3423: %distributed on $A$. %comprising

3424: Then

3425: \bea

3426: \Exp[ \Delta^- (\UU_{m,A};B)^4 ]  = 

3427: \sum_{i=1}^m \sum_{j=1}^m \sum_{k=1}^m \sum_{\ell=1}^m

3428: \Exp[ d(\bV_i;\UU_{m,A})^\alpha

3429:  d(\bV_j;\UU_{m,A})^\alpha

3430: \nonumber \\

3431:  \times d(\bV_k;\UU_{m,A})^\alpha

3432:  d(\bV_\ell;\UU_{m,A})^\alpha

3433: {\bf 1}\{

3434: E''(\bV_i) \cap

3435: E''(\bV_j) \cap

3436: E''(\bV_k) \cap

3437: E''(\bV_\ell)\}].  \label{0728h}

3438: \eea

3439: For $i,j,k,\ell$ distinct, the $(i,j,k,\ell)$th term of

3440: %  expectation in this sum

3441: (\ref{0728h}) is bounded by

3442: \bea

3443: \int_{B} \int_{B} \int_B \int_B 

3444: \frac{\ud  \bw}{n} 

3445: \frac{\ud  \bx}{n}

3446: \frac{\ud  \by}{n}

3447: \frac{\ud  \bz}{n}

3448:  \Exp[ d_{m-4}(\bw)^\alpha

3449:  d_{m-4}(\bx)^\alpha

3450:  d_{m-4}(\by)^\alpha

3451:  d_{m-4}(\bz)^\alpha

3452: \nonumber \\

3453: \times

3454: {\bf 1}\{

3455: E_{m-4}(\bw) \cap

3456: E_{m-4}(\bx) \cap

3457: E_{m-4}(\by) \cap

3458: E_{m-4}(\bz)\}], 

3459: \label{0728i}

3460: \eea 

3461: where $d_{m-4}(\bx):=d(\bx, 

3462: \UU_{m-4,A}\cup\{\bw,\bx,\by,\bz\})$ (using the notation of (\ref{0802})),

3463:  and $E_{m-4}(\bx)$ is the event

3464: that $\0$ is the directed nearest neighbour of $\bx$ in

3465: the set $\UU_{m-4,A} \cup \{\0,\bx\}$.

3466: 

3467: Let $I_{m-4}(\bx)$ denote the indicator variable of the

3468: event that $\bx$ is a minimal element of

3469: $\UU_{m-4,A} \cup \{\bx\} $. 

3470: An upper bound for $d_{m-4}(\bx)$ is provided by $d(\bx;\UU_{m-4,A} \cup \bx)$

3471: except when this is zero, so that

3472: \bea

3473: d_{m-4}(\bx)^{8\alpha} & \leq & d(\bx; \UU_{m-4,A}\cup\{\bx\})^{8\alpha} 

3474: %\nonumber \\

3475: %& &

3476:  + d(\bx;\{\bw,\bx,\by,\bz\})^{8\alpha}

3477: I_{m-4}(\bx).

3478: %{\bf 1}\{\bx \textrm{ minimal in }

3479: %\UU_{m-4,A} \cup \{\bx\} \}. 

3480: \label{0817d}

3481: \eea

3482: For $\bx \in B$, it can be shown,

3483: by a similar argument to the one used above for

3484: $L_0$,  that there is a constant $C'$ such that  

3485: \bea

3486: \Exp[(d(\bx;\UU_{m-4,A}\cup\{\bx\}))^{8 \alpha}] <C'.

3487: \label{0817c}

3488: \eea 

3489: Moreover, if $\bw \in A$ with $\bw \preccurlyeq \bx$

3490: and $\|\bx -\bw\| =t >0$, then 

3491: by a similar argument to that at (\ref{0719a}), and (\ref{0719d}), we have

3492: that

3493: $$

3494: %P[ \bx \textrm{ minimal in } \UU_{m-4,A} \cup \{\bx\} ]

3495: \Exp[  I_{m-4}(\bx) ]

3496: \leq \exp(4 - |R(\bw,\bx)|/2) \leq \exp(4 -C t/2), ~~~t \geq 1,

3497: $$  

3498: and hence, uniformly over $A,B$ and $\{\bw,\bx,\by,\bz\}\subset A$ with

3499: $\bx \in B$, we have

3500: $$

3501: \Exp[ d(\bx;\{\bw,\bx,\by,\bz\})^{8\alpha}

3502: %{\bf 1}\{\bx \textrm{ minimal in }

3503: I_{m-4}(\bx)

3504: %\UU_{m-4,A} \cup \{\bx\} \}

3505: ] \leq \max\left\{\sup_{t \geq 1}

3506: \left( t^{8 \alpha} \exp(4-Ct/2) \right),1\right\}.

3507: %< \infty. 

3508: $$

3509: Combining this with \eq{0817c}, we see from \eq{0817d}

3510: that $\Exp[d_{m-4}(\bx)^{8 \alpha}]$ is bounded by a constant. 

3511: Also, by a similar argument to (\ref{0719a}) and (\ref{0719d}), 

3512: it can be shown that

3513:  $P[E_{m-4}(\bx)] \leq \exp(4 -C\|\bx\|/2)$ for $\|\bx\| \geq 1$.

3514:  Therefore, by H\"older's inequality,

3515:  the expression (\ref{0728i}) is bounded by a constant times

3516: $$

3517: n^{-4} \int \int \int \int 

3518: \ud \bw 

3519: \ud \bx 

3520: \ud \by 

3521: \ud \bz 

3522: \exp ( - C ( \|\bw\| + 

3523: \| \bx\| +

3524: \| \by\| +

3525: \| \bz\|

3526: )/16 )

3527: $$

3528: and therefore is $O(n^{-4})$. Since the number of

3529: distinct $(i,j,k,\ell)$ in the summation

3530: (\ref{0728h}) is bounded by $m^4$, and hence 

3531: by $(3/2)^4 n^4$, this shows

3532: that the contribution to (\ref{0728h}) from

3533: $i,j,k,\ell$ distinct is uniformly bounded.

3534: 

3535: Likewise, the number of terms $(i,j,k,\ell)$

3536: with only three distinct values  (e.g., $i=j$ with $i,k,\ell$ distinct)

3537: is $O(n^3)$. Such a term is bounded by an expression like

3538: (\ref{0728i}) but now with a triple integral, which

3539: by a similar argument is $O(n^{-3})$. Hence

3540: the contribution to (\ref{0728h})

3541: of these terms is also bounded.

3542: Similarly, the contribution to (\ref{0728h})

3543: from $(i,j,k,\ell)$

3544: with two distinct values has $O(n^2)$ terms which

3545: are $O(n^{-2})$, and so is bounded.

3546: Likewise  the contribution to (\ref{0728h}) from 

3547: terms with $i=j=k= \ell$ is  bounded. Thus

3548: the expression (\ref{0728h}) is uniformly bounded.

3549: 

3550: 

3551: 

3552: 

3553: Hence $\Delta (\mathcal{U}_{m,A};B) $ has bounded fourth moments,

3554: uniformly in

3555: $A,B,m$.  $\square$ \\

3556: 

3557: \noindent

3558:  \textbf{Proof of Theorem \ref{CLT}.}

3559: By Lemmas \ref{stab}, \ref{nondeg}, \ref{ubmlem}

3560:  and the fact that $\LL^\alpha$ is homogeneous of order $\alpha$,

3561: we can apply

3562: Corollary \ref{cltcor}, taking $R_0:= (0,1]^2$ and $S_{0,n} := 

3563: (n^{\eps-\1/2},1]^2$, to obtain

3564:  Theorem \ref{CLT}.  $\square$ \\

3565: 

3566: \rem An alternative method for proving central limit theorems in

3567: geometrical probability is based on dependency graphs.

3568: %a dependency graph approach

3569: %\cite{baldirinott1989} 

3570: %as 

3571: Such a method was employed by Avram and Bertsimas

3572: \cite{avrambertsimas1993} to give central limit theorems for

3573: nearest neighbour graphs and other random geometrical structures.

3574: A general version of this method is provided by \cite{pynorm}.

3575: By a similar argument to \cite{avrambertsimas1993}, one can show

3576: that, under $\postar$, the total weight (for $\alpha

3577: > 2/3$)

3578:  of edges in the MDST from

3579: points in the region $(\varepsilon_n,1)^2$ (for $\varepsilon_n$

3580: given below) satisfies a central limit theorem, where

3581: \[ \varepsilon_n = \left( \left \lfloor 

3582: \sqrt{ \frac{n}{c \log{n}} } \right \rfloor

3583: \right)^{-1}. \] 

3584: Such an approach can be suitably adapted to show

3585: that a central limit theorem also holds under the more general

3586: partial order specified by $\theta, \phi$, in the region

3587: $(\varepsilon_n, 1-\varepsilon_n)^2$. The benefit of this method

3588: is that it readily yields rates of convergence bounds for the CLT.

3589: The martingale method employed has the advantage of yielding the

3590: convergence of the variance.

3591: 

3592: 

3593: 

3594: 

3595: \section{The edges near the boundary} \label{bdry}

3596: Next in our analysis of the MDST on random points in the unit square,

3597: we consider  the length of the edges close to the boundary of

3598: the square.  The limiting structure of the MDSF and MDST

3599:  near the boundaries is

3600: described by the directed linear forest model

3601: discussed in Section \ref{secdlt}.

3602: %the preceding  section. 

3603: 

3604: Initially we consider the `rooted' case where we insert a point at

3605: the origin. Later we analyse the multiple sink (or `unrooted')

3606: case, where we do not insert a point at the origin, in a similar

3607: way.

3608: 

3609: 

3610: 

3611: Fix $\sigma \in (1/2,2/3)$.

3612: Let $B_n$ denote the L-shaped boundary region 

3613: $(0,1]^2 \setminus (n^{-\sigma},1]^2$.

3614: Recall from (\ref{0714a}) that

3615:  $\LL^\alpha (\X ; R)$ denotes the contribution to the

3616: total weight of the MDST on $\X$ from %those

3617:  edges starting at points of $\X \cap R$.

3618: When $\X$ is a random point set, set $\tilde \LL^\alpha (\X; R)

3619: := 

3620:  \LL^\alpha (\X; R)

3621: - \Exp \LL^\alpha (\X; R)$.

3622: 

3623: \begin{theorem} \label{thmbdry}

3624: Suppose the partial order is $\postar$.

3625: Then 

3626: %for $\alpha \geq 1$, 

3627: as $n \to \infty$ we have

3628: \bea

3629:  \tLalph ( \Po^0 _n ; B_n ) \tod \tDalph^{\{1\}}

3630: + \tDalph^{\{2\}} ~~~~~~(\alpha \geq 1);

3631: \label{bdry1} \\

3632:  \tLalph ( \X^0_n ; B_n ) \tod \tDalph^{\{1\}}

3633: + \tDalph^{\{2\}} ~~~~~~(\alpha \geq 1),

3634: \label{bdry1X}

3635: \eea

3636:  where

3637: $\tDalph^{\{1\}}$, $\tDalph^{\{2\}}$ are

3638: independent random variables with the

3639: distribution of $\tDalph$ given by

3640: the fixed-point equation (\ref{0628a}) for $\alpha=1$

3641: and by (\ref{0628b}) for $\alpha>1$.

3642: Also, as $n \to \infty$,

3643: \bea

3644:  \tLalph  ( \Po_n ; B_n ) \tod

3645:  \tFalph^{\{1\}} + \tFalph^{\{2\}}

3646: ~~~~~~(\alpha \geq 1);

3647: \label{bdry2}

3648: \\

3649:  \tLalph  ( \X_n ; B_n ) \tod \tFalph^{\{1\}} +

3650: \tFalph^{\{2\}}

3651: ~~~~~~(\alpha \geq 1),

3652: \label{bdry2X}

3653: \eea

3654:  where $\tFalph^{\{1\}}$,

3655: $\tFalph^{\{2\}}$ are independent random variables

3656: with the same distribution as $\tDone$ for $\alpha=1$

3657: and with the distribution given by the fixed-point equation

3658:  (\ref{0628d}) for $\alpha>1$.

3659: Also, as $n\to \infty$,

3660: \bea \label{0214h}

3661: n^{(\alpha-1)/2} \LL^\alpha ( \Po_n ; B_n ) \inL 0 

3662: ~~~~~~(0 < \alpha < 1);

3663: %\eea

3664: %and

3665: %\bea

3666: \\

3667:  \label{0802a}

3668: n^{(\alpha-1)/2} \LL^\alpha ( \Po_n^0 ; B_n ) \inL 0 

3669: ~~~~~~(0 < \alpha < 1).

3670: \eea

3671: %Further, all the results hold with the Poisson process

3672: %$\Po_n$ replaced by the binomial point process $\X_n$ of $n$

3673: %independent uniformly distributed random points on $(0,1]^2$.

3674: \end{theorem}

3675: 

3676: The idea behind the proof of Theorem \ref{thmbdry} is

3677: to show that the MDSF near each of the two boundaries is close to

3678: a DLF system defined on a sequence of uniform random variables

3679: coupled to the points of the MDSF. To do this,

3680: %In order to proceed with the proof of Theorem \ref{thmbdry}, we

3681: we produce two explicit sequences of random variables on which we

3682: construct the DLF coupled to

3683: $\Po_n$, a Poisson process of intensity $n$ on $(0,1]^2$,

3684: on which the MDSF is constructed.

3685: 

3686:  Let $B_n^x$ be the rectangle

3687:  $(n^{-\sigma},1] \times (0, n^{-\sigma}]$, let $B_n^y$ be

3688:  the rectangle $(0,n^{-\sigma}]

3689: \times (n^{-\sigma},1]$, and let $B_n^0$ be the square $(0,n^{-\sigma}]^2$;

3690: see Figure \ref{fig7}. Then $B_n = B_n^0 \cup B_n^x \cup B_n^y$.

3691: \begin{figure}[h]

3692: \centering

3693: \input{fig7.pstex_t}

3694: \caption{The boundary regions}

3695: \label{fig7}

3696: \end{figure}

3697: Define the point processes

3698: \bea

3699: \label{0701f}

3700:  \VV^x_n := \Po_n \cap ( B_n^x \cup B_n^0 ),

3701: ~~~

3702: \VV^y_n := \Po_n \cap ( B_n^y \cup B_n^0 ), \textrm{ and } \VV^0_n

3703: := \Po_n \cap B_n^0.

3704: \eea

3705:  Let $N^x_n := \card( \VV^x_n )$,  $N^y_n :=

3706: \card( \VV^y_n)$ and $N^0_n := \card( \VV^0_n)$. List

3707: $\mathcal{V}^x_n$ in order of increasing $y$-coordinate as

3708: $\bX^x_i$, $i=1,2,\ldots,N^x_n$. In coordinates, set $\bX^x_i =

3709: (X^x_i,Y^x_i)$ for each $i$. Similarly, list $\VV^y_n$ in order of

3710: increasing $x$-coordinate as $\bX^y_i = (X^y_i, Y^y_i)$,

3711: $i=1,\ldots, N^y_n$.  Set $\UU^x_n = ( X^x_i , i=1,2,\ldots,N^x_n

3712: )$ and $\UU^y_n = ( Y^y_i , i=1,2,\ldots,N^y_n )$. Then $\UU^x_n$

3713: and $\UU^y_n$ are sequences of uniform random variables in

3714: $(0,1]$, on which we may construct a DLF. Also, we write $\UU^{x,0}_n$

3715: for the sequence $(0, X^x_1, X^x_2, \ldots, X^x_{N^x_n})$, and

3716: $\UU^{y,0}_n$

3717: for the sequence $(0, Y^y_1, Y^y_2, \ldots, Y^y_{N^y_n})$.

3718: 

3719: With the total DLF/DLT weight functional $D^\alpha(\cdot)$ 

3720: defined in Section \ref{secdlt} for  random finite sequences in $(0,1)$,

3721: the DLF weight $D^\alpha(\UU^x_n)$ is coupled in a natural way

3722: to the MDSF contribution $\LL^\alpha(\VV_n^x)$, 

3723: and likewise for $D^\alpha(\UU_n^y) $ and

3724:  $\LL^\alpha(\VV_n^y)$,

3725:  for $D^\alpha(\UU_n^{x,0})$ and

3726:  $\LL^\alpha(\VV_n^x \cup \{\0\})$, and

3727: for $D^\alpha(\UU_n^{y,0})$ and   

3728:  $\LL^\alpha(\VV_n^y \cup \{\0\})$.

3729: 

3730: 

3731: \begin{lemma} \label{1108c}

3732: For any $\alpha \geq 1$, as $n \to \infty$,

3733: \begin{equation} \label{0209c} \LL ^\alpha (\VV^x_n) - D^\alpha

3734: (\UU^x_n) \inLL 0, \textrm{ and }  \LL^\alpha (\VV^y_n) -

3735: D^\alpha (\UU^y_n) \inLL 0;

3736: \end{equation} 

3737: %and

3738: \begin{equation} \label{0209d}  \LL ^\alpha (\VV^x_n \cup \{ \0 \} )

3739: - D^\alpha

3740: (\UU^{x,0}_n ) \inLL 0, \textrm{ and } 

3741: \LL^\alpha (\VV^y_n \cup \{ \0 \}) -

3742: D^\alpha (\UU^{y,0}_n  ) \inLL 0.

3743: \end{equation}

3744: Further, for $0 < \alpha <1$, as $n\to \infty$,

3745: \bea \label{0214a}

3746: \Exp \left[ \left| \LL^\alpha (\VV^x_n) - D^\alpha (\UU^x_n ) \right|^2

3747: \right] = O \left( n^{2-2\sigma-2\alpha \sigma} \right) ,\eea

3748: and the corresponding result holds for $\VV^y_n$ and $\UU^y_n$, and

3749: for the rooted cases (with the addition of the origin).

3750: %

3751: \end{lemma} \textbf{Proof.}

3752: We approximate the MDSF in the region $B_n$ by two

3753: DLFs, coupled to the MDSF.

3754: Consider $\VV^x_n$; the argument for $\VV^y_n$ is entirely

3755: analogous.

3756: 

3757: We have the set of points $\VV^x_n = \{(X^x_i,Y^x_i),

3758: i=1,\ldots,N^x_n\}$. We construct the MDSF on these points,

3759:  and construct the DLF on the $x$-coordinates, $\UU^x_n =

3760:  (X_i^x, i=1,\ldots, N^x_n)$.

3761: Consider any point $(X_i^x,Y_i^x)$. For any single point, either

3762: an edge exists from that point in both constructions, or in

3763: neither. Suppose an edge exists, that is suppose $X_i^x$ is joined

3764: to a point $X^x_{D(i)}$, $D(i)<i$ in the DLF model, and $(X^x_i,Y^x_i)$ to

3765: a point $(X^x_{N(i)},Y^x_{N(i)})$ in the MDST (we do not necessarily have

3766: $N(i)=D(i)$). 

3767: By construction, we know that $| X^x_i-X^x_{D(i)} | \leq

3768: | X^x_i-X^x_{N(i)} |$, since $N(i)<i$ by the order of our points. It then

3769: follows that

3770:  \[ \|(X^x_i,Y^x_i)-(X^x_{N(i)},Y^x_{N(i)})\|^\alpha \geq

3771: |X^x_i-X^x_{N(i)} |^\alpha \geq |X^x_i-X^x_{D(i)} |^\alpha,

3772: \]

3773: %That is, for every point the directed nearest neighbour distance

3774: %must exceed the edge length in the linear scheme,

3775: and so we have established that, for all $\alpha>0$,

3776: \[

3777: %\label{1122b}

3778: D^\alpha ( \UU^x_n ) \leq \LL^\alpha

3779: ( \VV^x_n ) ; \textrm{ and } D^\alpha ( \UU^{x,0}_n  )

3780: \leq \LL^\alpha (\VV^x_n \cup \{ \0 \}) . \]

3781: Now, by the construction of the MDST, we have that

3782: \bea \label{0209a}

3783: \| (X^x_i,Y^x_i)-(X^x_{N(i)},Y^x_{N(i)})

3784: \| \leq \| (X^x_i,Y^x_i)-(X^x_{D(i)},Y^x_{D(i)}) \|.

3785: \eea

3786: If $(x,y) \in (0,1]^2$ then $\| (x,y) \| \leq x + y$, and by the

3787: Mean Value Theorem for the function $t \mapsto t^\alpha$, for $\alpha

3788: \geq 1$,

3789: \[ \| (x,y) \|^\alpha - x^\alpha \leq (x+y)^\alpha - 

3790: x^\alpha \leq \alpha 2^{\alpha-1} y ~~~ (\alpha \geq 1). \]

3791: Hence, for $\alpha \geq 1$,

3792: \bea \label{0209b}

3793:  \| (X_i^x, Y_i^x) - (X_{D(i)}^x, Y_{D(i)}^x) 

3794: \|^\alpha - ( X_i^x - X_{D(i)}^x)

3795: ^\alpha \leq \alpha 2^{\alpha -1}

3796: (Y_i^x - Y_{D(i)}^x) .

3797: \eea

3798: Then (\ref{0209a}) and (\ref{0209b}) yield, for $\alpha \geq 1$,

3799: \[ \| ( X^x_i, Y^x_i ) - (X^x_{N(i)}, Y^x_{N(i)} ) \|^\alpha

3800: - (X_i^x - X^x_{D(i)} )^\alpha

3801: \leq \alpha 2^{\alpha-1} ( Y^x_i - Y^x_{D(i)} ) . \]

3802: Hence, for $\alpha \geq 1$,

3803: \[ 0 \leq \LL^\alpha ( \VV_n^x ) -

3804:  D^\alpha ( \UU_n ^x ) \leq \alpha 2^{\alpha-1}

3805: \sum_{i=1}^{N_n^x} (Y_i^x - Y_{D(i)}^x). \]

3806: %

3807: Thus, for $\alpha \geq 1$,

3808: \begin{eqnarray}

3809: \label{1202e} & & 0  \leq \LL^\alpha ( \VV^x_n ) - D^\alpha ( \UU^x_n )

3810: \leq \alpha 2^{\alpha-1} N^x_n n^{-\sigma} ; \nonumber\\

3811:  & \textrm{and } &

3812: 0 \leq

3813: \LL^\alpha ( \VV^x_n \cup \{ \0 \} ) - D^\alpha ( \UU^{x,0}_n  )

3814: \leq \alpha 2^{\alpha-1} N^x_n n^{-\sigma} .

3815: \end{eqnarray}

3816: We have $N^x_n \sim \textrm{Po}\left(n^{1-\sigma}\right)$, so that

3817: since $\sigma > 1/2$, we have

3818: $$

3819: \Exp [

3820: (\LL^\alpha ( \VV^x_n \cup \{ \0 \} ) - D^\alpha ( \UU^{x,0}_n  ) )^2 ]

3821: \leq \alpha^2 2^{2 \alpha -2}  n^{-2 \sigma} \Exp[(N_n^x)^2] \to 0,

3822: ~~~ \alpha \geq 1.

3823: $$

3824:  An entirely analogous

3825: argument leads to the same statement for $\UU^y_n$ and $\VV^y_n$, and we

3826: obtain (\ref{0209c}), and (\ref{0209d}) in identical fashion.

3827: 

3828: We now consider $0 < \alpha <1$.

3829: By the concavity of the function $t \mapsto t^\alpha$

3830: for $\alpha <1$,

3831: we have for $x >0, y>0$ that

3832:  \[

3833:  \| (x,y) \|^\alpha -x^\alpha \leq

3834: (x+y)^\alpha -x^\alpha \leq y^\alpha ~~~ (0 <\alpha <1) .\]

3835: Then, by a similar argument to (\ref{1202e}) in

3836: the $\alpha \geq 1$ case, we obtain

3837: \[ 0 \leq \LL^\alpha (\VV^x_n ) - D^\alpha (\UU^x_n ) \leq N_n^x n^{-\alpha

3838: \sigma} . \]

3839: Then (\ref{0214a}) follows since $N_n^x \sim 

3840: \textrm{Po}\left(n^{1-\sigma}\right)$, and the rooted case is similar.

3841: $\square$

3842: 

3843: \begin{lemma} \label{1108d} 

3844: %For $\alpha > 1$,

3845: Suppose $\tDone$ has distribution given by (\ref{0628a}),

3846: $\tDalph$, $\alpha >1$, has distribution given by (\ref{0628b}), and 

3847: $\tFalph$, $\alpha >1$, has distribution given by (\ref{0628d}).

3848: Then

3849: as $n \to \infty$,

3850: \bea

3851: \tilde \LL^1 (\VV^x_n \cup \{ \0 \} ) \tod \tDone,

3852:  %\textrm{ and } 

3853: {\rm ~~~and ~~~}

3854:  \tilde \LL^1 (\VV^x_n) \tod \tDone;

3855: \label{0715a}

3856: \eea

3857: \bea

3858: \tilde

3859: \LL^\alpha (\VV^x_n \cup \{ \0 \} ) \tod \tDalph,

3860: {\rm ~~~and ~~~}

3861: % \textrm{ and }

3862:  \tilde \LL^\alpha (\VV^x_n) \tod \tFalph ~~~(\alpha >1).

3863: \label{0715b}

3864: \eea

3865: Moreover, (\ref{0715a}) and (\ref{0715b}) also hold

3866: with $\VV^x_n$ replaced by $\VV^y_n$.

3867: %where $\tF^1$ has distribution given by (\ref{0628a}) and

3868: \end{lemma}

3869: \proof

3870: As usual we present the argument for $\VV_n^x$ only, since

3871: the result for $\VV_n^y$ follows in the same manner.

3872: First consider the $\alpha>1$ case. We have the distributional

3873: equality

3874: \[

3875:  \LL \left( \left. D^\alpha ( \UU_n^{x,0} ) \right| N_n^x =m

3876: \right) = \LL \left( D^\alpha (\UU_m^0) \right) ; ~~~~~

3877:  \LL \left( \left. D^\alpha ( \UU_n^{x} ) \right| N_n^x =m

3878: \right) = \LL \left( D^\alpha (\UU_m) \right) .

3879: \]

3880: But $N_n^x$ is Poisson with mean $n^{1-\sigma}$, and so

3881: tends to infinity almost surely. Thus by

3882: % Proposition \ref{1119f},

3883: Theorem \ref{dltthm} (ii),

3884: $D^\alpha (\UU_n^{x,0}) \tod \Dalph$

3885: and

3886: $D^\alpha (\UU_n^{x}) \tod \Falph$

3887:  as $n \to \infty$, and so

3888: by Lemma \ref{1108c} and Slutsky's theorem,

3889:  we obtain 

3890: \bea

3891:  \LL^\alpha (\VV_n^x \cup \{ \0 \}) \tod \Dalph 

3892: {\rm ~~~ and ~~~}

3893:  \LL^\alpha (\VV_n^x ) \tod \Falph 

3894: {\rm ~~ as ~~} n \to \infty.

3895: \label{0803} 

3896: \eea

3897: Also, $\Exp [D^\alpha(\UU_n^{x,0})] \to (\alpha -1)^{-1} $

3898: by (\ref{0720c}), so by Lemma \ref{1108c} and Proposition

3899: \ref{1119f}, 

3900: $\Exp[\LL^\alpha

3901: (\VV_n^x \cup \{\0\}) ] \to (\alpha -1)^{-1} =

3902: \Exp[\Dalph]$. 

3903: Similarly, by (\ref{0720f}), 

3904:  Lemma \ref{1108c} and

3905:  Proposition \ref{1125a},

3906: $\Exp[\LL^\alpha

3907: (\VV_n^x ) ] \to (\alpha(\alpha -1))^{-1} =

3908: \Exp[\Falph]$. 

3909: Hence, (\ref{0803}) still holds with the centred variables,

3910: i.e., \eq{0715b} holds.

3911: 

3912: 

3913: 

3914: 

3915: Now suppose $\alpha=1$.

3916: Since $N_n^x$ is Poisson with parameter $n^{1-\sigma}$,

3917: Lemma \ref{0630c} (i), with $t=n^{1-\sigma}$,

3918: then shows that

3919: $

3920: \tD^1 (\UU^{x,0}_n) \tod \tDone$

3921: as $n \to \infty$.

3922: Slutsky's theorem with Lemma \ref{1108c}

3923: then implies that

3924: $\tLL^1 (\VV^x_n \cup \{ \0 \}) \tod \tDone$.

3925: In the same way we obtain

3926: $\tLL^1 (\VV^x_n ) \tod \tDone$,

3927: this time using part (ii) instead of part (i) of

3928:  Lemma \ref{0630c}, along with Proposition \ref{ffixed}.

3929: $\square$ \\

3930: 

3931: Note that

3932: $D^\alpha (\UU^x_n)$ and $D^\alpha (\UU^y_n)$ are not independent.

3933:  To

3934: deal with this, we

3935: define

3936: \[ \tilde \VV^x_n := \Po_n \cap B_x^n, \textrm{ and }

3937: \tilde \VV^y_n := \Po_n \cap B_y^n . \]

3938: Also, recall the definition of $\VV^0_n$ at (\ref{0701f}).

3939: Let $\tilde N^x_n :=

3940: \card( \tilde \VV^x_n )$ and $\tilde N^y_n := \card( \tilde

3941: \VV^y_n)$. 

3942: %

3943: Since $B_n^x$ and $B_n^y$ are

3944: disjoint, $\LL^\alpha (\tilde \VV^x_n)$ and $\LL^\alpha (\tilde

3945: \VV^y_n)$ are independent,

3946: % and $D^\alpha (\tilde \UU^x_n)$ and 

3947: %$D^\alpha (\tilde \UU^y_n)$ are also independent, 

3948: by the spatial

3949: independence property of the Poisson process $\Po_n$.

3950: 

3951: \begin{lemma} \label{1108e} Suppose $\alpha > 0$. Then:

3952: 

3953: (i)  As $n \to \infty$,

3954: \bea

3955:  \LL^\alpha(\VV^x_n) - \LL^\alpha (\tilde \VV^x_n) 

3956: \inL 0 , \textrm{ and } \LL^\alpha (\VV^y_n) - \LL^\alpha (\tilde

3957: \VV^y_n) \inL 0; 

3958: \label{0803a}

3959: \eea

3960: \bea

3961:  \LL^\alpha(\VV^x_n\cup\{\0\}) - \LL^\alpha (\tilde

3962: \VV^x_n\cup\{\0\}) \inL 0 , \textrm{ and } \LL^\alpha (\VV^y_n\cup\{\0\}) - \LL^\alpha (\tilde

3963: \VV^y_n\cup\{\0\}) \inL 0. ~ 

3964: \label{0803b}

3965: \eea

3966: % \item[(ii)]

3967: 

3968: (ii)  As $n \to \infty$, we have

3969: $ \LL^\alpha (\VV^0_n) \inL 0 $,

3970:  and

3971: $ \LL^\alpha (\VV^0_n\cup \{\0\}) \inL 0  $.

3972: %\end{itemize}

3973: \end{lemma}

3974: \textbf{Proof.}

3975: We first prove (i). We give only the argument

3976: for $\VV_n^x$; that for $\VV_n^y$ is analogous.

3977: Set $\Delta := 

3978:  \LL^\alpha(\VV^x_n) - \LL^\alpha (\tilde \VV^x_n)$. 

3979: Let $\beta = (\sigma +(1/2))/2$.

3980: Then $1/2 < \beta < \sigma$.

3981: 

3982: 

3983:  Assume without loss of generality that $\Po_n$ is the restriction

3984:  to $(0,1]^2$ of a homogeneous Poisson process $\H_n$ of intensity $n$ on 

3985: $\R^2$.  Let $\bX^-=(X^-,Y^-)$

3986: be the point of $\H_n \cap ( (0,n^{-\beta}] \times (0,\infty))$

3987: with minimal $y$-coordinate. 

3988: Then $X^-$ is uniform on $(0,n^{-\beta}]$.

3989: Let $E_n$ be the event

3990: that $X^- > 3 n^{-\sigma}$; then  

3991: $\Pr[E_n^c] =3 n^{\beta - \sigma} $ for $n$ large enough.

3992: 

3993: 

3994: Let $\Delta_1$ be the the contribution to $\Delta$ from edges

3995: starting at points in $(0,n^{-\beta}]\times(0,n^{-\sigma}]$.

3996: Then the absolute value of 

3997: $\Delta_1$ is bounded by the product of $(\sqrt{2}n^{-\beta})^\alpha$

3998:  and the number of points of $\Po_n $ in $ (0,n^{-\beta}] \times

3999: (0,n^{-\sigma}]$. Hence,  for any $\alpha >0$,

4000: \bea

4001:  \Exp \left[  | \Delta_1 | \right]

4002: & \leq & (\sqrt{2}n^{-\beta})^\alpha \Exp

4003: \left[ \card \left(

4004: \Po_n \cap ((0,n^{-\beta}] \times (0,n^{-\sigma}] ) \right)

4005: \right]

4006: \nonumber \\

4007: & = & 2^{\alpha/2} n^{1-\beta-\sigma-\alpha \beta} \to 0. 

4008: \label{0802b}

4009: \eea

4010:  %since $\sigma>\beta >1/2$.

4011: 

4012: 

4013: Let $\Delta_2 := \Delta - \Delta_1$, the contribution

4014: to $\Delta$ from edges starting at points in

4015: $(n^{-\beta},1]\times(0,n^{-\sigma}]$.

4016: Then by the triangle inequality,

4017: if $E_n$ occurs then these edges are unaffected by points in

4018: $B_n^0$, so that

4019:  $\Delta_2$ is zero if $E_n$ occurs.

4020: Also, 

4021: only minimal elements

4022: of $\Po_n \cap  (n^{-\beta},1]\times(0,n^{-\sigma}]$ can

4023: possibly have their

4024:  directed nearest neighbour in 

4025: $(0,n^{-\sigma}] \times (0,n^{-\sigma}]$; hence,  

4026: if $M_n$ denotes 

4027: the number of such minimal

4028: elements then

4029:  $|\Delta_2|$ is bounded  by  $2^{\alpha/2}M_n$.

4030: Hence, using (\ref{harmonicbd}), we obtain

4031: $$

4032: \Exp[ | \Delta_2 | ] \leq 2^{\alpha/2}P[E_n^c] \Exp[M_n] = O(n^{\beta -\sigma}

4033: \log n )  

4034: $$

4035: which tends to zero. Combined with (\ref{0802b}), this  gives

4036: us (\ref{0803a}). The same argument gives us (\ref{0803b}). 

4037: %part (i). 

4038: 

4039: 

4040: For (ii), note that

4041: \[ \Exp \left[

4042:  \LL^\alpha (\VV^0_n) \right] \leq (\sqrt{2}n^{-\sigma})^\alpha

4043: \Exp[ N_n^0] = 2^{\alpha/2} n^{1-2\sigma-\sigma\alpha}

4044:  \to 0 , \textrm{ as } n\to

4045: \infty, \]

4046: for any $\alpha >0$. Thus

4047:  $\LL^\alpha (\VV^0_n) \inL 0$,

4048: and similarly 

4049:  $\LL^\alpha (\VV^0_n \cup \{\0\}) \inL 0$.

4050: $\square$ \\

4051: 

4052: In proving our next lemma (and again later on)

4053: we use the following elementary fact.

4054: If $N(n)$ is Poisson with parameter $n$, then

4055: as $n \to \infty$ we have

4056: \bea

4057: \Exp [|N(n)-n|\log \max(N(n),n)] = O(n^{1/2} \log n).

4058: \label{logmax}

4059: \eea

4060: To see this, set $Y_n :=

4061: |N(n)-n|\log \max(N(n),n)$.

4062: Then $Y_n\1_{\{N(n) \leq 2n\} } \leq |N(n)-n |\log (2 n) $,

4063: and the expectation of this is $O(n^{1/2} \log n)$ by Jensen's

4064: inequality since $\Var(N(n)) = n$. On the other hand,

4065: the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality shows that

4066:  $\Exp[Y_n\1_{\{N(n) > 2n\} } ] \to 0$, and (\ref{logmax}) follows.

4067: 

4068: 

4069: 

4070: 

4071: 

4072: We now state a lemma for coupling $\X_n $ and $\Po_n$.

4073:  The $\alpha \geq 1$ part will be

4074: used in the proof of Theorem \ref{thmbdry}. The $0<\alpha<1$

4075: part will be needed later, in the proof of Theorem \ref{mainth}.

4076: As in Section \ref{ltot}, let $S_{0,n}$ denote

4077: the `inner' region $(n^{\eps-1/2},1]^2$, with $\eps \in (0,1/2)$ a constant.

4078: The boundary region $B_n$ is disjoint from $ S_{0,n} $;

4079: let $C_n$ denote the intermediate region $(0,1]^2 \setminus

4080: ( B_n \cup S_{0,n} )$, so that $B_n \cup C_n = (0,1]^2 \setminus S_{0,n}$. 

4081: 

4082: \begin{lemma}

4083: \label{lem0803} There exists a coupling of $\X_n$

4084: and $\Po_n$ such that:  

4085: \begin{itemize}

4086: \item[(i)]

4087: For $0< \alpha <1$, provided $\eps < (1-\alpha)/2$, 

4088: we have that as $n \to \infty$,

4089: \bea

4090: \label{0804f}

4091: n^{(\alpha -1)/2} \Exp [|\LL^\alpha(\X_n;B_n \cup C_n) - \LL^\alpha(\Po_n;

4092: B_n \cup C_n) |]   \to 0 

4093: \eea

4094: and

4095: \bea

4096: \label{0804g}

4097: n^{(\alpha -1)/2} \Exp [|\LL^\alpha(\X_n^0;B_n \cup C_n) - \LL^\alpha(\Po^0_n;

4098: B_n \cup C_n) |]   \to 0. 

4099: \eea

4100: \item[(ii)]

4101: For $\alpha \geq 1$, we have that

4102: as $n \to \infty$,

4103: \bea

4104: \label{0803d}

4105: \Exp [|\LL^\alpha(\X_n;B_n ) - \LL^\alpha(\Po_n;

4106: B_n ) |]   \to 0 

4107: \eea

4108: and

4109: \bea

4110: \label{0803e}

4111: \Exp [|\LL^\alpha(\X_n^0;B_n) - \LL^\alpha(\Po^0_n;

4112: B_n ) |]   \to 0. 

4113: \eea

4114: \end{itemize}

4115: \end{lemma}

4116: \proof 

4117: We couple $\X_n$ and $\Po_n$ in the following standard way.

4118:  Let $\bX_1, \bX_2, \bX_3, \ldots$

4119: be independent uniform random vectors on $(0,1]^2$, and

4120:  let $N(n) \sim {\rm Po}(n)$

4121: be independent of $(\bX_1,\bX_2,\ldots)$. For $m \in \N$

4122: (and in particular for $m =n$) set

4123: $\X_m := \{ \bX_1, \ldots, \bX_m \}$;

4124: set $\Po_n := \{ \bX_1, \ldots, \bX_{N(n)} \}$.

4125: 

4126: For each $m \in \N$, let $Y_m$ denote the

4127: in-degree of vertex $\bX_m$ in the MDST on $\X_{m}$. 

4128: Suppose $\bX_m=\bx$. Then an upper bound for

4129: $Y_m$ is provided by the number of minimal

4130: elements of the restriction of $\X_{m-1}$

4131: to the rectangle $\{\by \in (0,1]^2: \bx \postar \by\}$.

4132: Hence, conditional on $\bX_m =\bx$ and on 

4133: there being $k$ points of $\X_{m-1}$ in this rectangle,

4134: the expected value of $Y_m$ is bounded

4135: by the expected number of minimal elements

4136: in a random uniform sample of $k$ points in this

4137: rectangle, and hence

4138: (see (\ref{harmonicbd})) by

4139: $1 + \log k$.

4140: Hence, given the value of $\bX_m$, the 

4141: conditional expectation of $Y_m$ is bounded by

4142:  $1+ \log m$. 

4143: 

4144: First we prove the statements in part (i) ($0<\alpha <1$). Suppose

4145: $\eps < (1-\alpha)/2$. Then

4146: \bea

4147: |\LL^\alpha(\X_m;B_n\cup C_n) - \LL^\alpha(\X_{m-1};B_n \cup C_n)

4148:  |

4149: \leq

4150: 2^{\alpha/2}( Y_m +1)

4151:  {\bf 1}\{\bX_m \in B_n \cup C_n\}. ~

4152: \label{0803c1}

4153: \eea

4154:  Since $B_n\cup C_n$ has area 

4155: $2 n^{\eps -1/2} - n^{2\eps -1} $,

4156: we obtain

4157: $$

4158: \Exp[ (Y_m +1) {\bf 1}\{\bX_m \in B_n\cup C_n\} ] \leq

4159:  (2 + \log m )2 n^{\eps -1/2} .

4160: $$

4161: Hence, by (\ref{0803c1}) there is a constant $C$ such that 

4162: \bean

4163: n^{(\alpha -1)/2} \Exp[ (| \LL^\alpha(\Po_n;B_n \cup C_n) -

4164: \LL^\alpha(\X_n;B_n \cup C_n) | )| N(n) ] 

4165: \\

4166: \leq C 

4167: |N(n)-n|

4168: \log(\max(N(n),n) ) n^{(\alpha + 2 \eps -2)/2 },  

4169: \eean

4170: and since we assume $\alpha + 2\eps  < 1 $,

4171: by \eq{logmax}

4172: the expected value of the right hand side tends to zero

4173: as $n \to \infty$, and we obtain (\ref{0804f}). Likewise in the rooted case

4174: (\ref{0804g}).

4175: 

4176: Now we prove part (ii). For $\alpha \geq 1$, we have 

4177: \bea

4178: |\LL^\alpha(\X_m;B_n) - \LL^\alpha(\X_{m-1};B_n)

4179:  |

4180: \leq

4181: 2^{\alpha/2}( Y_m +1)

4182:  {\bf 1}\{\bX_m \in B_n \}.

4183: \label{0803c2}

4184: \eea

4185: Since $B_n$ has area 

4186: $2 n^{-\sigma} - n^{-2\sigma}$,

4187: by (\ref{0803c2}) there is a constant $C$ such that 

4188: \bean

4189: \Exp[ (| \LL^\alpha(\Po_n;B_n) - \LL^\alpha(\X_n;B_n) | )| N(n) ] 

4190: %\\

4191: \leq C |N(n)-n| \log(\max(N(n),n) ) n^{-\sigma },  

4192: \eean

4193: and since $\sigma> 1/2$, by \eq{logmax}

4194: the expected value of the right hand side tends to zero

4195: as $n \to \infty$, and we obtain (\ref{0803d}). 

4196: We get (\ref{0803e}) similarly.

4197: $\square$ \\

4198: 

4199: 

4200: \noindent \textbf{Proof of Theorem \ref{thmbdry}.} Suppose

4201: $\alpha \geq 1$. We have that

4202: \bean

4203: \tilde \LL^\alpha ( \tilde \VV_n^x ) = \tilde \LL^\alpha (

4204: \VV_n^x) + ( \tilde \LL^\alpha ( \tilde \VV_n^x ) - \tilde \LL^\alpha (

4205: \VV_n^x) ).\eean

4206: The final bracket converges to zero in probability,

4207: by Lemma \ref{1108e} (i). Thus by Lemma \ref{1108d} and Slutsky's theorem,

4208: we obtain $\tilde \LL^\alpha ( \tilde \VV_n^x) \tod \tFalph$

4209: (where we have $\tFone \eqd \tDone$).

4210: Now

4211: \bean

4212: \tilde \LL^\alpha ( \VV_n^x) +

4213: \tilde \LL^\alpha ( \VV_n^y) =

4214: \tilde \LL^\alpha ( \tilde \VV_n^x)

4215: +

4216: \tilde \LL^\alpha ( \tilde \VV_n^y)

4217: + (\tilde \LL^\alpha ( \VV_n^x)-

4218: \tilde \LL^\alpha ( \tilde \VV_n^x))

4219: +(\tilde \LL^\alpha ( \VV_n^y)-

4220: \tilde \LL^\alpha ( \tilde \VV_n^y)).

4221: \eean

4222: The last two brackets converge to zero in probability,

4223: by Lemma \ref{1108e} (i). Then the independence

4224: of $\tilde \LL^\alpha (\VV^x_n)$ and $\tilde \LL^\alpha (\VV^y_n)$

4225: and another

4226: application of Slutsky's theorem 

4227: %and Lemma \ref{1108d}

4228:  yield

4229: \[ \tilde \LL^\alpha (\VV^x_n) + \tilde \LL^\alpha (\VV^y_n)

4230: \tod \tFalph^{\{1\}} + \tFalph^{\{2\}} ,

4231: \]

4232: where $\tFalph^{\{1\}}$ and $\tFalph^{\{2\}}$

4233: are independent copies of $\tFalph$.

4234: Similarly,

4235: \[ \tilde \LL^\alpha (\VV^x_n \cup \{ \0 \} ) +

4236: \tilde \LL^\alpha (\VV^y_n \cup \{ \0 \} ) \tod \tDalph^{\{1\}}

4237: + \tDalph^{\{2\}} . \]

4238: Finally, since $\tilde \LL^\alpha (\Po_n ; B_n)

4239: = \tilde \LL^\alpha (\VV^x_n)+\tilde \LL^\alpha (\VV^y_n)

4240: -\tilde \LL^\alpha (\VV^0_n)$

4241: (with a similar statement including the origin)

4242: Lemma \ref{1108e} (ii) and Slutsky's

4243: theorem complete the proof of (\ref{bdry1}) and (\ref{bdry2}).

4244: %in the Poisson case for $\alpha \geq 1$.

4245: 

4246: To deduce (\ref{bdry1X}) and (\ref{bdry2X}), 

4247: assume without loss of generality

4248: that $\X_n$ and $\Po_n$ are coupled

4249:   in the manner of Lemma \ref{lem0803}. 

4250:  Then $\tLL^\alpha(\Po_n;B_n) -  \tLL^\alpha(\X_n;B_n) $ tends

4251: to zero in probability by (\ref{0803d}), and 

4252:  $\tLL^\alpha(\Po_n^0;B_n) -  \tLL^\alpha(\X_n^0;B_n) $ tends

4253: to zero in probability by (\ref{0803e}). Hence by Slutsky's theorem,

4254: the convergence  results (\ref{bdry1}) and (\ref{bdry2})

4255:  carry through to the binomial point process case,

4256: i.e., (\ref{bdry1X}) and (\ref{bdry2X}) hold.

4257: 

4258: 

4259: 

4260: Now suppose

4261:  $0 < \alpha <1$.

4262: Then (\ref{0214a}) gives us

4263: \bea \Exp \left[ \left| n^{(\alpha-1)/2} \left( \LL^\alpha (\VV^x_n ) -

4264: D^\alpha (\UU^x_n) \right) \right|^2 \right] = O \left(

4265: n^{(\alpha +1)(1 -2\sigma)} \right), 

4266: \label{0802c}

4267: \eea

4268: which tends to 0 as $n\to \infty$,

4269:   since $\sigma>1/2$. Likewise for the rooted case,

4270: \bea

4271:  \Exp \left[ \left| n^{(\alpha-1)/2} \left( \LL^\alpha (\VV^x_n \cup\{\0\}

4272:  ) -

4273: D^\alpha (\UU^{x,0}_n) \right) \right|^2 \right] = O \left(

4274: n^{(\alpha +1)(1 -2\sigma)} \right), 

4275: \label{0802d}

4276: \eea

4277: %Also, for $0<\alpha<1$,

4278: %from

4279: By Proposition \ref{dlfmoms} 

4280: we have

4281:  \[

4282: \Exp[ n^{(\alpha-1)/2} D^\alpha (\UU^x_n) ] = O(n^{(\alpha-1)/2}

4283: \Exp[(N_n^x)^{1-\alpha} ] ) = O(n^{(\alpha -1)(\sigma -1/2)}) \to 0,

4284: %\inL 0 ,

4285:  \]

4286: %and the fact that

4287: %$\Exp[(N^x_n)^{1-\alpha}] = O( n^{(1-\alpha)(1-\sigma)})$,

4288: and combined with (\ref{0802c}) this 

4289:  completes the proof of (\ref{0214h}). Similarly, 

4290: by Proposition \ref{dltmoms}, 

4291:  \[

4292: \Exp[ n^{(\alpha-1)/2} D^\alpha (\UU^{x,0}_n) ] = O(n^{(\alpha-1)/2}

4293: \Exp[(N_n^x)^{1-\alpha} ] ) = O(n^{(\alpha -1)(\sigma -1/2)}) \to 0,

4294:  \]

4295: and  combined with (\ref{0802d}) this gives us (\ref{0802a}).  $\square$

4296: 

4297: 

4298: \section{Proof of Theorem \ref{mainth}} \label{totallength}

4299: 

4300: Let  $ \sigma \in (1/2, 2/3)$.

4301: Let $\eps > 0 $ with

4302: \bea

4303: \eps < \min (1/2, (1-\sigma)/3,

4304: (3 - 4 \sigma) /10, (2 - 3 \sigma)/8).

4305: \label{epsdef}

4306: \eea

4307: In addition,  if $0<\alpha <1$,

4308: we impose the further condition

4309: that $\eps < (1-\alpha)/2$. As in Section \ref{ltot}, 

4310:  denote by $S_{0,n}$ the region

4311:  $(n^{\eps-1/2},1]^2$.

4312: % (which we denoted $S_{0,n}$

4313: As in Section \ref{bdry}, let $B_n$

4314: denote the region $(0,1]^2 \setminus (n^{-\sigma},1]^2$,

4315: and let $C_n$ denote $(0,1]^2 \setminus

4316: ( B_n \cup S_{0,n} )$. 

4317: 

4318: We know from Sections \ref{ltot} and \ref{bdry}

4319:  that, for large $n$, the weight of

4320: edges starting in $S_{0,n}$ satisfies

4321:  a central limit theorem, and the weight

4322: of edges starting in

4323:  $B_n$ can be approximated by the directed linear forest.

4324: We shall show in Lemmas \ref{varClem} and \ref{lem0817}

4325:  that (with a suitable

4326: scaling factor for $\alpha<1$) the contribution

4327: to the total weight from points in $C_n$ 

4328: has variance converging to 

4329:  zero. 

4330: To complete the proof of Theorem \ref{mainth} in the Poisson case,  

4331: we shall show that the lengths from $B_n$ and $S_{0,n}$

4332: are asymptotically independent by virtue of the fact that

4333: the configuration of points in $C_n$ is (with probability

4334: approaching one) sufficient to ensure that the configuration

4335: of points in $B_n$ has no effect on the edges from points in $S_{0,n}$.

4336: To extend the result to the binomial point process case,

4337: we shall use a de-Poissonization argument related to that used 

4338: in \cite{penyuk1}.

4339: 

4340: First consider the region $C_n$. We naturally divide this

4341: into three regions. Let

4342: \bean

4343: C_n^x := (n^{\eps -1/2},1] \times

4344: (n^{-\sigma},n^{\eps-1/2}], ~~

4345: C_n^y := (n^{-\sigma},n^{\eps-1/2}] \times (n^{\eps-1/2},1], 

4346: \\

4347: C_n^0 := (n^{-\sigma},n^{\eps-1/2}]^2.

4348: \eean

4349: Also, as in Section \ref{bdry}, let

4350: \bean

4351: B_n^x := (n^{-\sigma},1] \times (0,n^{-\sigma}], ~~

4352: B_n^y := (0,n^{-\sigma}] \times (n^{-\sigma},1], ~~

4353: B_n^0 := (0,n^{-\sigma}]^2.

4354: \eean

4355: We 

4356:  divide the $C_n$ and $B_n$ into rectangular cells as follows

4357: (see Figure \ref{fig1}.)

4358: We leave $C_n^0$ undivided. We set

4359: \bea

4360:  k_n := \lfloor n^{1-\sigma -2 \eps} \rfloor

4361: \label{kndef}

4362: \eea

4363: and

4364: divide $C_n^x$ lengthways into $k_n$ cells.

4365: For each cell, 

4366: \bea

4367: {\rm width} = (1 - n^{\eps- 1/2})/k_n \sim n^{2 \eps + \sigma -1 }

4368: ; ~~~~~

4369: {\rm height} = n^{\eps - 1/2} - n^{-\sigma} \sim n^{\eps -1/2} 

4370: .

4371: \label{0729}

4372: \eea

4373: Label these

4374: cells $\Gamma_i^x$ for $i=1,2,\ldots,k_n$ from left to right.

4375: For each cell $\Gamma^x_i$, define the adjoining

4376: cell of $B_n^x$, formed by extending the

4377: vertical edges of $\Gamma^x_i$, to be $\beta^x_i$.

4378: The cells $\beta^x_i$ then have width

4379: $(1-n^{\eps-1/2})/k_n \sim n^{2 \eps + \sigma -1}$

4380: and height $n^{-\sigma}$.

4381: 

4382: In a

4383: similar way we divide $C_n^y$ into $k_n$ cells $\Gamma_i^y$ of

4384:  height $(1-n^{\eps-1/2})/k_n$

4385:  and

4386: width $n^{\eps-1/2}-n^{-\sigma}$,

4387:  and

4388: divide $B_n^y$ into the corresponding cells $\beta^y_i$, $i=1,\ldots,k_n$.

4389: %\Comment{see caption}

4390: \begin{figure}[h]

4391: \centering

4392: \input{fig6b.pstex_t}

4393: \caption{The regions of $[0,1]^2$.} 

4394: \label{fig1}

4395: \end{figure}

4396: 

4397: For $i=2,\ldots,k_n$, let $E_{x,i}$ denote the event that the cell

4398: $\beta^x_{i-1}$

4399: contains at least one point of $\Po_n$, and

4400:  let $E_{y,i}$ denote the event that

4401: $\beta^y_{i-1}$ contains at least one point of $\Po_n$.

4402: 

4403: 

4404: \begin{lemma}

4405: \label{neighbours} 

4406:  For $n$ sufficiently large,

4407: and for $1 \leq j <i \leq k_n$ with $i -j >3$,

4408:  if $E_{x,i}$ (respectively $E_{y,i}$) occurs then

4409: no point in the cell $\Gamma^x_i$ 

4410: (respectively  $\Gamma^y_i$)

4411: has a directed nearest neighbour in the cell $\Gamma^x_j$

4412: or $\beta_j^x$

4413: ($\Gamma^y_j$ or $\beta_j^y$).

4414: \end{lemma} 

4415: \textbf{Proof.}

4416: Consider a point $X$, say, in cell $\Gamma_i^x$ in $C_n^x$. 

4417: Given $E_{x,i}$, we know that there is a point, $Y$ say, in the

4418: cell $\beta^x_{i-1}$ to the left of the $\beta^x_i$ cell

4419: immediately below $\Gamma_i^x$,

4420:  such that $Y \postar X$, but the difference

4421: in $x$-coordinates between $X$ and $Y$ is no more than twice the

4422: width of a cell. So, by the triangle inequality, we have 

4423: \bea

4424: \label{0712a} \| X - Y \| \leq 2 (1-n^{\eps-1/2})/k_n +

4425: n^{\eps-1/2} \sim 2 n^{2 \eps + \sigma -1  }, 

4426: \eea 

4427: since $\sigma > 1/2$.

4428: Now, consider a point $Z$ in a cell

4429: $\Gamma^x_j$ or $\beta_j^x$ 

4430: with $j \leq i-4$. In this case, the difference in

4431: $x$-coordinates between $X$ and $Z$ is at least the width of 3

4432: cells, so that 

4433: \bea

4434:  \label{0712b}

4435:  \| X-Z \| \geq 3 (1-n^{\eps-1/2})/k_n \sim 3 n^{2 \eps + \sigma -1 }. 

4436: \eea

4437: Comparing (\ref{0712a}) and (\ref{0712b}), we see that

4438: $X$ is not connected to $Z$, which completes the proof.  

4439: $\square$ \\

4440: 

4441: Recall from (\ref{0714a})

4442: % Section \ref{con}

4443:  that for a point set $\SS \subset \R^2$

4444: and a region $R \subseteq \R^2$,

4445:  $\LL^\alpha(\SS;R)$ denotes

4446: the total weight of edges of the MDSF on $\SS$ which originate

4447: in the region $R$.

4448: 

4449: 

4450: 

4451: 

4452: \begin{lemma}

4453: \label{varClem}

4454: As $n \to \infty$, we have that

4455: \bea

4456: \label{0525aa}

4457:  \Var [ \LL^\alpha( \Po_n ; C_n) ] \to 0

4458: ~~{\rm and} ~~

4459:  \Var [ \LL^\alpha( \Po_n^0 ; C_n) ] \to 0

4460: ~~~~~ (\alpha \geq 1);

4461: \eea

4462: \bea

4463: \label{0525bb}

4464:  \Var [ n^{(\alpha-1)/2}

4465: \LL^\alpha( \Po_n ; C_n) ] \to 0 

4466: ~~~~~ (0 < \alpha < 1);

4467: \eea

4468: \bea

4469: \label{0525bbb}

4470:  \Var [ n^{(\alpha-1)/2}

4471: \LL^\alpha( \Po_n^0 ; C_n) ] \to 0 

4472: ~~~~~ (0 < \alpha < 1).

4473: \eea

4474: %[MP: do we need $\X_n$ version of these last two???] \Comment{MP}

4475: \end{lemma}

4476: \proof For ease of notation, write $X_i = \LL^\alpha (\Po_n ;

4477: \Gamma^x_i)$ and $Y_i = \LL^\alpha (\Po_n ; \Gamma^y_i)$, for

4478: $i=1,2,\ldots,k_n$. Also let $Z = \LL^\alpha (\Po_n ; C_n^0 )$.

4479: Then 

4480: \bea 

4481: \label{0712v}

4482:  \Var[ \LL^\alpha( \Po_n ; C_n)

4483: ] & = & \Var \left[ Z + \sum_{i=1}^{k_n} X_i + \sum_{i=1}^{k_n}

4484: Y_i 

4485:  \right].

4486: \eea

4487: Let $N^x_i$, $N^y_i$, $N_0$, respectively,

4488:  denote the number of points of $\Po_n$ in $\Gamma_i^x$, $\Gamma_i^y$,

4489: $C_n^0$, respectively.

4490: Then by (\ref{0729}), 

4491: $N^x_i$ 

4492: is Poisson with parameter asymptotic

4493: to $n^{3 \eps +\sigma-1/2}$,

4494: while $N^x_1 + N^y_1 + N_0$ 

4495: is Poisson with parameter asymptotic

4496: to $2 n^{3 \eps +\sigma-1/2}$; hence as $n \to \infty$

4497: and we have

4498:  \bea

4499:  \label{0712g}

4500:  \Exp[(N_i^x)^2] \sim n^{6\eps + 2\sigma-1}, ~~~~

4501:  \Exp[(N_1^x + N_1^y + N_0)^2] \sim 4 n^{6\eps + 2\sigma-1} .

4502:   \eea 

4503: Edges from points in $\Gamma_1^x \cap \Gamma_1^y \cap C_n^0$

4504: are of length at most $2 n^{2\eps +\sigma -1}$, and hence,

4505:  \bea

4506:  \Var [ X_1 + Y_1 + Z] & \leq  & (2n^{2 \eps + \sigma -1} )^{2 \alpha}

4507:  \Exp [ (N_1^x + N_1^y + N_0)^2]

4508: \nonumber \\

4509:   & \sim & 2^{2 + 2 \alpha}

4510: n^{6 \eps + 2 \sigma -1 + 2 \alpha (2 \eps + \sigma -1) }.

4511: %\to 0. 

4512: \label{0802e}

4513:  \eea

4514: For $\alpha \geq 1$, since $\eps$ is small (\ref{epsdef}), 

4515:  the expression (\ref{0802e}) is $O(n^{10 \eps + 4 \sigma -3})$

4516: and in fact  tends to zero, so that 

4517: \bea

4518: \Var(X_1 + Y_1 + Z) \to 0 ~~~(\alpha \geq 1).

4519: \label{0712x}

4520: \eea 

4521: 

4522: By Lemma \ref{neighbours} and (\ref{0712a}), given

4523: $E_{x,i}$, an edge from a point of $\Gamma^x_i$ can be of length

4524: no more than 

4525: %$2/k_n + n^{\eps -1/2}$, which is bounded by

4526:  $3 n^{2 \eps + \sigma -1}$.

4527:  Thus using (\ref{0712g}) we have 

4528: \bea

4529: \label{0712d} \Var [ X_i \1 \{E_{x,i} \} ]  & \leq &  \Exp [ X_i^2 

4530: {\bf 1}\{E_{x,i}\}] \leq 

4531: (3 n^{2\eps + \sigma -1})^{2\alpha} 

4532: \Exp [ (N^x_i)^2 ]

4533: \nonumber\\ & = &

4534: O(n^{6 \eps + 2 \sigma-1  + 2 \alpha(2 \eps + \sigma-1) }) .

4535:  \eea

4536: Next, observe that ${\rm Cov} [ X_i \1 \{ E_{x,i} \} , X_j \1 \{ E_{x,j}

4537: \}] =0$ for $i-j >3$, since  by Lemma \ref{neighbours},

4538: $X_i {\bf 1} \{E_{x,i}\}$ is determined by the restriction of

4539: $\Po_n$ to the union of the regions $\Gamma_\ell^x  \cup \beta_\ell^x,

4540: i-3 \leq \ell \leq i$.

4541:  Thus 

4542: by (\ref{kndef}), Cauchy-Schwarz and (\ref{0712d}),

4543: we obtain

4544:  \bea 

4545: \label{0712e}

4546:  \Var \left[ \sum_{i=2}^{k_n} X_i \1

4547: \{ E_{x,i} \} \right] 

4548: & = & \sum_{i=2}^{k_n} \Var

4549: [X_i \1 \{ E_{x,i} \}] 

4550: \nonumber \\ && 

4551: + \sum_{i=2}^{k_n} \sum_{j:1 \leq |j-i|

4552: \leq 3} \!\!\!\! {\rm Cov} [X_i \1 \{ E_{x,i} \} , X_j \1 \{ E_{x,j} \} ]

4553: \nonumber\\ 

4554: & = &

4555: O(n^{4 \eps +  \sigma  + 2 \alpha(2 \eps + \sigma-1) }) .

4556: \eea 

4557: For $\alpha \geq 1$,

4558: the bound in 

4559:  (\ref{0712e}) tends to zero 

4560:  as $n \to \infty$, 

4561: since $1/2 < \sigma < 2/3$

4562: and $\eps$ is small (\ref{epsdef}).

4563: 

4564: By (\ref{kndef}), the cells $\beta^x_i$,

4565:  $i=1,\ldots,k_n$, have width asymptotic to $n^{2 \eps + \sigma -1}$

4566: and height $n^{-\sigma}$, so the mean number

4567: of  points of $\Po_n$  in one of these cells is

4568: asymptotic to $n^{2 \eps}$; hence 

4569: %the mean number ofwe have

4570: %\[ \frac{1}{k_n} = n^{\sigma-1+\eta} + 

4571: %O \left( n^{2\sigma-2+2\eta} \right),

4572: %\] and

4573: for any cell $\beta^x_i$ or $\beta^y_i$,

4574:  $i=1,\ldots,k_n$, the probability that   the cell

4575:  contains no point of $\Po_n$ is given by

4576: $ \exp \{-n^{2\eps}(1+o(1))\}$.  

4577: Hence for $n$ large enough, and $i=2,\ldots,k_n$,  we have

4578: $

4579: \Pr[E^c_{x,i}] 

4580: %= \Pr[E^c_{y,i}]

4581:  \leq \exp (-n^\eps),

4582: $

4583: and hence by (\ref{0712g}),

4584:  \bea \label{0712f}

4585:  \Var [ X_i \1 \{ E^c_{x,i} \} ] \leq \Exp [

4586: X_i^2 | E^c_{x,i} ] \Pr[ E^c_{x,i} ] 

4587: & \leq &

4588: 2^\alpha \Exp[ (N^x_i)^2 ] \Pr [

4589: E^c_{x,i}]

4590: \nonumber \\

4591: &  = & O( n^{6 \eps + 2\sigma-1} \exp (-n^\eps)). ~ 

4592: \eea

4593: Hence by Cauchy-Schwarz

4594: we have 

4595: \bea \label{0712j} \Var

4596: \left[ \sum_{i=2}^{k_n} X_i \1 \{ E^c_{x,i} \} \right] & = &

4597: \sum_{i=2}^{k_n} \Var[ X_i \1 \{ E^c_{x,i} \} ] + \sum_{i \neq j}

4598: {\rm Cov} [ X_i \1 \{ E^c_{x,i} \}, X_j \1 \{ E^c_{x,j} \}] \nonumber\\

4599: & = & O \left( k_n^2 n^{6 \eps + 2\sigma-1} \exp (-n^\eps)

4600: \right)  \to 0, 

4601: \eea 

4602: as $n \to \infty$. 

4603: Then by

4604:  (\ref{0712e}), (\ref{0712j}), and the analogous

4605: estimates for $Y_i$, along with the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, we

4606: obtain for $\alpha \geq 1$ that

4607:  \bea \label{0712z} \Var \left[ \sum_{i=2}^{k_n} X_i \1 \{

4608: E_{x,i} \}+\sum_{i=2}^{k_n} Y_i \1 \{ E_{y,i} \}+\sum_{i=2}^{k_n}

4609: X_i \1 \{ E^c_{x,i} \}+\sum_{i=2}^{k_n} Y_i \1 \{ E^c_{y,i} \}

4610: \right] \to 0, \eea as $n \to \infty$. 

4611: By (\ref{0712v}) with

4612:  (\ref{0712x}),

4613:  (\ref{0712z}),

4614: and Cauchy-Schwarz again, we obtain the first part of (\ref{0525aa}). 

4615: The argument for $\Po_n^0$ is the same as for $\Po_n$,

4616: so we have (\ref{0525aa}).

4617: 

4618: 

4619: Now suppose  $0<\alpha<1$.

4620: We obtain (\ref{0525bb}) and (\ref{0525bbb}) in a similar

4621:  way to (\ref{0525aa}),

4622: since (\ref{0802e}) implies that

4623: $$

4624: \Var(n^{(\alpha-1)/2}(X_1 + Y_1 + Z)) = O(n^{6 \eps + 2 \sigma -2

4625: + \alpha(4 \eps + 2 \sigma -1) })

4626: $$

4627:  and 

4628: (\ref{0712e}) implies 

4629: $$

4630: \Var \left( n^{(\alpha-1)/2}\sum_{i=2}^{k_n} X_i{\bf 1}\{E_{x,i}\}

4631: \right)

4632:  = O(n^{4 \eps +  \sigma -1

4633: + \alpha(4 \eps + 2 \sigma -1) }),

4634: $$

4635:  and both of these bounds tend to zero when $0 < \alpha < 1$,

4636: $1/2 < \sigma < 2/3$, and $\eps $ is small (\ref{epsdef}).

4637: $\square$ \\

4638: 

4639: To prove those parts of Theorem \ref{mainth}

4640: which refer to the binomial process $\X_n$, we need

4641: further results comparing the processes $\X_n$ and $\Po_n$

4642: when they are coupled as in Lemma \ref{lem0803}.

4643: 

4644: \begin{lemma}

4645: \label{lem0817}

4646: Suppose $\alpha \geq 1$. With $\X_n$ and $\Po_n$

4647: coupled as in Lemma \ref{lem0803}, we have that as $n \to \infty$

4648: \bea

4649: \label{0525aaa}

4650:  \LL^\alpha( \X_n ; C_n) - \LL^\alpha(\Po_n; C_n) \inL 0

4651: ~~{\rm and} ~~

4652:  \LL^\alpha( \X_n^0 ; C_n) - \LL^\alpha(\Po_n^0; C_n) \inL 0.

4653: %~~~ (\alpha \geq 1).

4654: \eea

4655: \end{lemma}

4656: \proof

4657: Let  $\Po_n$ and $\X_m$ ($m \in \N$) be coupled as 

4658: described in Lemma \ref{lem0803}. 

4659: Given $n$, for $m \in \N$

4660: define the event

4661: $$

4662: E_{m,n} :=

4663: \cap_{1 \leq i \leq k_n}(\{ \X_{m-1} \cap \beta_i^x \neq \emptyset\}

4664: \cap  \{\X_{m-1} \cap \beta_i^y \neq \emptyset\}),

4665: $$

4666: with the sub-cells $\beta_i^x$ and $\beta_i^y$ 

4667: of $B_n$ as defined near the start of Section \ref{totallength}.

4668: Then by similar arguments to those for $\Pr[E_{x,i}^c]$ above,

4669: we have

4670: $$

4671: \Pr[E_{m,n}^c] = O (n^{1-\sigma-2\eps}

4672: \exp(-n^\eps/2) ), ~~~~m \geq n/2 +1.

4673: $$

4674: As in the proof of Lemma \ref{lem0803},

4675: let $Y_m$ denote the in-degree

4676: of vertex $\bX_m$ in the MDST on $\X_m$.

4677: Then

4678: \[ \left| \LL^\alpha (\X_m ; C_n) -

4679: \LL^\alpha (\X_{m-1} ; C_n ) \right|

4680: \leq  (Y_m+1) \1\{\bX_m \in C_n \} 

4681: \left( (3n^{2\eps +\sigma -1})^{\alpha}

4682: + 2^{\alpha/2} \1\{E_{m,n}^c\} \right).\]

4683: Thus, given $N(n)$,

4684: \bean

4685: %\label{0807a}

4686:  \left| \LL^\alpha (\X_n ; C_n) -

4687: \LL^\alpha (\Po_n ; C_n) \right|

4688: & \leq  \sum_{m=\min (N(n),n)}

4689: ^{\max (N(n),n)}

4690:  & (Y_m+1) \1\{\bX_m \in C_n \} 

4691: \\

4692: & & \times \left( 3^\alpha n^{\alpha(2\eps+\sigma-1)}

4693: +2^{\alpha/2} \1\{E_{m,n}^c\} \right).

4694: \eean

4695: Since $C_n$ has area less than $2n^{\eps-1/2}$, 

4696: by \eq{harmonicbd} there exists a constant $C$ such that,

4697: for $n$ 

4698:  sufficiently large 

4699: and $N(n) \geq n/2+1$,

4700: \bea

4701: \label{0807b}

4702: \Exp \left[ \left.

4703: \left( \left| \LL^\alpha (\X_n ; C_n) -

4704: \LL^\alpha (\Po_n ; C_n) \right|

4705: \right) \right| N(n) \right] \leq

4706: 2^{\alpha/2} n  \1_{\{N(n) < n/2 +1\}}

4707: \nonumber \\ + 

4708:  C |N(n)-n| \log( \max (N(n),n))   

4709: n^{\alpha(2\eps+\sigma-1)+\eps-1/2} \1_{\{N(n) \geq n/2 +1\}}.

4710: \eea

4711: By tail bounds for the Poisson distribution, we have

4712: $nP[N(n) < n/2 +1] \to 0$ as $n \to \infty$, and hence,

4713: taking expectations in (\ref{0807b}) and

4714: using (\ref{logmax}),

4715: we obtain 

4716: \[ \Exp \left[ 

4717:  \left| \LL^\alpha (\X_n ; C_n) -

4718: \LL^\alpha (\Po_n ; C_n) \right|

4719:  \right] = O(  n^{\alpha(2\eps+\sigma-1)+\eps}\log n) + o(1),\]

4720: which tends to zero since $\alpha \geq 1$,

4721: $1/2< \sigma <2/3$

4722: and $\eps$ is small (see

4723: (\ref{epsdef})). So

4724: %, finally, by Cauchy-Schwarz 

4725: we obtain

4726: the unrooted part of (\ref{0525aaa}). The argument is the same

4727: in the rooted case. $\square$ \\

4728: 

4729: %We shall need one final lemma on coupling of $\Po_n$ and $\X_n$.

4730: \begin{lemma}

4731: \label{depolem}

4732: Suppose $\X_n$ and $\Po_n$ are coupled 

4733: as described in Lemma \ref{lem0803}, with $N(n):= \card(\Po_n)$.

4734: Let $\Delta(\infty)$ be given by Definition \ref{sstabdef} with

4735: $H = \LL^1$, and

4736: set $\alpha_1 := \Exp[\Delta(\infty)]$.

4737: Then as $n \to \infty$

4738:  we have

4739: \bea

4740: \label{eqdepo1}

4741:   \LL^1 (\Po_n;S_{0,n}) - \LL^1 (\X_n;S_{0,n})

4742: - n^{-1/2}\alpha_1 (N(n)-n)  \inLL 0; \\

4743: \label{eqdepo2}

4744:   \LL^1 (\Po_n^0;S_{0,n}) - \LL^1 (\X_n^0;S_{0,n})

4745: - n^{-1/2}\alpha_1 (N(n)-n)  \inLL 0.

4746: \eea

4747: \end{lemma}

4748: {\em Proof.}

4749: The proof of the first part (\ref{eqdepo1}) follows that of eqn (4.5)

4750: of \cite{penyuk1}, using our Lemma \ref{0331q} and the fact that

4751: %for our present choice of

4752: %$\xi$, given by (\ref{0802})  with $\alpha =1$ and with

4753: %the ordering $\postar$ 

4754: the functional $\LL^1$ is homogeneous of order 1,

4755: is strongly stabilizing

4756: by Lemma \ref{stab},

4757: and satisfies the moments condition \eq{ubm}

4758: by Lemma \ref{ubmlem}.

4759: 

4760: As shown in the proof of Corollary \ref{0804c} 

4761: (see in particular eqn \eq{0817b}), we have that

4762: $  \LL^1 (\Po_n^0;S_{0,n}) - \LL^1 (\Po_n;S_{0,n})$

4763: converges to zero in $L^2$ and

4764: $  \LL^1 (\X_n^0;S_{0,n}) - \LL^1 (\X_n;S_{0,n})$

4765: converges to zero in $L^2$. 

4766: Therefore the second part (\ref{eqdepo2}) follows from 

4767: (\ref{eqdepo1}).  $\square$\\

4768: 

4769: 

4770: 

4771: 

4772: 

4773: 

4774: We are now in a position to prove Theorem \ref{mainth}.

4775: We divide the proof into two cases: $\alpha \neq 1$ and $\alpha=1$. 

4776: In the latter case,

4777: to prove the result for 

4778:  the Poisson process $\Po_n$, we

4779: need to show that

4780: $\LL^1 ( \Po_n ; B_n)$ and $\LL^1 ( \Po_n ; S_{0,n})$ are

4781: asymptotically independent; likewise for $\Po_n^0$.

4782:  We shall then obtain the results for the binomial process

4783: $\X_n$ and for $\X_n^0$

4784: from those for $\Po_n$ and $\Po_n^0$ via the

4785:  coupling described in Lemma \ref{lem0803}.  \\

4786: 

4787: \noindent \textbf{Proof of Theorem \ref{mainth} for $\alpha \neq 1$.}

4788: First suppose $0<\alpha <1$. For the Poisson case, we have

4789: \bea

4790:  n^{(\alpha-1)/2} \tLalph (\Po_n) = n^{(\alpha-1)/2}

4791: \tLalph (\Po_n;S_{0,n}) + n^{(\alpha-1)/2} \tLalph (\Po_n;B_n)

4792: \nonumber \\

4793: + n^{(\alpha-1)/2}

4794: \tLalph (\Po_n;C_n).

4795: \label{0804a}

4796: \eea

4797: The first term in the

4798: right hand side of (\ref{0804a})

4799: converges in distribution to $\NN(0,s_\alpha^2)$

4800: by Theorem \ref{CLT} (iv), and the other two terms converge

4801: in probability to 0 by eqns (\ref{0214h}) and (\ref{0525bb}).

4802: Thus Slutsky's theorem yields the

4803: first (Poisson) part of 

4804:  (\ref{0727d}).

4805: To obtain the second (binomial) part of (\ref{0727d}),

4806: we use the coupling of Lemma \ref{lem0803}.

4807: We write

4808: \bea

4809: n^{(\alpha -1)/2}\tLL^\alpha(\X_n) =

4810: n^{(\alpha -1)/2}

4811: \tLL^\alpha(\X_n;S_{0,n} ) 

4812: + n^{(\alpha -1)/2} (\tLL^\alpha (\Po_n; B_n \cup C_n) ) 

4813: \nonumber \\

4814: + n^{(\alpha -1)/2} (

4815: \tLL^\alpha (\X_n; B_n \cup C_n)

4816: -

4817: \tLL^\alpha (\Po_n; B_n \cup C_n)

4818:  ) . ~

4819: \label{0803f}

4820: \eea

4821: The first term in the right side of  (\ref{0803f}) is asymptotically

4822: $\NN(0,t_\alpha^2)$ by Theorem \ref{CLT} (ii). The second term tends to

4823: zero in probability by 

4824:  (\ref{0214h}) and (\ref{0525bb}).

4825: The third term tends to zero in probability by 

4826: (\ref{0804f}). Thus we have 

4827:  the binomial case of (\ref{0727d}).

4828: 

4829: The rooted case (\ref{0727a}) is similar. Now,

4830: for the first (Poisson) part  of

4831:  (\ref{0727a}), we use Corollary \ref{0804c} (iv) with

4832: (\ref{0802a}) and (\ref{0525bbb}), and Slutsky's theorem. The

4833: second part of

4834: (\ref{0727a}) follows from the analogous statement to (\ref{0803f})

4835: with the addition of the origin, using Corollary \ref{0804c} (ii)

4836: with (\ref{0802a}), (\ref{0525bbb}), (\ref{0804g}), and

4837: Slutsky's theorem again.

4838: 

4839: 

4840: Next, suppose $\alpha >1$. 

4841: %Now suppose $\alpha>1$. 

4842: We have 

4843: \bea

4844: \label{0804b}

4845: \tLalph (\Po_n) = 

4846: \tLalph (\Po_n;S_{0,n}) + 

4847: \tLalph (\Po_n;C_n)

4848: +

4849: \tLalph (\Po_n;B_n).\eea

4850: The first term in the right hand side

4851: converges to 0 in probability, by Theorem \ref{CLT} (iii).

4852: The second term also converges to 0 in probability,

4853: by the first

4854: part of (\ref{0525aa}). Then by (\ref{bdry2})

4855: and Slutsky's theorem, we obtain

4856: the first (Poisson) part of (\ref{0727f}).

4857: To obtain the rooted version,

4858: i.e. the first part of (\ref{0727c}),

4859: we replace $\Po_n$ by $\Po_n^0$

4860: in (\ref{0804b}), and

4861:  combine (\ref{bdry1}) 

4862:   with Corollary \ref{0804c} (iii)  

4863: and the second part of (\ref{0525aa}),

4864: and apply Slutsky's theorem again.

4865: 

4866: To obtain the binomial versions of the results (\ref{0727c}) and

4867: (\ref{0727f}), we again

4868: make use of the coupling described in Lemma \ref{lem0803}.

4869: We have 

4870: \bea

4871: \label{0804h}

4872: \tLalph (\X_n)  =   

4873: \tLalph (\X_n;S_{0,n}) + 

4874: \tLalph (\X_n;C_n)

4875: +

4876: \tLalph (\X_n;B_n). 

4877: \eea

4878: The first term in the right hand

4879: side converges in probability to zero by

4880: Theorem \ref{CLT} (i). 

4881: The second term converges in probability to zero by 

4882: the first part of (\ref{0525aa})  and the first part of (\ref{0525aaa}).

4883: The third part converges in distribution to

4884:  $\tFalph^{\{1\}} + \tFalph^{\{2\}}$ by

4885: by  (\ref{bdry2X}). Hence, 

4886:  Slutsky's theorem

4887: yields the binomial part of (\ref{0727f}). 

4888: 

4889: Similarly, by replacing $\Po_n$ by $\Po^0_n$ and $\X_n$

4890: by $\X^0_n$ in (\ref{0804h}), and using Corollary \ref{0804c}

4891: (i), the second part of (\ref{0525aa})

4892: %, (\ref{0803e}), the second part

4893: and of (\ref{0525aaa}),

4894: (\ref{bdry1X}) and Slutsky's theorem,

4895: we obtain the binomial part of (\ref{0727c}).

4896: This completes the proof for $\alpha \neq 1$. \\

4897: 

4898: \noindent \textbf{Proof of Theorem \ref{mainth} for $\alpha = 1$:

4899:  the Poisson case.}

4900: We now prove the first part of (\ref{0727b}) and the first 

4901: part of (\ref{0727e}).

4902: Given $n$, set $q_n := 4 \lfloor n^{\eps   + \sigma -1/2} \rfloor$. 

4903: Split each

4904: cell $\Gamma^x_i$ of $C_n^x$ into $  4 q_n $ 

4905:  rectangular sub-cells, by splitting

4906: the horizontal edge into $q_n$ segments and the vertical edge into

4907: 4 segments by a rectangular grid. Similarly, split each

4908: cell $\Gamma_i^y$ by splitting the vertical edge into $q_n$ segments

4909: and the horizontal edge into 4 segments. 

4910: Finally, add a single square sub-cell  in the top right-hand

4911: corner of $C_n^0$, of side $(1/4)n^{\eps-1/2 }$, and denote this

4912: ``the corner sub-cell''.

4913: 

4914: The total number of all such sub-cells is $1+8 k_nq_n \sim 32 n^{(1/2)-\eps}$.

4915: Each of the sub-cells has width asymptotic to $(1/4)n^{\eps-1/2}$

4916: and height asymptotic to $(1/4)n^{\eps-1/2}$, and so

4917:  the area of each cell is asymptotic to

4918: $(1/16)n^{2 \eps -1}$.  So for large $n$,

4919: for each of these sub-cells,  the probability

4920: that it contains no point of $\Po_n$

4921: is bounded by $\exp (-n^{\eps})$.

4922: 

4923: Let $E_n$ be the event that

4924: each of the  sub-cells

4925:  described above contains at least one point of $\Po_n$. Then

4926: \bea

4927: \label{0807d}

4928:  \Pr[ E_n^c ] = 

4929: %\exp(-n^\eps) +

4930:  O \left( n^{(1/2)-\eps}

4931: \exp (-n^{\eps}) \right)

4932:   \to 0 . 

4933: \eea

4934: Suppose $\bx$ lies on the lower boundary of  $S_{0,n}$.

4935: Consider the rectangular sub-cell of $\Gamma_i^x$

4936: lying just to the left of the sub-cell directly below

4937: $\bx$ (or the corner sub-cell if that lies just to the left of

4938: the sub-cell directly below $\bx$). 

4939:  All points $\by$ in this sub-cell

4940: satisfy $\by \preccurlyeq^* \bx$, and

4941:  for large $n$, satisfy  $\|\by -\bx\| <

4942: (3/4)n^{\eps-1/2}$, whereas the nearest point to $\bx$

4943: in $B_n$ is at a distance at least $(3/4)n^{\eps -1/2}$.

4944: Arguing similarly for $\bx$ on the left boundary of $S_{0,n}$,

4945: and using the triangle inequality, we see that

4946: if $E_n$ occurs, no point in $S_{0,n}$ can be connected to 

4947: any point in $B_n$,

4948: provided $n$ is sufficiently large.

4949: 

4950:  

4951: 

4952: 

4953: For simplicity of notation, set 

4954: $X_n := \tilde \LL^1 ( \Po_n ; B_n)$

4955: and $Y_n := \tilde \LL^1 ( \Po_n ; S_{0,n})$. 

4956: Also, set

4957:  $X := \tDone^{\{ 1 \}} + \tDone^{\{ 2 \}}$ 

4958: and $Y\sim \NN(0,s_1^2)$, independent of $X$,

4959: with $s_1$ as given in Theorem \ref{CLT}.

4960: We know from 

4961: Theorem \ref{thmbdry} and Theorem \ref{CLT} that

4962: $X_n \tod X$ and $Y_n \tod Y$ as $n \to \infty$.

4963: 

4964: 

4965: 

4966: We need to show that

4967:  $X_n + Y_n \tod X+ Y$, where $X$ and $Y$

4968: are independent random variables.

4969: % By the Cramer-Wold device, it suffices to prove that

4970: %$X_n +Y_n \tod X + Y$ for independent $X, Y$. 

4971: We show this by convergence of the

4972: characteristic function,

4973: \bea \label{0210a}

4974: \Exp { \left[ \exp{ \left( i t (X_n +Y_n ) \right) } \right] }

4975: \longrightarrow \Exp { \left[ \exp{ \left( i t X \right) } \right] }

4976: \Exp { \left[ \exp{ \left( i t Y \right) } \right] }.

4977: \eea

4978: With $\omega$ denoting the configuration of points in

4979: $C_n$, we have

4980: \bean

4981: \Exp \left[ \exp{ \left( it(X_n + Y_n ) \right) } \right]

4982: & = & \int_{E_n} \Exp \left[ \left. e^{itX_n} e^{itY_n}

4983: \right| \omega \right] \ud \Pr (\omega) + \Exp \left[

4984: e^{it(X_n +Y_n)} \1_{ E_n^c } \right] \\

4985: & = & \int_{E_n} \Exp \left[ e^{itX_n}

4986: \right]

4987: \Exp \left[ \left. e^{itY_n}

4988: \right| \omega \right] \ud \Pr (\omega) + \Exp \left[

4989: e^{it(X_n +Y_n)} \1_{ E_n^c } \right] , \eean

4990: where we have used the fact that $X_n$ and $Y_n$ are

4991: conditionally independent, given $\omega \in E_n$, for $n$ sufficiently large,

4992: and that $X_n$ is independent of the configuration in $C_n$. Then

4993: $\Exp [ e^{it(X_n+Y_n)} \1_{ E_n^c } ] \to 0$ 

4994: as $n \to \infty$, since $P[E_n^c]\to 0$.

4995: So 

4996: \[

4997: \Exp \left[ \exp{ \left( it(X_n + Y_n ) \right) } \right]

4998: - \Exp \left[ e^{itX_n} \right] \Exp \left[ e^{itY_n} \1_{E_n} \right] \to 0,

4999: \]

5000: and we obtain (\ref{0210a})

5001: since $\Exp [ e^{itY_n} \1_{E_n} ] = \Exp

5002: [ e^{itY_n} ] - \Exp [ e^{itY_n} \1_{E_n^c} ]$,

5003: $\Exp [ e^{itY_n} \1_{E_n^c} ]\to 0$,

5004: $\Exp[ e^{itX_n}] \to \Exp[

5005: e^{itX}]$, and $\Exp[ e^{itY_n}] \to \Exp[

5006: e^{itY}]$ as $n \to \infty$.

5007: 

5008: We can now prove the first (Poisson) part of (\ref{0727e}). 

5009: We have the $\alpha=1$ case of (\ref{0804b}). 

5010: %The above argument

5011: %deals with the contributions from $S_{0,n}$ and $B_n$. 

5012: The contribution

5013: from $C_n$ converges in probability to 0 by the first part of (\ref{0525aa}).  

5014: Slutsky's theorem and 

5015: (\ref{0210a}) then give the first (Poisson) part of (\ref{0727e}). 

5016: The rooted Poisson case (\ref{0727b}) follows from the rooted version of (\ref{0804b}), this time

5017: applying the argument for (\ref{0210a})

5018: taking $X_n := \tilde \LL^1 (\Po^0_n;B_n)$, $Y_n:= \tilde \LL^1

5019: (\Po^0_n;S_{0,n})$ and $X$, $Y$ as before,

5020: and then using the second part of (\ref{0525aa}) and Slutsky's theorem again. Thus 

5021: we obtain the first (Poisson) part of (\ref{0727b}). \\

5022: 

5023: \noindent \textbf{Proof of Theorem \ref{mainth} for $\alpha = 1$:

5024:  the binomial case.}

5025: It remains for us to 

5026: prove the second part of (\ref{0727b}) and the second 

5027: part of (\ref{0727e}).

5028: To do this, we use the coupling of Lemma \ref{lem0803}

5029: once more. Considering first the unrooted case, 

5030: we here set $X_n :=  \LL^1 (\X_n;B_n)$ and 

5031: $Y_n:= \LL^1 (\X_n;S_{0,n})$.

5032: Set $X'_n := \LL^1 (\Po_n;B_n)$ and 

5033: $Y'_n:=  \LL^1 (\Po_n;S_{0,n})$

5034:  (note that all these random variables are uncentred). 

5035: 

5036: Set $Y \sim \NN(0,s_1^2)$ with $s_1$ as given in Theorem \ref{CLT}. 

5037: Set $X := \tDone^{\{1\}} + \tDone^{\{2\}}$, independent of

5038: $Y$. Then by \eq{0210a} we have (in our new notation)

5039: \bea

5040: X'_n -\Exp X'_n  + Y'_n - \Exp Y'_n \tod X + Y.  

5041: \label{0818}

5042: \eea

5043: By (\ref{0803d}), we have $X_n-X'_n \toP 0$ and $\Exp X_n - \Exp X'_n \to 0$. 

5044: Also, with $\alpha_1 $ as defined in Lemma \ref{depolem},

5045:  eqn (\ref{eqdepo1}) of that result gives us

5046: \bea

5047: Y'_n - Y_n - n^{-1/2}\alpha_1 (N(n)-n)  \inLL 0

5048: \label{0818a}

5049: \eea

5050: so that 

5051:  $\Exp[Y'_n] - \Exp[ Y_n] \to 0$.

5052: Combining these observations with (\ref{0818}), 

5053: and using Slutsky's theorem, we obtain

5054: \bea

5055: X_n -\Exp X_n  + Y_n - \Exp Y_n  + n^{-1/2}\alpha_1 (N(n) -n)  \tod X + Y.  

5056: \label{0818b}

5057: \eea

5058: By Theorem \ref{CLT} (iii) we have $\Var(Y'_n) \to s^2_1$ as $n \to \infty$.

5059: By

5060:  (\ref{0818a}), and the independence of $N(n)$ and $Y_n$, we have

5061: \bea

5062: s^2_1 = \lim_{n \to \infty} \Var[ Y_n + n^{-1/2}\alpha_1(N(n)-n) ]

5063: = \lim_{n \to \infty} ( \Var [Y_n] + \alpha_1^2)  

5064: % Y_n - \Exp Y_n  + n^{-1/2}\alpha_1 (N(n) -n)  \tod  Y  

5065: \label{0818c}

5066: \eea

5067: so that $\alpha_1^2 \leq s_1^2$.   

5068: Also, $ n^{-1/2}\alpha_1( N(n)-n)$ is

5069:  independent of $X_n + Y_n$, and asymptotically $\NN(0,\alpha_1^2)$.

5070: %By considering

5071: Since the $\NN(0,s^2)$  characteristic function is

5072: $\exp(-s^2t^2/2)$, for all $t \in \R$ we obtain 

5073: from \eq{0818b} that 

5074: $$

5075: \Exp[ \exp(it(X_n - \Exp X_n + Y_n  - \Exp Y_n))] \to \exp( -(s_1^2 - \alpha_1^2)t^2/2 ) \Exp [\exp(it X )] 

5076: $$

5077: so that 

5078: \bea

5079: X_n -\Exp X_n  + Y_n - \Exp Y_n   \tod X + W,  

5080: \label{0818d}

5081: \eea

5082: where $W \sim \NN(0,s_1^2 -\alpha_1^2)$, and $W$ is independent of $X$.

5083: 

5084: 

5085: We have the $\alpha=1$ case of 

5086: (\ref{0804h}). 

5087:  By the first part of

5088:   \eq{0525aa} and the first part of (\ref{0525aaa}),

5089: the contribution from $C_n$ tends to zero in probability.

5090:  Hence

5091: by (\ref{0818d}) and Slutsky's theorem,

5092: we obtain

5093:  the second  (binomial) part of (\ref{0727e}). 

5094: 

5095: 

5096: For the rooted case, 

5097: %i.e. for  the second part of (\ref{0727b}), 

5098: we apply the argument for (\ref{0818d}), now

5099: taking $X_n := \LL^1 (\X^0_n;B_n)$, $Y_n:=  \LL^1

5100: (\X^0_n;S_{0,n})$, with $X$, $Y$ and $W$ as before.

5101: % $Y \sim \NN(0,s_1^2)$ as before, but now with $X = \tDone^{\{1\}}  

5102: %+ \tDone^{\{2\}}.$

5103: The rooted case of (\ref{0818}) follows from the rooted 

5104: case of (\ref{0210a}), and now we have

5105:  $X_n-X'_n \toP 0$ and $\Exp X_n - \Exp X'_n \to 0$ by 

5106:  (\ref{0803e}).

5107: In the rooted case (\ref{0818a}) still holds by

5108: (\ref{eqdepo2}),

5109: and then we obtain the rooted case

5110: of (\ref{0818d}) as before. 

5111: 

5112: To obtain  the second (binomial) part of

5113:  (\ref{0727b}), we start with

5114: the rooted version of the $\alpha =1$ case of (\ref{0804h}). 

5115:  By the second part of

5116:   \eq{0525aa} and of (\ref{0525aaa}),

5117: the contribution from $C_n$ tends to zero in probability.

5118:  Hence by the rooted version of (\ref{0818d}) and Slutsky's theorem,

5119: we obtain the second part of (\ref{0727b}). 

5120: 

5121: 

5122:  

5123:  This completes 

5124: the proof of the $\alpha=1$ case,

5125: and hence the proof of Theorem \ref{mainth}

5126:  is complete.

5127: $\square$ \\

5128: 

5129: 

5130: 

5131: \begin{center} \textbf{Acknowledgements} \end{center}

5132: The first author began this work while at the University of

5133: Durham, and was also supported by the Isaac Newton Institute for

5134: Mathematical Sciences, Cambridge. The second author was

5135:  supported by the EPSRC.

5136: 

5137: 

5138: \begin{thebibliography}{99}

5139: \bibitem{avrambertsimas1993} Avram, F.~and Bertsimas, D. (1993)

5140:  On central limit

5141: theorems in geometrical probability, \emph{Ann. Appl. Probab.},

5142: \textbf{3}, 1033--1046.

5143: 

5144: 

5145: 

5146: \bibitem{blp} Bai, Z., Lee, S.~and Penrose, M.~D. (2004) Rooted

5147: edges in a minimal directed spanning tree, preprint.

5148: 

5149: \bibitem{BNS}

5150: Barndorff-Nielsen, O.~and Sobel, M. (1966)

5151: On the distribution of the number of admissible

5152: points in a vector random sample, {\em Theory Probab.

5153: Appl.} {\bf 11}, 249--269.

5154: 

5155: \bibitem{bertoin} Bertoin, J.~and Gnedin, A. (2004)

5156: Asymptotic laws for nonconservative

5157: selfsimilar fragmentations. Preprint, available

5158: from \texttt{arXiv:math.pr/0402227}.

5159:  

5160: \bibitem{boll} Berger, N., Bollob\'as, B., Borgs, C., Chayes,  J., and Riordan, O. (2003)

5161:  Degree distribution

5162: of the FKP model, {\em

5163: Automata, Languages and Programming: 30th International

5164: Colloquium, ICALP 2003, Lecture Notes in Computer

5165: Science 2719}, eds. J.C.M. Baeten, J.K. Lenstra, J. Parrow, and G.J. Woeginger,

5166: Springer, Heidelberg, 725--738.

5167: 

5168: \bibitem{bhattroy2002} Bhatt, A.~G.~and Roy, R. (2004)

5169:  On a random

5170: directed spanning tree, {\em Adv. App. Probab.},

5171: {\bf 36}, 19--42.

5172: 

5173: \bibitem{hoare} Hoare, C.~A.~R. (1961)

5174: Algorithm 64: Quicksort,

5175: {\em Comms. of the ACM},

5176: {\bf 4}, 321.

5177: 

5178: \bibitem{hwang1998} Hwang, H.-K. (1998) Asymptotics of

5179: divide-and-conquer recurrences: Batcher's sorting algorithm

5180: and a minimum Euclidean matching heuristic,

5181: {\em Algorithmica}, {\bf 22}, 529--546.

5182: 

5183: \bibitem{KL} Kesten, H. and Lee, S. (1996) The central limit

5184: theorem for weighted minimal spanning trees on random

5185: points. {\em Ann. Appl. Probab.} {\bf 6} 495-527.

5186: 

5187: \bibitem{kingman}

5188: Kingman, J.~F.~C. (1993) Poisson Processes, {\em Oxford Studies in

5189: Probability}, {\bf 3}, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

5190: 

5191: \bibitem{mcleish} McLeish, D.~L. (1974) Dependent central

5192: limit theorems and invariance principles, {\em

5193: Ann. Probab.}, \textbf{2}, 620--628.

5194: 

5195: \bibitem{Miles}

5196: Miles, R.~E. (1970)

5197: On the homogeneous planar Poisson point process.

5198: {\em Math. Biosci.} {\bf 6}, 85--127.

5199: 

5200: 

5201: \bibitem{neinrusch} Neininger, R.~and R\"uschendorf, L. (2004)

5202: A general limit theorem for recursive algorithms and combinatorial structures,

5203: {\em Ann. App. Probab.}, {\bf 14}, 378--418.

5204: 

5205: \bibitem{penbook} Penrose, M. (2003) Random Geometric Graphs,

5206: \emph{Oxford Studies in Probability}, \textbf{6}, Clarendon Press,

5207: Oxford.

5208: 

5209: \bibitem{mdp} Penrose, M.~D. (2004) Multivariate spatial central limit theorems with applications

5210: to percolation and spatial graphs, preprint available from

5211: \texttt{http://www.maths.bath.ac.uk/MATHEMATICS/preprints.html}

5212: 

5213: \bibitem{rooted} Penrose, M.~D. and Wade, A.~R. (2004) Random

5214:  minimal directed spanning trees and Dickman-type distributions,

5215:  {\em Adv. App. Probab}, {\bf 36}, 691--714.

5216: 

5217: \bibitem{penyuk1} Penrose, M.~D.~and Yukich, J.~E. (2001) Central limit

5218: theorems for some graphs in computational geometry, \emph{Ann.

5219: Appl. Probab.}, \textbf{11}, 1005--1041.

5220: 

5221: \bibitem{penyuk2} Penrose, M.~D.~and Yukich, J.~E. (2003) Weak laws of large

5222: numbers in

5223: geometric probability, \emph{Ann. Appl. Probab.}, \textbf{13}, 277--303.

5224: 

5225: \bibitem{pynorm} Penrose, M.~D.~and Yukich, J.~E. (2004) Normal approximation

5226: in geometric probability, preprint.

5227: 

5228: \bibitem{rodriguez} Rodriguez-Iturbe, I.~and Rinaldo, A. (1997) Fractal

5229: River Basins: Chance and Self-Organization,

5230: Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

5231: 

5232: \bibitem{rosler0} 

5233:  R\"osler, U. (1992) A fixed point theorem for distributions, 

5234: {\em Stochastic Process. Appl.} {\bf 42}, 195--214.

5235: 

5236: \bibitem{rosler} R\"osler, U.~and R\"uschendorf, L. (2001)

5237: The contraction method for recursive algorithms, {\em

5238: Algorithmica}, {\bf 29}, 3--33.

5239: 

5240: \bibitem{SY}

5241:  Sepp\"al\"ainen, T. and Yukich, J. E. (2001)  

5242:  Large deviation principles for Euclidean

5243:  functionals and other nearly additive processes, 

5244: {\em Probability Theory and Related Fields} \textbf{120}, 309-345.

5245: 

5246: 

5247: 

5248: 

5249: \bibitem{steelebook} Steele, J.~M. (1997) Probability Theory and Combinatorial

5250: Optimization, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics,

5251: Philadelphia.

5252: \bibitem{yukbook} Yukich, J.~E. (1998) Probability Theory of Classical

5253: Euclidean Optimization Problems, \emph{Lecture Notes in

5254: Mathematics}, \textbf{1675}, Springer, Berlin.

5255: 

5256: \end{thebibliography}

5257: 

5258: \end{document}

5259: 

5260: 

5261: 

5262: 

5263: 

5264: