Instruction: Write an abstract for the following acadamic paper.

Input:
Paper: we have recorded the flight of a fly during take off and landing using digital high speed photography . it is shown that the dynamics of flexible wings are different for these procedures . during this observation fly flew freely in a big box and it was not tethered .
Abstract: in this fluid dynamics video , we demonstrated take off and landing of a fly . the deformation of wings is in focus in this video .

Paper: wireless networks are ubiquitous and are on their way to become even more prevalent , e.g. , with the advent of internet - of - things . wireless communication is , however , particularly challenging to model algorithmically . in two crucial interrelated aspects , wireless networks on the ground differ from models typically assumed in algorithmic studies . one is the _ communication modeling _ : when is a transmission successfully decoded , as a function of the environment and the _ interference _ from other transmissions . the other is _ variability with time _ : wireless networks are particularly susceptible to changes . both of these are hard to capture accurately with well - defined , clear - cut rules . we aim in this paper to address core information dissemination problems  _ local broadcast _ and ( global ) _ broadcast _  in dynamic distributed networks , under very weak assumptions on the communication . to this end , we propose a communication model with significant flexibility that allows for adversarial control , generalizing essentially all known analytic wireless models . it allows for more general interference relationships than treated before . the network can experience adversarial dynamic behavior , both edge changes ( change of signal strengths ) and node insertions / deletions . wireless communication has traditionally been modeled theoretically by graphs , either geometric or general . interference is then also transmitted on graph edges ( precluding a node from receiving a message from a neighbor if another neighbor is transmitting ) , but is sometimes represented by a supergraph . _ fading channel _ or _ physical _ models common in communication engineering , on the other hand , consider interference as cumulative , decreasing with distance but adding up . they have been popular in recent algorithmic studies , adding more realism to the formulation . the standard assumption of _ geometric signal decay _ ( that signal decreases inverse polynomially with distance ) in the sinr model , the prototypical fading channel , is though equally at odds with experimental evidence . ultimately , it may prove futile to hope for a clean deterministic model , or even a purely stochastic one , without a significant dose of unpredictability and non - determinism . wireless communication is commonly closely linked to mobility , as the transceivers are more often than not on the move . dynamic changes to reception conditions have many causes other than node mobility , since almost any changes in the environment affect transmissions due to reflections of signals over multiple paths , antenna characteristics , scattering , and diffraction . these changes are by nature hard to predict , even when assuming a `` mobility model '' . the most robust approach would then be to assume a non - trivial adversarial component . while the study of algorithms in dynamic networks has a long history , little has been done in cases where interference plays a role . * setting and model*.   nodes are distributed and autonomous . there is no built - in structure and the nodes have no information besides bounds on model parameters and an upper bound on the number of nodes . communication is locally synchronous , but there is no global clock . we will assume a very general model for when nodes successfully communicate . nodes are located in space , with separation between points given by the relative decrease in strength of signal ( or interference ) sent between the points . this induces a metric space , when these decays are raised to the appropriate power  actually , it is a _ quasi - metric _ , since symmetry need not hold . for distributed computation to be possible , the quasi - metric must have _ bounded independence _ ( to be defined precisely ) . _ edge changes _ can occur , with some restrictions , which are changes in the signal strength between the pair of points . the rule for when communication is successful is only partially pre - specified : transmission succeeds on a `` clear channel '' . that is , if a sender is within a _ communication radius _ from the receiver , if no other node transmits within a ( larger ) radius , and if the combined interference from all other transmitting nodes is ( quite ) small , then the transmission succeeds . otherwise , success is up to the adversary , or it can be further specified by the particular model assumptions desired . this captures essentially all known algorithmic wireless models ( including quasi - unit disc graphs , unit - ball graphs , bounded - independence graphs , @xmath0-hop extensions , and sinr ) . the only exception is the radio network model with general graphs , which can not be extended to involve comprehensive interference without a major hit in time complexity . the generality of our model is a key feature . given the vagaries of actual wireless environments , it is preferable for robustness reasons to make minimal assumptions about the communication model . a conservative approach is then to seek algorithms that work in most established models rather than depending on model - specific factors that simplify the life of the algorithm designer . [ [ dynamic - network - model ] ] dynamic network model + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +    the network is dynamic , both in terms of nodes and links . nodes can come and go , potentially adversarially . this includes the situation where nodes are wakened by other nodes . we only expect nodes that have been awake for long enough ( logarithmic number of rounds ) to participate in the computation , i.e. , the _ stable _ nodes .    in the _ local broadcast _ problem , all stable nodes should inform all of their ( stable ) neighbors ( i.e. , within the communication radius ) . in the _ broadcast _ problem , the nodes in the network are to be informed of a message that initially resides at a source node . the network need not be connected at any instant in time , but we need to make assumptions about what transient paths are usable by an algorithm operating under interference . this leads to a definition of a _ dynamic diameter _ of the network , that becomes the competitive objective for the time complexity . * our approach and results*.   the key algorithmic technique is a natural randomized _ contention balancing _ procedure , where a node continuously adjusts its transmission probability based on the interference that it senses . it allows nodes to stabilize quickly from any initial conditions , or after waking up . this routine is a variation on an old story , a simple backoff procedure to manage local contention :    _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ if a node @xmath1 senses contention in a given round beyond a fixed threshold , then @xmath1 halves its transmission probability in the next round and otherwise doubles it . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _    our main technical contribution is to show logarithmic - round convergence of this method to a steady state of nearly balanced contention , from an arbitrary starting configuration and in the presence of network changes . it proves also to be surprisingly tolerant of different communication models . the higher level algorithms are then built on top of this primitive . a crucial component is the use of _ carrier sense _ to detect the cumulative amount of signals in the air . since it is supplied by the cheapest available hardware today as rss ( received signal strength ) readings , we posit that carrier - sense capability should be the default assumption in wireless algorithmics ( while exploring the necessity of different assumptions is interesting theoretically ) . as carrier - sense indicators can provide fine - grained information , we are interested in restraining its use and identifying which aspects are necessary to achieve the results obtained . to this end , we identify several _ primitives _ that carrier - sense can supply , restrict the algorithm to use only a subset of the primitives , and examine which of these are truly necessary . the local broadcast algorithm simply runs the contention balancing procedure , with nodes bowing out when they are sure to have completed their transmission . the broadcast algorithms are based on sparsifying the instance , so that only nodes of constant density actually participate in the global broadcast action . the former is achieved in @xmath2 time , where @xmath3 is the maximum number of neighbors that a node can have , while the latter takes @xmath4 rounds , where @xmath5 is a dynamic diameter . these dissemination algorithms are efficient enough to improve on some of the results known for static versions of the problems . the local broadcast algorithm is strongly optimal , or within constant factors on every instance . in the standard setting ( static , spontaneous case ) , the algorithm is _ uniform _ , in that it need not know the network size . the broadcast algorithm is also optimal and uniform in the same setting , while in the non - spontaneous setting it is faster by a logarithmic factor than the previous algorithm of @xcite that however does not require carrier sense . * closely related work*.   there are two largely disjoint bodies of work of wireless algorithmic results , with work on fading models like sinr slowly catching up with the better studied graph - based models . one approach for capturing more realism in sinr model is to move beyond euclidean metrics @xcite , even to general ones @xcite . one can view relative signal decrease as implicitly defining a quasi - distance metric @xcite . link scheduling problems can be formulated on edge - weighted interference graphs @xcite that properly generalize both graph - based and sinr models , linked by a graph - theoretic parameter . distributed dissemination problems , however , necessarily require metric restrictions , such as doubling or _ fading _ metrics @xcite , and limits on communication abilities in order to capture both types of models . the local broadcast and global broadcast problems have been extensively studied in both graph - based radio network models  @xcite and the sinr model  @xcite . for local broadcast , the best results known in the radio network model are both @xmath6 with and without knowing ( an upper bound on ) @xmath3  @xcite . in the sinr model , with knowledge of @xmath3 , the local broadcast can be accomplished in the same time bound as in the radio network model @xcite . if @xmath3 is not known , the best result is @xmath7  @xcite , which is improved to @xmath2 with free acknowledgments @xcite . this can be further improved to @xmath8 in the spontaneous case , when @xmath3 is known  @xcite . the time complexity of non - spontaneous broadcasting in the radio network model is @xmath9  @xcite without collision detection . with collision detection , this lower bound was recently broken in  @xcite , where a solution of @xmath10 was given . broadcasting has also been treated in the sinr model under a variety of assumptions . some are stronger than ours ( location information @xcite , power control @xcite ) , while others relax the assumption about the connectivity property , incurring necessarily much higher complexity @xcite . results in our setting , but without carrier sensing , include time complexity of @xmath11 @xcite ( see also @xcite ) , where @xmath12 denotes the maximum ratio between distances of stations connected in the communication graph ; and @xmath13 @xcite . in the spontaneous setting , where the nodes can build an overlay structure along which the message is then propagated , scheideler et al . @xcite used carrier sense to give a dominator algorithms , which can be applied to solve broadcast in @xmath14 rounds . yu et al . @xcite solved the problem in the same time bound using power control , while the algorithm in  @xcite that requires neither power control nor carrier sense runs in time @xmath15 . these problems have also been treated in dynamic networks . in the _ unstructured _ model @xcite , where nodes may wake up asynchronously ( modeling the node insertion ) , the local broadcast problem is well studied , even in the sinr setting  @xcite , but this model does not consider node deletion . in the _ dual graph _ model  @xcite ( originally due to @xcite ) , both the local broadcast  @xcite and global broadcast  @xcite problems are studied . but this model involves only edge behavior and not node changes ( churn ) . hence , the impact of dynamicity on wireless information dissemination is still largely unexplored . considering wireless interference , there are two classes of wireless network models : graph - based and physical models . basically , the graph - based models define a local and binary type of interference , while the physical models consider fading effect of signal on wireless channels . there are many widely used graph - based models , such as the unit disc graph ( udg ) model  @xcite ( unit ball graph ( ubg ) model  @xcite ) , the quasi unit disc graph ( qudg ) model  @xcite , the protocol model  @xcite , the bounded - independence graph ( big ) model  @xcite and the @xmath0-hop variants of the above models  @xcite . physical models , also known as sinr models  @xcite , capture the missing practical issues in wireless interference , such as fading and cumulativeness of wireless interference . most of current works in the sinr model focus on networks embedded in euclidean space , while many of the results hold also for doubling or `` bounded growth '' metrics @xcite . those doubling metrics constrain growth at every ( or arbitrarily small ) granularity , while ours only bounds regions proportional to the transmission range , in particular capturing bounded independence graphs ( big ) . all above models are included by our proposed communication model as shown in sec . [ sec : primitiveproofs ] . for more on wireless models , please refer to  @xcite . more detailed related work is introduced in sec . [ drw ] .    * our contributions*. we have obtained generalized and improved algorithms for two of the most fundamental dissemination problems , in some cases improving the best results known in static settings . beyond these specific results , we identify the following technical contributions :    _ unified model of wireless networks_. the model proposed appears to be the first that allows for the development of pan - model distributed dissemination algorithms . this hopefully prompts further studies crossing the artificial boundary between graph- and fading - based models . _ dynamic networks under interference_. this appears to be the first work to address dynamic networks in the presence of comprehensive interference . _ uniform algorithms_. our algorithms in the static spontaneous setting appear to be the first in fading models that work independent of instance parameters ( number of nodes , max .  degree ) .    _ primitives for carrier - sense . _ we introduce several primitives or _ capabilities _ that can be implemented using environmental sensing , and propose to study the power of such primitives .    _ stabilization mechanisms . _ we identify contention adaptation as a fundamental ability in wireless networks , that appears to be of crucial value to implement other distributed tasks . * roadmap*.   the formal model and basic definitions , including the definitions of communication model and carrier sensing primitives , are given in sec . [ sec : model ] . [ sec : balancingcontention ] contains the core technical part of the paper that includes the basic contention balance routine and its analysis . the main results concerning local and global broadcast problems are presented in sections  [ sec : localbroadcast ] and  [ sec : broadcast ] , respectively . due to space constraints , most proofs are relegated to appendices . we consider a dynamic network of point - size wireless devices ( nodes ) . nodes can transmit messages in time slots / rounds that are sufficiently long to allow a transmission of a single message . no global clock or synchronization of rounds is required , but the clocks of different nodes run at a similar rate , i.e. , the length of a round differs between nodes at most by a factor of 2 . nodes may arrive and leave the network at any time . unless specified otherwise , the nodes are assumed to work _ non - spontaneously _ : they can initially be in sleep state and join the execution of an algorithm only after receiving a message . we say a node is _ alive _ at some point in time if it is present in the network . we assume the total number of nodes in the network is polynomially bounded by a number @xmath16 in each round . we use @xmath17 to denote the set of alive nodes at any fixed point in time and also use @xmath16 to denote the current number of nodes , i.e. @xmath18 . we assume all nodes use the same transmission power @xmath19 for communication in all rounds .    _ metrics_.   the _ signal strength _  or _ interference _ , depending on context  of transmitting node @xmath20 on a node @xmath1 is @xmath21 , where @xmath22 is the _ path loss _ from @xmath20 to @xmath1 . the _ metricity _ of a space @xmath23 is the smallest number @xmath24 such that for every triplet @xmath25 , @xmath26 @xcite . we define @xmath27 if @xmath20 and @xmath1 are different nodes and @xmath28 when @xmath29 . note that @xmath30 is a _ quasi - metric _ , as all metric axioms except symmetry hold . in the rest of the paper , we assume that in each round the metricity of the network is bounded by a fixed constant @xmath24 and will work with values @xmath31 instead of @xmath32 . we assume the quasi - metric @xmath30 has _ bounded independence _ , defined below , roughly stating that there can not be many nodes each causing high interference to a _ fixed _ node , while having low mutual interferences . first , some notations . the _ ball _ with radius @xmath33 centered at @xmath20 is defined as @xmath34 . the _ in - ball _ with radius @xmath33 centered at @xmath20 is defined as @xmath35 ; clearly , @xmath36 . a set @xmath37 is a @xmath33-_packing _ for set @xmath38 if balls of radius @xmath33 centered at nodes in @xmath39 are contained in @xmath38 and are disjoint . @xmath39 is a @xmath40-_cover _ for @xmath38 if the union of balls of radius @xmath40 centered at nodes in @xmath39 contains @xmath38 . note that any maximal @xmath33-packing is a @xmath41-cover , and thus one can bound sizes of covers by packings . we say that @xmath30 has @xmath42-_bounded independence _ , for given @xmath43 and @xmath44 , if for every @xmath45 and every in - ball @xmath46 of radius @xmath47 , the size of a maximum cardinality @xmath48-packing of @xmath46 is at most @xmath49 , where @xmath50 is a constant , possibly depending on @xmath51 . for instance , the euclidean plane is @xmath52-bounded independent , for every @xmath33 . _ neighborhoods , communication graph and dissemination problems_.   let @xmath53 denote the maximum transmission distance possible when no other node transmits . as the latter event is arguably very rare , we define the _ communication radius _ @xmath54 as a slightly smaller distance , where @xmath55 is a _ precision _ parameter . we will drop the parameter @xmath55 whenever it is fixed and clear from the context . fix a round @xmath56 . the _ neighborhood _ of a node is @xmath57 , describing who @xmath20 can communicate with directly . the basic operation of interest is when @xmath20 broadcasts a message to its neighbors @xmath58 . the _ communication graph _ is a directed graph @xmath59 , where @xmath60 if and only if @xmath61 . thus , the sequence @xmath62 defines a _ dynamic graph_. the _ vicinity _ of @xmath20 refers to a larger region , @xmath63 , for a parameter @xmath64 . the data dissemination problems that we consider are defined below . we say that a node @xmath20 _ mass - delivers _ in round @xmath56 if it transmits and all its neighbors ( @xmath58 ) receive the message .    in the _ local broadcast _ problem , given a node @xmath20 , it is required to minimize the time from the beginning of the algorithm until node @xmath20 mass - delivers at least once , assuming it stays alive during that time .    in the _ ( global ) broadcast _ problem , given a distinguished _ source _ node that initially holds a message , the goal is to minimize the time needed to deliver the message to every node in the network through multihop transmissions . _ one hop communication_.   when is a transmission successfully received ? suppose a node @xmath20 transmits in round @xmath56 , and let @xmath39 be the set of concurrently transmitting nodes . let @xmath65 and @xmath66 be parameters that depend on the precision @xmath55 . ( , success on a clear channel ) if no other node in @xmath67 transmits _ and _ the total interference at node @xmath20 is at most @xmath68 ( i.e. @xmath69 and @xmath70 ) , then the transmission of node @xmath20 is successfully received by _ all _ its neighbors ( @xmath58 ) . otherwise , the reception is under adversarial control .    _ randomized algorithms_.   we mainly consider randomized algorithms of the following form : in each round @xmath56 , node @xmath1 makes a transmission with probability @xmath71 , independent of other nodes transmissions in that round . an important notion for the analysis of such algorithms is _ local contention _ , the sum of the transmission probabilities in a close region . the contention in the _ close neighborhood _ of a node @xmath1 in round @xmath56 is @xmath72 , where the radius @xmath73 allows all pair of nodes in @xmath74 to potentially communicate . also , let @xmath75 denote the contention in the larger _ vicinity _ of @xmath1 in round @xmath56 ( @xmath76 will be fixed later ) . we will also use the notation @xmath77 to denote the interference at @xmath1 from nodes outside its vicinity ( in @xmath78 ) in round @xmath56 . the expected value of @xmath77 is @xmath79 .    _ sensing primitives_.   we assume the nodes have abilities to sense activity on the channel . namely , we assume the nodes are able to detect high and low contention in their vicinity , detect ( under some conditions ) whether their transmission in a given round succeeded and detect a single very near transmission . in the following , we formalize these notions in three primitives : , and . we show in sec . [ sec : primitiveproofs ] how _ all _ these primitives can be implemented with _ basic _ physical carrier sensing and possibly also with other means . ( ) . contention can be probabilistically deduced from measured level of radio activity . we want to relax this ability and will use the following variant , where the outcome of is one of the two values : busy or idle channel . formally , for each node @xmath1 and round @xmath56 :    if contention among close neighbors is high ( @xmath80 ) then they _ all _ detect busy channel in round @xmath56 with probability at least @xmath81 , for given @xmath82 , where @xmath83 is a constant ,    if the contention in the vicinity of @xmath1 is low ( @xmath84 ) _ and _ the interference on @xmath1 from outside its vicinity is above a threshold ( @xmath85 ) then @xmath1 detects idle channel in round @xmath56 with probability at least @xmath86 , for given @xmath87 , where @xmath88 and @xmath89 are constants . if a node @xmath20 has the = ( @xmath55 ) primitive ( depending on the precision parameter @xmath55 ) then : if @xmath20 transmits in round @xmath56 , the interference at @xmath20 is bounded by @xmath90 and the transmission is received by all nodes in @xmath91 , then the outcome of is 1 , where @xmath90 is a parameter . if the transmission is not received by a node @xmath92 then the outcome is @xmath93 . otherwise , the outcome is @xmath93 or @xmath94 , adversarially . ( ) . with = ( @xmath55 ) primitive , a node is able to detect if a transmitter is very close , assuming that it receives the transmitted message . the outcome of is @xmath94 for node @xmath1 in round @xmath56 if @xmath1 _ receives _ a transmission from a node @xmath20 , @xmath95 . otherwise , the outcome of is @xmath93 . this can also be made approximate .    _ dynamicity_.   we consider a dynamic network where the topology may change adversarially in each round due to node churn ( node arrivals / departures ) and edge changes . we assume that arriving nodes start running the algorithms from an initial configuration , so we do not limit the rate of churn . with edge changes , existing nodes that were not neighbors before , may become neighbors ( e.g. due to mobility ) . the new neighbors may cause too much interference in a too short time , so the edge changes should be limited . we assume the amount of edge changes is bounded for each node @xmath1 , as follows . consider a time interval @xmath96 of length @xmath97 . we require that the number of new neighbors of @xmath1 during @xmath96 ( not counting churn ) is bounded by @xmath98 , where @xmath99 denotes the number of rounds in @xmath96 and @xmath100 is a constant , to be fixed later . we further assume the fraction of rounds in @xmath96 when there are more than @xmath101 new neighbors of @xmath1 is bounded by @xmath102 for every @xmath103 , where @xmath104 . note that there is no restriction on distance changes inside the neighborhood of @xmath1 ( e.g. it is fine for node @xmath1 if its neighbors move , as far as they remain neighbors ) . note that the edge changes may affect the underlying metric , but we require that the upper bounds on metricity and independence are maintained .    _ requirements and assumptions_.   for the convenience of the reader , we gather together all of our assumptions and requirements in a single place . communication is assumed to succeed in a clear channel ( ) . we assume constant metricity @xmath105 and that @xmath30 has @xmath42-bounded independence with @xmath106 . for the local broadcast problem , we assume that @xmath107 , and for the broadcast problem that @xmath108 . as is standard in fading models , the communication radius @xmath109 is necessarily an @xmath110-fraction of the maximum transmission distance in a clear channel . besides the knowledge required by the primitives that are needed for a particular algorithm , the nodes are assumed to know the precision parameter @xmath55 . a polynomial estimate on the number of nodes , @xmath16 , is needed in dynamic and non - spontaneous algorithms , but not in the static spontaneous problems . knowledge of approximations of model parameters are needed to implement primitives , including @xmath111 , @xmath105 , @xmath53 , @xmath112 , and @xmath68 . knowledge of the maximum degree @xmath3 is not needed . synchronous operation is only assumed in the broadcast algorithm . aspects not defined or constrained are assumed to be under ( adaptive ) adversarial control , including when transmissions that fail are successful , or when nodes appear or disappear from the network . the extent of increases in edge strengths over a period is restricted , as detailed above , while decreases are not and neither are node changes . the dissemination problems are only expected to function with the set of nodes that are sufficiently stable , as detailed in the respective section . in order to keep the contention in the network balanced , we propose a basic procedure called try&adjust , which will be the main building block in our algorithms . the idea is to let each node adapt its transmission probability to the contention detected using the assumed primitive . the parameter @xmath113 describes the passiveness of the newly arriving nodes .    _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ try&adjust(@xmath114 ) : each node @xmath1 maintains transmission probability @xmath115 in each round @xmath56 , initialized as @xmath116 when @xmath1 enters the network . in round @xmath117 , @xmath1 does : + 1 . transmit with probability @xmath71 , and + 2 . set @xmath118 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _    the aim for controlling contention is , of course , to ensure that transmissions made have a fair chance of being successful , which means they sufficiently overpower the interference experienced at intended receiver from all other transmissions made in that round . we account for this interference in two ways : the _ contention _ captures the expected interference from the nodes neighbors , while the _ interference _ integrates also the interference from nodes further away . we will measure the contention in the _ vicinity _ of each node @xmath1 , i.e. in @xmath119 , where @xmath76 is a large enough constant . we specify a threshold @xmath120 ( recall @xmath121 from definition ) for measuring contention : if @xmath122 then round @xmath56 is a _ high contention round _ for node @xmath1 and is a _ low contention round _ , otherwise . we further specify a threshold @xmath123 for interference : if @xmath124 then round @xmath56 is a _ high interference round _ for @xmath1 and is _ low interference round _ , otherwise . these thresholds are chosen so as to ensure that in a low - contention / interference round , node @xmath1 will be likely to succeed if it transmits . however , requiring all or most rounds to be low contention for all nodes will lead to high delays instead , it turns out that most rounds will have _ bounded contention _ and low interference , which allows for good progress ; we say node @xmath1 experiences _ bounded contention _ in round @xmath56 if @xmath125 , where @xmath126 is a large enough constant , to be specified later . we say that a round @xmath56 is _ good _ for node @xmath1 if @xmath56 is both bounded contention and low interference round ( in which case , some node in @xmath1 s vicinity has a good chance of successfully transmitting ) . we analyze the properties of try&adjust using the notion of _ a phase _ , the shortest time in which at least @xmath127 rounds occur for all nodes , where @xmath128 is sufficiently large ( given in prop . [ pr : pgoodroundl ] ) . we use @xmath129 to denote a general phase and also the set of rounds in that phase . @xmath130 denotes the number of rounds in a phase @xmath129 ( i.e. @xmath131 ) . the fundamental property of try&adjust ( prop . [ pr : pgoodroundl ] ) is that , for each node and each phase , most of the rounds in the phase are good for that node . this property is then used to show that :    if most of the good rounds in a phase have low contention , then node @xmath1 detects idle channel in most of those rounds .    otherwise , during a constant fraction of the rounds , a node in the vicinity of @xmath1 mass - delivers .    by choosing the parameters carefully , i.e.  requiring _ low enough _ contention , we can make sure that during a phase with mostly low contention , the node detects idle channel in _ most of the rounds _ ( more than half ) in a phase , thus leading to an increase of transmission probability by the end of the phase , which , after sufficiently many phases ensures message delivery , w.h.p . on the other hand , during a phase with mostly high contention , there will be many nodes in the vicinity of @xmath1 that successfully transmit , leading to lower contention . these ideas are applied in thms . [ thm : localbroadcast ] and  [ thm : broadcast ] . the core idea behind this analysis is based on  @xcite . [ pr : pgoodroundl ] let @xmath132 . if constants @xmath133 and @xmath134 are large enough then for each node @xmath1 and phase @xmath129 , with probability @xmath135 , a @xmath136-fraction of the rounds in @xmath129 are good .    the proof is rather technical and is deferred to sec .  [ sec : contentiondetails ] but the intuition is as follows . the contention in each neighborhood must be bounded most of the time , because when it becomes large , it has a high chance of being decreased due to busy channel . moreover , we show that in expectation , the contention in _ all _ local neighborhoods is bounded , which is then combined with a geometric argument to show that the expected interference at each node is low most of the time . we derive from the fundamental property two useful propositions . the first says that if contention is high , then nodes in the vicinity deliver the message . [ pr : pdecrease ] assume that constants @xmath137 are large enough . for each node @xmath1 and phase @xmath129 , if at least @xmath138-fraction of the rounds of @xmath129 are of high contention , then @xmath139 nodes in @xmath140 mass - deliver , with probability @xmath135 .    to this end , we first show that if a round is good for node @xmath20 and a node in its vicinity transmits , then it mass - delivers with constant probability , utilizing both metric assumptions and the properties of good rounds . we then argue that since most rounds are good ( by prop . [ pr : pgoodroundl ] ) and most rounds have by assumption sufficient contention , many rounds will be both good and with sufficient contention , and in each of those , a node in the vicinity of @xmath1 is likely to transmit and succeed . when contention is low in a lot of rounds of a phase , the node will detect idle channel by the primitive in many rounds . this will actually happen during many good rounds , which have the low local contention and low external interference to allow for this detection . [ pr : idle ] assume that @xmath137 are large enough . for each node @xmath1 and phase @xmath129 , if at least @xmath141-fraction of the rounds of @xmath129 are low contention rounds , then with probability @xmath135 , in at least @xmath142-fraction of the rounds of @xmath129 , @xmath1 will detect idle channel and have low contention and low interference . we propose an algorithm for asynchronous local broadcast in dynamic networks . the algorithm is an extension of the try&adjust procedure , where the nodes try to balance the contention in the network and stop transmitting as soon as they deliver their message . we assume the nodes are powered with and primitives . note that the passiveness parameter is set to @xmath143 , which means that the transmission probability of nodes does not get below @xmath144 . localbcast : each node @xmath1 executes try&adjust(1 ) with the following additional step : if @xmath1 transmits and detects , it stops ( i.e. @xmath145 for @xmath146 ) .    we will estimate the performance of the algorithm using the notion of _ dynamic degree _ , defined as follows . given a parameter @xmath147 , we denote @xmath148 for node @xmath1 and rounds @xmath149 with @xmath150 , where @xmath151 denotes the in - ball @xmath119 in round @xmath33 .    below we prove that if there are not too many node insertions in the neighborhood of a node @xmath1 , then @xmath1 mass - delivers ( delivers to all its neighbors ) in time comparable to its dynamic degree with @xmath76 a constant . the main tools for proving the bound are props . [ pr : pdecrease ] and  [ pr : idle ] . first we argue that if there is a phase of mostly low contention , then node @xmath1 will deliver its message , w.h.p . then we show that if the insertions are not too intensive then the contention around @xmath1 will decrease and a phase with mostly low contention will happen . [ thm : localbroadcast ] there is a constant @xmath147 , such that a node @xmath1 performing localbcast asynchronously in a time interval @xmath152 $ ] with @xmath153 mass - delivers , w.h.p . , provided that @xmath154 . note that the assumption @xmath154 is needed only for making the claim w.h.p . : it can be relaxed to higher degree polynomials by only increasing constant factors . let us fix constants @xmath155 so that props . [ pr : pdecrease ] and  [ pr : idle ] with @xmath156 . we partition @xmath96 into phases ( for node @xmath1 ) and classify them into two types : ( type a ) phases @xmath129 where at least @xmath138-fraction of rounds are high contention rounds ( i.e. @xmath157 ) , and ( type b ) phases @xmath129 where at least @xmath141-fraction of rounds are low contention rounds ( i.e. @xmath158 ) . node @xmath1 mass - delivers in a type b phase , w.h.p . let @xmath159 be the low contention and interference rounds during phase @xmath129 where @xmath1 detects idle channel . by prop . [ pr : idle ] @xmath160 > 1-o(n^{-3})$ ] . assume for now that the latter happens . for each @xmath161 we have @xmath162 . let us call this operation doubling . the value of @xmath71 at the beginning of the phase is at least @xmath144 , so @xmath163 doubling operations are sufficient to raise it to @xmath164 . the probability can be further halved during the phase at most @xmath165 times . thus , we may assume we have at most @xmath166 halving and at least @xmath167 doubling operations applied to an initial value @xmath164 . if @xmath168 , then the total number of halving operations is less than @xmath169 . it follows that @xmath1 has @xmath170 in at least @xmath171 low contention / interference rounds . by lemma  [ le : broadgood ] , in each such round , @xmath1 mass - delivers with probability at least @xmath172 ; hence , if @xmath128 is large enough , @xmath1 mass - delivers in @xmath129 , w.h.p . it remains to argue that there will be a type b phase during time interval @xmath96 . consider a type a phase @xmath129 . [ pr : pdecrease ] implies that with probability @xmath135 , @xmath173 nodes in @xmath119 deliver their message and stop during phase @xmath129 . thus , with probability @xmath174 , there are at most @xmath175 type a phases with @xmath176 a constant , as there are at most @xmath177 nodes in @xmath140 during the time interval @xmath96 ( also recall that @xmath178 ) . we conclude that if @xmath96 consists of at least @xmath179 phases , it will contain a type b phase and @xmath1 will deliver its message w.h.p . * implications for static networks*.   in static networks , the parameter @xmath177 is at most @xmath180 if @xmath76 is constant , where @xmath181 is the maximum size of a neighborhood in the network . thus , we obtain the following optimal result ( up to constant factors ) for static networks , as @xmath3 and @xmath163 are lower bounds even when running in the spontaneous mode  @xcite . when running localbcast in a static asynchronous network , each node @xmath1 completes local broadcast in @xmath182 rounds , w.h.p .    * remark . * in the special case when the nodes can start executing the algorithm simultaneously , i.e. in the _ spontaneous mode _ , the nodes need not know an upper bound on the size of the network . indeed , each node may start running try&adjust with initial probability set to an arbitrary value and with no lower limit . the first phase will be spent for stabilization and can be ignored , while the argument for the rest of the phases is nearly identical to the one in thm . [ thm : localbroadcast ] . for the broadcast problem , we assume nodes communicate in synchronized rounds of equal length . each round consists of two slots . the idea is to use the first slot of each round for disseminating the message with try&adjust and the second slot for notifying nodes which have no uninformed neighbors . the latter is accomplished by using higher precision primitives , namely ( @xmath183 ) and ( @xmath183 ) , when executing try&adjust . this helps to detect a transmission that is successfully received by all nodes in @xmath184 of a node @xmath1 . upon detecting such a transmission , node @xmath1 resends the message in the second slot , in order to inform nodes @xmath20 with @xmath185 that their neighborhood ( @xmath186 ) has been covered . a node @xmath20 can detect that @xmath185 using . the algorithm is presented below . we assume the passiveness parameter @xmath114 of try&adjust is large enough , to be defined later . note that the algorithm works for the non - spontaneous mode , as nodes act only after receiving the message . bcast(@xmath114 ) : initially , only a source node @xmath187 has the message . a node @xmath1 , upon receiving a message , starts executing try&adjust(@xmath114 ) in the first slot of rounds . in addition , in each round @xmath56 , + 1 . if @xmath1 detects in the first slot , it retransmits in the second slot and restarts try&adjust(@xmath114 ) , + 2 . if @xmath1 receives a message in the first slot and detects in the second slot , it restarts try&adjust(@xmath114 ) .    in order to evaluate the progress of the algorithm , we use a notion of a _ dynamic distance _ , as defined below . let @xmath188 be a parameter . a sequence @xmath189 is called a _ stable @xmath187-@xmath1 path _ if there is a sequence @xmath190 of time intervals with @xmath191 $ ] , such that @xmath192 , @xmath193 and nodes @xmath194 and @xmath195 are both alive and @xmath196 during @xmath197 . the _ time - length _ of a stable @xmath187-@xmath1 path is @xmath198 . the _ stable @xmath187-@xmath1 distance _ @xmath199 is defined as the minimum time - length of a stable @xmath187-@xmath1 path . note that a stable path need not be connected at any fixed point in time . moreover , most of the nodes might be missing at any given point in time . the core idea behind the analysis of the following theorem is similar to the case of local broadcast : we show that as soon as a neighbor @xmath20 of a node @xmath1 has the message and @xmath20 and @xmath1 keep being neighbors for @xmath200 rounds , @xmath1 will receive a transmission of @xmath20 during those rounds . [ thm : broadcast ] assume the edge change rate @xmath100 is sufficiently small . there are constants @xmath201 , such that when running bcast(@xmath114 ) in the synchronous mode , each node @xmath1 receives the message in @xmath202 rounds w.h.p . let us fix constants @xmath155 so that props . [ pr : pdecrease ] and  [ pr : idle ] hold with interference threshold @xmath203 , where @xmath204 and @xmath205 are the parameters corresponding to precision @xmath183 . we set the passiveness parameter of try&adjust to @xmath206 and the stable distance parameter @xmath207 . consider a node @xmath20 that receives the message in round @xmath56 . let @xmath1 be such that @xmath208 in the time interval @xmath209 $ ] ( and both stay alive during @xmath96 ) . the theorem follows by an induction and union bound from the claim below . node @xmath1 gets the message of @xmath20 during @xmath96 , with probability @xmath210 . we prove the claim by contradiction , and assume that @xmath1 can not get the message during @xmath96 . let us split @xmath96 into phases ( for @xmath20 ) and , similar to the proof of thm . [ thm : localbroadcast ] , classify the phases @xmath129 into types : ( type a ) at least @xmath138-th of rounds in @xmath129 are high contention rounds for @xmath20  @xmath211 , and ( type b ) at least @xmath141-th of rounds in @xmath129 are low contention rounds for @xmath20  @xmath212 . we show that with probability @xmath135 , all phases in @xmath96 are of type b. consider a type a phase @xmath129 . we know from prop . [ pr : pdecrease ] that , with probability @xmath135 , there is a set @xmath39 of @xmath139 nodes in @xmath140 that deliver their messages and restart try&adjust during @xmath129 . we split @xmath39 into three subsets , @xmath213  those inserted by churn during @xmath129 , @xmath214  those inserted by edge change during @xmath129 and @xmath215  the rest . consider @xmath214 first . we know that in each local neighborhood , there are at most @xmath216 nodes arriving due to edge changes . note that @xmath217 can be covered with @xmath218 local neighborhoods ; hence , the total number of nodes arriving in @xmath217 due to edge changes is @xmath219 . since @xmath220 , setting @xmath221 a small enough constant gives @xmath222 . now consider @xmath215 . by the primitive , for each node @xmath223 , all nodes in @xmath224 also restart try&adjust , setting their transmission probability to @xmath225 . by the setting of @xmath226 , the probability that a node restarting try&adjust in phase @xmath129 transmits again in @xmath129 is at most @xmath227 . thus , with probability at least @xmath135 , the nodes in @xmath214 constitute an @xmath228-packing of @xmath140 and are at most @xmath229 . as for @xmath213 , the probability that a newly arriving node transmits during phase @xmath129 is at most @xmath227 , so @xmath230 w.h.p . these bounds lead to a contradiction  @xmath231 , if constant @xmath128 is large enough . thus , each phase @xmath129 of @xmath96 is of type b with probability @xmath135 . it remains to recall that @xmath96 contains constant number of phases . now assume that @xmath129 is of type b. in a similar way as in theorem  [ thm : localbroadcast ] , we can apply prop . [ pr : idle ] and show that if @xmath232 at the beginning of @xmath129 , then by the end of @xmath129 , the effect on @xmath71 is equivalent to applying at least @xmath233 of @xmath234 operations on @xmath235 . since @xmath236 at the beginning of @xmath96 is at least @xmath225 , it will take at most 11 phases to increase the probability to the value @xmath164 . then , a single phase will suffice for @xmath20 to deliver its message ( including to node @xmath1 ) , with probability at least @xmath210 . * implications for static networks*.   when the network is static , theorem  [ thm : broadcast ] can be reformulated in terms of hop - distance @xmath237 in the communication graph , which is defined as the length of the shortest directed @xmath187-@xmath1 path in @xmath238 : we have that @xmath239 for any node @xmath1 . note also that in this setting nodes that succeeded transmitting or detected need not continue the algorithm , so they stop transmitting . in this case , setting the passiveness parameter to @xmath143 suffices . we call this variant of the algorithm bcast@xmath240 .    when running bcast@xmath240 in synchronous non - spontaneous mode in a static network with source @xmath187 , each node @xmath1 receives the message in @xmath241 rounds w.h.p . when the communication graph is strongly connected , the broadcast from any source node is completed in @xmath242 rounds , where @xmath243 is the diameter of the communication graph .    in the spontaneous mode , the bound above can be further improved to @xmath244 ; see appendix [ sec : spontaneous ] . this is based on finding a constant - density dominating set in @xmath200 time @xcite and simultaneously propagating along the dominators in @xmath244 time . we can therefore extend the approach based on @xcite to uniform algorithms in bounded - independence metrics . these results are close to best possible . we show below that in order to obtain bounds of that magnitude , it is necessary to have the primitive . to this end , we extend the lower bound construction of  ( * ? ? ? * thm .  7 ) for `` compact sinr '' to our setting . this construction leverages the property of our model that there can be arbitrarily many nodes that are mutually close to each other . namely , the bounded - independence metric is strictly more relaxed than the standard euclidean metrics . indeed , there is a @xmath245-round broadcast algorithm for the sinr model that does not need or other carrier sensing primitives @xcite . what the lower bound then illustrates is that to obtain such results , one must depend on opportune traits of the sinr model that we have tried to avoid and are not necessary for problems like local broadcast . thus we can observe concrete tradeoffs depending on model assumptions . [ thm : brlowerbound ] for every ( possibly randomized ) broadcast algorithm @xmath246 that uses neither node coordinates nor primitive , there is a @xmath247-bounded - independence metric space where @xmath246 needs @xmath248 rounds to do broadcast in a @xmath249-broadcastable network , even if the nodes have and primitives and operate spontaneously . 10    n.  alon , a.  bar - noy , n.  linial , and d.  peleg . . in _ stoc _ , pages 274285 , 1989 . n.  alon , a.  bar - noy , n.  linial , and d.  peleg . a lower bound for radio broadcast . , 43(2):290298 , 1991 . r.  bar - yehuda , o.  goldreich , and a.  itai . on the time - complexity of broadcast in radio networks : an exponential gap between determinism and randomization . in _ podc87 _ , 1987 . l.  barenboim and d.  peleg . nearly optimal local broadcasting in the sinr model with feedback . in _ sirocco _ , pages 164178 , 2015 . m.  h. bodlaender and m.  m. halldrsson . beyond geometry : towards fully realistic wireless models . in _ podc _ , pages 347356 , 2014 . m.  h. bodlaender , m.  m. halldrsson , and p.  mitra . . in _ podc _ , pages 355364 . acm , 2013 . i.  chlamtac and s.  kutten . on broadcasting in radio networks  problem analysis and protocol design . , 33(12):12401246 , 1985 . b.  s. chlebus , d.  r. kowalski , and s.  vaya . distributed communication in bare - bones wireless networks . , 2015 . b.  n. clark , c.  j. colbourn , and d.  s. johnson . unit disk graphs . , 86(1):165177 , 1990 . a.  e. clementi , a.  monti , and r.  silvestri . round robin is optimal for fault - tolerant broadcasting on wireless networks . , 64(1):8996 , 2004 . a.  czumaj and w.  rytter . broadcasting algorithms in radio networks with unknown topology . in _ focs03 _ , 2003 . s.  daum , s.  gilbert , f.  kuhn , and c.  newport . . in _ disc _ , pages 358372 , 2013 . b.  derbel and e.  talbi . . in _ icdcn10 _ , pages 155166 , 2010 . s.  dolev , s.  gilbert , m.  khabbazian , and c.  newport . . in _ disc _ , pages 252267 , 2011 . a.  fanghnel , t.  kesselheim , and b.  vcking . . , 412(24):26572667 , 2011 . m.  ghaffari , s.  gilbert , c.  newport , and h.  tan . optimal broadcast in shared spectrum radio networks . in _ opodis12 _ , 2012 . m.  ghaffari , b.  haeupler , and m.  khabbazian . randomized broadcast in radio networks with collision detection . in _ podc13 _ , 2013 . m.  ghaffari , b.  haeupler , n.  lynch , and c.  newport . bounds on contention management in radio networks . in _ disc _ , 2012 . m.  ghaffari , e.  kantor , n.  lynch , and c.  newport . multi - message broadcast with abstract mac layers and unreliable links . in _ podc14 _ , 2014 . m.  ghaffari , n.  lynch , and c.  newport . the cost of radio network broadcast for different models of unreliable links . in podc13 _ , 2013 . o.  goussevskaia , t.  moscibroda , and r.  wattenhofer . . in _ dialm - pomc 08 _ , pages 3544 , 2008 .    p.  gupta and p.  kumar . , 46(2):388404 , 2000 . m.  m. halldrsson . . , 9(1):7:17:20 , dec . m.  m. halldrsson , s.  holzer , and n.  a. lynch . a local broadcast layer for the sinr network model . in _ podc _ , pages 129138 , 2015 . m.  m. halldrsson , s.  holzer , p.  mitra , and r.  wattenhofer . . in _ soda13 _ , pages 15951606 , 2013 . m.  m. halldrsson and p.  mitra . . in _ icalp _ , pages 625636 , 2011 . m.  m. halldrsson and p.  mitra . . in _ podc _ , 2012 . m.  m. halldrsson and p.  mitra . . fomc _ , 2012 . m.  m. halldrsson , y.  wang , and d.  yu . leveraging multiple channels in ad hoc networks . in _ podc15 _ , 2015 . m.  hoefer , t.  kesselheim , and b.  vcking . approximation algorithms for secondary spectrum auctions . in _ proceedings of the twenty - third annual acm symposium on parallelism in algorithms and architectures _ , spaa 11 , pages 177186 , new york , ny , usa , 2011 . r.  impagliazzo and v.  kabanets . constructive proofs of concentration bounds . in _ approx - random _ , pages 617631 , 2010 . t.  jurdzinski , d.  kowalski , m.  rozanski , and g.  stachowiak . distributed randomized broadcasting in wireless networks under the sinr model . in _ disc _ , pages 373387 , 2013 . t.  jurdzinski , d.  kowalski , m.  rozanski , and g.  stachowiak . on the impact of geometry on ad hoc communication in wireless networks . in _ podc 14 _ , 2014 . t.  jurdzinski , d.  r. kowalski , and g.  stachowiak . . in _ fct13 _ , pages 195209 , 2013 . t.  jurdzinski , d.  r. kowalski , and g.  stachowiak . distributed deterministic broadcasting in wireless networks of weak devices . in _ icalp13 _ , 2013 . t.  kesselheim and b.  vcking . . in _ disc _ , pages 163178 , 2010 .    d.  kowalski and a.  pelc . broadcasting in undirected ad hoc radio networks . in _ podc03 _ , 2003 . f.  kuhn , n.  lynch , and c.  newport . brief announcement : hardness of broadcasting in wireless networks with unreliable communication . in _ disc _ , 2009 . f.  kuhn , n.  lynch , c.  newport , r.  oshman , and a.  richa . . in _ podc _ , pages 336345 . acm , 2010 . f.  kuhn , t.  moscibroda , and r.  wattenhofer . . in _ mobicom _ , pages 260274 . acm , 2004 . f.  kuhn and r.  oshman . dynamic networks : models and algorithms . , 42(1):8296 , 2011 . f.  kuhn , r.  wattenhofer , and a.  zollinger . ad hoc networks beyond unit disk graphs . , 14:715729 , 2008 . e.  kushilevitz and y.  mansour . . , 27(3):702712 , 1998 .    c.  lenzen and r.  wattenhofer . distributed algorithms for sensor networks . , 370(1958 ) , 2012 . t.  moscibroda and r.  wattenhofer . . , 21(4):271284 , 2008 .    c.  newport radio network lower bounds made easy . in _ disc14 _ , 2014 . c.  scheideler , a.  richa , and p.  santi . . in _ mobihoc 08 _ , pages 91100 , 2008 . s.  schmid and r.  wattenhofer . algorithmic models for sensor networks . in _ wpdrts06 _ , 2006 . j.  schneider and r.  wattenhofer . . in _ podc _ , pages 210219 , 2009 .    j.  schneider and r.  wattenhofer . in _ disc _ , pages 133147 . springer - verlag , 2010 . d.  yu , q .- s . hua , y.  wang , and f.  lau . . dcoss 12 _ , pages 132139 , 2012 . d.  yu , q .- s . hua , y.  wang , h.  tan , and f.  lau . . in _ sirocco12 _ , pages 111122 , 2012 . d.  yu , q .- s . hua , y.  wang , j.  yu , and f.  lau . . in _ infocom13 _ , pages 24272435 , 2013 .    d.  yu , y.  wang , q .- s . hua , and f.  c.  m. lau . . in _ distributed computing in sensor systems and workshops ( dcoss ) , 2011 international conference on _ , pages 18 , 2011 . d.  yu , y.  wang , y.  yan , j.  yu , and f.  lau . speedup of information exchange using multiple channels in wireless ad hoc networks . in _ infocom15 _ , 2015 . _ wireless models : _ considering wireless interference , there are two classes of wireless network models : graph - based and physical models . basically , the graph - based models define a local and binary type of interference , while the physical models consider fading effect of signal on wireless channels . the most classical graph - based model is the radio network model  @xcite . in this model , the network is modeled using a communication graph , where each pair of nodes that can communicate with each other is connected by an edge . it defines the interference just from direct neighbors , and a transmission can succeed if and only if there is only one neighbor of the receiver transmitting . there are many widely used variants of the classical radio network models , including : 1 ) the @xmath0-hop model where the interference comes from @xmath0-hop neighbors  @xcite ; 2 ) unit disc graph ( udg ) model  @xcite which defines the neighborhood using a unit disc ; 3 ) quasi unit disc graph ( qudg ) model  @xcite which just defines all pairs of nodes with distance at most @xmath76 for some given @xmath250 $ ] are adjacent , and leave the ` grey ' area in @xmath251 $ ] being determined by an adversary ; 4 ) protocol model  @xcite , where each node has a transmission range and an interference range , and a successful transmission occurs if a node falls into the transmission range of a transmitter and outside the interference ranges of all other transmitter ; 5 ) bounded - independence graph ( big ) model  @xcite , which defines abstractly and requires that the size of the maximal independent set in the @xmath33-hop neighborhood of each node is bounded by a polynomial function with @xmath33 . though the graph - based interference models miss certain crucial aspects of actual wireless networks , the simple definition of these models can help derive novel insights into distributed solutions to wireless problems .    physical models , also known as sinr models  @xcite , capture the fading and cumulative features of receptions in actual wireless environments . the default assumption is that interference fades with a polynomial of the distance , and transmission succeeds only if the received signal strength is sufficiently larger than the total interference plus noise . recently , the sinr model has attracted great attentions in the distributed community  @xcite . most of these works focus on networks embedded in euclidean space , while many of the results hold also for doubling or `` bounded growth '' metrics @xcite . those doubling metrics constrain growth at every ( or arbitrarily small ) granularity , while ours only bounds regions proportional to the transmission range , in particular capturing bounded independence graphs ( big ) . for more on wireless models , please refer to  @xcite . _ local broadcast _ : in the radio network model , probably the first local broadcast result was a randomized algorithm of alon et al . @xcite in a synchronous model , running in @xmath6 rounds . derbel and talbi  @xcite later generalized their algorithm to work without knowledge of @xmath3 and their proposed algorithm can accomplish local broadcast in @xmath7 rounds . the decay strategy also yields an @xmath6 time algorithm for local broadcast without knowledge of @xmath3  @xcite . goussevskaia et al . @xcite gave the first results for local broadcast in the sinr model , running in time @xmath6 and @xmath252 with and without knowledge of @xmath3 , respectively . the latter was improved in @xcite and further improved , independently , to @xmath7 time @xcite . with free acknowledgements , this was improved to @xmath253 @xcite . when additionally @xmath3 is known , this was further improved recently to @xmath8 in the spontaneous setting @xcite . the speedup of multiple channels on local broadcast was considered in  @xcite    _ broadcast _ : the complexity of broadcasting is well understood in graph - based models . in the radio network model , bar - yehuda et al . @xcite presented the decay protocol which can accomplish non - spontaneous broadcast in @xmath254 rounds , where @xmath46 is the diameter . this result was improved to @xmath9 independently by czumaj and rytter  @xcite , and kowalski and pelc  @xcite . these algorithms can be viewed as clever optimizations of the decay protocol and match the lower bound  @xcite . with collision detection , this lower bound was recently broken in  @xcite , where a solution of @xmath10 was given . broadcast in multi - channel radio networks was considered in  @xcite . for the udg model , an @xmath255 time algorithm was given in  @xcite in the spontaneous setting . broadcasting has been treated in the sinr model under a variety of assumptions . some are stronger than ours ( location information @xcite , power control @xcite ) . some relax the assumption about the connectivity property , but incur necessarily super - linear complexity @xcite . results in our setting , but without carrier sensing , include time complexity of @xmath256 @xcite ( see also @xcite ) , where @xmath12 denotes the maximum ratio between distances of stations connected in the communication graph ; and @xmath13 @xcite . in the spontaneous setting , where the nodes can build an overlay structure along which the message is then propagated , scheideler et al . @xcite solved the problem in @xmath257 rounds using physical carrier sensing . yu et al . @xcite solved the problem in @xmath258 rounds using power control , allowing stations to decide the strength of a transmitted signal in each step . and the algorithm in  @xcite then runs in time @xmath254 . _ distributed models of temporal variability _ : dynamic networks have been studied extensively in recent years ( see @xcite for a survey ) , but generally not in the presence of interference . the _ dual graph _ model  @xcite ( originally due to @xcite ) was designed to capture inherent _ unreliability _ in wireless networks , much of which can be due to dynamicity . the main focus of that work is on extending the radio network model in general graphs . importantly , the dual graph model does not distinguish between interference and communication edges ; only that the unreliable edges can transmit both interference and the usual communication , but their availability is under adversarial control . thus , there is no way to capture interference from further away nodes . most problems become extremely difficult against a powerful adversary , and to get good result , one must assume a much weaker one  @xcite . this model only involves edge behavior and not node changes ( churn ) . both the local broadcast  @xcite and global broadcast  @xcite problems are studied in the dual graph model .    a dynamic model that considers node insertion is the _ unstructured _ model  @xcite , which admits arbitrary wake - up mode and asynchronous communication . this model was first proposed in the unit - disc setting , and then extended to bounded independence graphs ( big )  @xcite and sinr  @xcite . it has been widely used in the solution of a variety of distributed wireless problems  @xcite , including local broadcast  @xcite , but there are no known global broadcast results . the model neither consider node deletion nor edge changes . hence , the impact of dynamicity on global communication is largely unexplored . [ [ modeling - communication ] ] modeling communication + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +    our communication model captures most known algorithmic wireless models , as it is demonstrated below on the example of sinr , disk - graph based and protocol models . note that we assume below the distance @xmath259 to be symmetric , but the results hold also for `` almost symmetric '' functions , i.e. when there is a constant @xmath260 such that @xmath261 for all @xmath262 . _ sinr model . _ consider a network in a metric space . in the sinr model of communication , if @xmath39 is the set of simultaneously transmitting nodes in the network , a node @xmath1 receives the transmission of node @xmath20 if and only if @xmath263 where constants @xmath113 and @xmath264 denote the minimum sinr threshold and the ambient noise , respectively . note that @xmath265 in this setting . we can implement with parameters @xmath266 and @xmath267 , as shown in the proposition below . [ pr : scc ] if the interference at a node @xmath1 is less than @xmath68 in round @xmath56 , then @xmath1 will deliver its message if it transmits . note that if the interference at node @xmath1 is not more than @xmath68 then there is no node @xmath268 transmitting in round @xmath56 , as otherwise the interference at @xmath1 would be at least @xmath269 ; hence , only nodes in @xmath270 can transmit . consider an arbitrary node @xmath271 . for each node @xmath272 , @xmath273 . then , the interference at @xmath274 is at most : @xmath275 which implies that node @xmath274 receives @xmath1 s transmission : @xmath276 . _ the udg and ubg models . _ these models are described by geometric graphs : a node @xmath20 receives a message from another node @xmath1 if and only if @xmath1 is the only transmitting neighbor of @xmath20 .    in the unit disk graph ( udg ) and unit ball graph ( ubg ) models the nodes are located in a metric space and two nodes are connected by an edge if and only if their distance is at most @xmath277 . the functionality of can be modeled as follows : the transmission of a node @xmath1 is received by all its neighbors if there is no other node at distance less than @xmath278 from @xmath1 transmitting simultaneously , i.e. we can set the parameters to @xmath279 and @xmath280 .    _ the quasi - udg model . _ the quasi - udg model is an extension of the udg model : a ) if @xmath281 then @xmath20 and @xmath1 are connected by an edge , b ) if @xmath282 then they are disconnected , c ) otherwise , @xmath20 and @xmath1 may be connected or not . in this case may be implemented by setting @xmath279 and @xmath283 , with the adversary constrained to follow the specific static situation captured by the qudg .    _ the protocol model . _ in the protocol model , the nodes are in a metric space and there are two radii : @xmath277  the communication radius , and @xmath284  the interference radius . a node @xmath1 receives the transmission of a node @xmath20 if and only if : 1 ) @xmath1 is in the communication range of node @xmath20 , i.e. @xmath281 , and 2 ) there is no transmitting node @xmath274 such that @xmath1 is in the interference range of @xmath274 : for each transmitting node @xmath285 , @xmath286 . may be implemented here by setting @xmath279 and @xmath283 . _ the big model . _ in the bounded independence graph ( big ) model , for a parameter @xmath287 , we are given a graph on the nodes with the property that for every node @xmath1 and every @xmath288 , the maximum independent set in the @xmath0-neighborhood of @xmath1 is @xmath289 . the shortest - path distance metric on the graph is now naturally a @xmath290-bounded independence metric . to fit in our model , the growth parameter @xmath287 must be less than @xmath105 . _ @xmath0-hop variants . _ these graph models can be naturally generalized to a model on interference , where nodes of distance at most @xmath0 cause interference , for some @xmath291 . we capture this by extending @xmath112 as needed . [ [ implementing - primitives - with - physical - carrier - sensing ] ] implementing primitives with physical carrier sensing + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +    one way of implementing the primitives mentioned in this paper is to use physical carrier sensing , i.e. we assume the nodes have technology to detect if the interference ( plus noise ) is higher than a given threshold . we show below how to implement , and primitives using carrier sensing . * primitive . * the primitive can be implemented using a carrier sensing threshold @xmath292 and setting the parameter @xmath293 ; busy channel is detected if and only if the interference is at least @xmath96 . we will need the following technical fact . [ ieq ] for every @xmath294 $ ] , @xmath295 , it holds that @xmath296    if @xmath297 in round @xmath56 then all nodes in @xmath298 detect busy channel with probability at least @xmath299 . in particular , we can take @xmath300 if @xmath301 .    by the setting of @xmath96 and the definition of @xmath74 , if two nodes in @xmath74 transmit in round @xmath56 , then all nodes in @xmath74 will detect busy channel . hence , the probability of all nodes in @xmath74 detecting busy channel is at least the probability of more than one node transmitting in round @xmath56 . the probability of no node transmitting is @xmath302 by lemma  [ ieq ] . the probability of exactly one node transmitting is : @xmath303 where we used the assumption that @xmath304 and lemma  [ ieq ] . thus , the probability of detecting busy channel is at least @xmath305 .    for every @xmath147 , if @xmath306 and @xmath307 then @xmath1 detects idle channel with probability at least @xmath308 .    by the setting of the threshold @xmath96 , if there is no node transmitting in @xmath119 then node @xmath1 will detect idle channel . thus , the probability that @xmath1 detects idle channel is at least @xmath309 using lemma  [ ieq ] . * primitive . * in order to detect successful transmission , we can use interference threshold @xmath310 and set @xmath311 , where @xmath312 and @xmath313 are the parameters of . if a node @xmath1 senses that the interference is no higher than @xmath96 , it knows that : 1 . there is no node in @xmath314 transmitting , as otherwise the interference would be at least @xmath315 , 2 . the interference is at most @xmath68 ; thus , it knows that its transmission has been received by all neighbors in @xmath316 by . * primitive . * if a node @xmath1 receives a message from a node @xmath20 then @xmath1 can separate the signal from the interference and measure the received signal strength . as the nodes use uniform power assignment , node @xmath1 knows that @xmath95 if the received signal is stronger than @xmath317 . [ [ implementing - primitives - by - other - means ] ] implementing primitives by other means + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +    the primitives can frequently be implemented in other ways , often with the logarithmic blowup that explains the differences with the best carrier - sense - free results .    * * in an asynchronous system , it may be impossible to implement by other means than carrier sense . in a synchronized system , however , we can be achieved with logarithmic or polylogarithmic factor overhead . consider a given round . for each probability @xmath318 , repeat @xmath319 times : the senders in the original round transmit with probability @xmath320 . using concentration bound with @xmath50 sufficiently large , one can infer the contention within an small approximation , with high probability . such a strategy has been applied , e.g. , in @xcite .    * primitive . * a simple strategy is to work with only probabilistic guarantees of a transmission being received by all neighbors . then , simply repeat the protocol until this has been achieved @xmath319 times , which gives an guarantee , w.h.p . this approach underlies , e.g. , the local broadcast algorithms without carrier sense @xcite . * primitive . * this primitive , which is essential for dominator - based strategies for broadcast , can be implemented using power control : by lowering the power on all units appropriately , one can ensure that nodes further away ( by a small constant factor ) will not be able to hear the message due to the ambient noise term , see e.g.  @xcite . alternatively , one can assume that distances can be determined in other ways , such as by gps @xcite . recall that we need to prove the following . we assume that at the beginning of the _ first _ phase under consideration , the contention in the whole network is bounded by a constant . this holds for all algorithms in this paper , as the initial probability of nodes is always at most @xmath321 .    * * proposition [ pr : pgoodroundl ] . * * let @xmath132 . if constants @xmath133 and @xmath134 are large enough then for each node @xmath1 and phase @xmath129 , with probability @xmath135 , a @xmath136-fraction of the rounds in @xmath129 are good . recall that in a good round , there should be both bounded contention and low interference . the proof is split into two parts , each handling one of these properties . [ pr : pgoodroundl ] follows by simply combining those two parts . we will need the following concentration bounds . @xcite[le : chernoff ] consider a collection of binary random variables @xmath322 , and let @xmath323 . if there are probabilities @xmath324 with @xmath325\leq \prod_{i\in s}p_i$ ] for every set @xmath326 , then it holds for @xmath327 and @xmath328 that @xmath329\leq\left(\frac{e^{\delta}}{(1+\delta)^{1+\delta}}\right)^\mu\leq e^{-\frac{\delta^2\mu}{2(1+\delta/3)}}.\ ] ] if , on the other side , there are probabilities @xmath324 with @xmath325\geq \prod_{i\in s}p_i$ ] for every set @xmath326 , then it holds for @xmath327 and @xmath330 that @xmath331\leq\left(\frac{e^{-\delta}}{(1-\delta)^{1-\delta}}\right)^\mu\leq e^{-\delta^2\mu/2}.\ ] ]      first , we show that for each fixed node @xmath20 , the contention in the _ local _ neighborhood @xmath332 is bounded in most of the rounds of a phase . to this end , we show that in each round , the contention is either already low or will be halved with significant probability , then apply a concentration bound to show the claim . recall the constant @xmath333 from the definition of . [ le : phi ] let @xmath129 be a time interval and assume that @xmath334 at the beginning of @xmath129 . then for every @xmath335 , @xmath336 happens at most @xmath337 times during @xmath129 , with probability @xmath338 , where @xmath339 and @xmath340 is the edge change parameter .    by the assumptions on edge changes , we have that during phase @xmath129 , the fraction of rounds where more than @xmath341 nodes become a neighbor of @xmath20 because of edge changes is @xmath102 . let @xmath159 denote the remaining set of rounds . we have @xmath342 . in each of those rounds , the contribution of edge changes in @xmath343 is clearly at most @xmath344 . next we bound the number of rounds in @xmath159 , where @xmath345 . consider such a round @xmath161 . let @xmath346 . by the definition of , all nodes in @xmath332 detect busy channel in round @xmath56 and halve their transmission probabilities with probability at least @xmath347 . thus , @xmath348\ge 1-\mu'$ ] , where the additive @xmath164 accounts for the sum of probabilities of the nodes that just join the ball @xmath332 due to node churn ( recall that each of them has an initial probability at most @xmath349 ) and @xmath344 is an upper bound on the contention due to edge changes ( by the definition of @xmath159 ) . for each round @xmath161 , let us define a binary random variable @xmath350 as follows : @xmath351 if @xmath352 or @xmath353 and @xmath354 ( recall that @xmath355 ) and @xmath356 otherwise . by the discussion above , we have : @xmath357&=pr[p_{t}(u)\leq\phi]+pr[p_{t}(u)>\phi\wedge p_{t+1}(u)\leq\frac{5}{6}p_t(u)]\\ & = pr[p_{t}(u)\leq\phi]+pr[p_{t}(u)>\phi]\cdot pr[p_{t+1}(u)\leq\frac{5}{6}p_t(u)|p_{t}(u)>\phi]\\ & \geq pr[p_{t}(u)\leq\phi]+pr[p_{t}(u)>\phi]\cdot ( 1-\mu')\\ & \geq 1-\mu ' . \end{aligned}\ ] ] this implies that for each round @xmath358 and each subset @xmath359 of earlier rounds ( @xmath360 for @xmath361 ) , @xmath362\geq 1-\mu'$ ] and @xmath363\leq \mu'$ ] . thus , for each subset @xmath364 we get @xmath365\le \mu'^{|s| } , $ ] and if we denote @xmath366 , then @xmath367\le \mu ' |h'|=\mu |h|$ ] , where we denote @xmath368 . thus , we can apply chernoff bound ( lemma  [ le : chernoff ] ) with @xmath369 to bound @xmath370 with high probability : @xmath371\le 2^{-\mu|h|}.\ ] ] using this bound , we obtain a bound on the number of rounds @xmath56 with @xmath372 . let @xmath373 denote this number . consider a maximal interval @xmath374\subseteq h'$ ] such that @xmath345 for all @xmath375 . for each round @xmath375 , @xmath376 if @xmath351 and @xmath377 otherwise . by maximality of @xmath378 , if @xmath379 _ is not _ the first round of phase @xmath129 , then we have @xmath380 . then a simple calculation shows that @xmath356 for at least @xmath381 part of the rounds of @xmath378 , i.e. @xmath382 . on the other hand , if there is a unique maximal interval @xmath378 starting at the first round of phase @xmath129 and such that @xmath383 , then it must hold that @xmath384 , where @xmath385 . combining these observations , we get that @xmath386 .    by combining this bound with  ( [ eq : xupperl ] ) , we have : @xmath387 \le pr[x\ge \delta\mu|h| ] < 2^{-\mu|h|}.\ ] ] thus , with probability @xmath388 , in at most @xmath389 fraction of rounds in @xmath129 there can be @xmath345 . recall that for node @xmath1 we need to show that @xmath390 for most rounds in a phase . we prove this by taking a _ constant size _ @xmath73-cover of @xmath119 and applying lemma  [ le : phi ] to all nodes in the cover _ [ pr : lowc ] for every @xmath132 and @xmath147 , there are constants @xmath391 and @xmath392 , such that for every node @xmath1 and phase @xmath129 , with probability @xmath135 , at least @xmath136-fraction of rounds in @xmath129 are bounded contention rounds , i.e. @xmath393 .    it will be sufficient to choose @xmath128 and @xmath394 such that @xmath395 and @xmath396 . by the definition of @xmath287 and bounded independence , there is a @xmath73-cover @xmath39 of @xmath119 of size @xmath397 . set @xmath398 . let us fix a node @xmath399 . if @xmath129 is the first phase or @xmath400 then we set @xmath401 . otherwise , consider the phase @xmath159 of @xmath127 rounds preceding @xmath129 . by lemma  [ le : phi ] , if we set @xmath402 then , with probability @xmath403 , there is a round in @xmath159 where @xmath404 . let @xmath405 be such a round and set @xmath406 $ ] , where @xmath407 is the last round of @xmath129 . clearly , @xmath408 . now we can apply lemma  [ le : phi ] for node @xmath20 with @xmath101 as above and conclude that with probability at least @xmath403 , there are at most @xmath409 rounds in @xmath378 ( note that @xmath410 ) where @xmath345 , so there are at most @xmath411 rounds in @xmath129 where @xmath345 . now we can apply the same argument for all nodes in @xmath412 simultaneously and conclude that with probability at least @xmath135 , there are at most @xmath413 rounds in @xmath129 where @xmath345 for _ every _ @xmath399 , if we take @xmath395 to be large enough . in the remaining @xmath414 rounds we have @xmath415 . we extract the following result from the proof of lemma  [ le : phi ] , to use it later . the proof is similar to the proof of prop . [ pr : lowc ] . [ co : pexpectation ] for every @xmath335 and each node @xmath1 , the expected number of rounds in each phase @xmath129 where @xmath416 , is @xmath411 . let @xmath378 be the shortest time interval containing @xmath129 such that @xmath417 at the beginning of @xmath378 . let @xmath418 denote the event that @xmath408 . as in the proof of prop . [ pr : lowc ] , we have @xmath419 > 1-n^{-3}$ ] . let @xmath370 denote the number of rounds @xmath375 with @xmath80 . we know from the proof of lemma  [ le : phi ] that @xmath420 = o(\phi^{-k})\cdot|\hat h| = o(\phi^{-k})\cdot |h|$ ] and @xmath367=e[x|\mathcal{e}]\cdot pr[\mathcal{e } ] + e[x|\bar{\mathcal{e}}]\cdot pr[\bar{\mathcal{e}}]= o(\phi^{-k})\cdot |h|$ ] . this completes the proof as @xmath421 . next we show that if @xmath76 is appropriately chosen then for each node @xmath1 , @xmath422 happens most of the time during each phase w.h.p . in order to show this , first we split the set of nodes in @xmath423 into local neighborhoods . we show that if in a given round the contention in each local neighborhood is bounded by an appropriate threshold , then the expected interference is small . for each local neighborhood , the expected number of rounds when the contention is higher than its threshold is bounded using corollary  [ co : pexpectation ] . combining these results into one we get a bound on the expected number of rounds when @xmath424 is small . it then remains to apply a concentration bound to conclude the proof . [ pr : pinterferenceboundl ] for every @xmath132 and @xmath425 , there are constants @xmath426 and @xmath427 , such that for each node @xmath1 and phase @xmath129 , with probability @xmath135 , at least @xmath136-fraction of rounds in @xmath129 are low interference rounds , i.e. @xmath428 . let @xmath429 denote the in - ball of radius @xmath430 centered at node @xmath1 for @xmath431 . let @xmath432 be an @xmath73-cover of @xmath429 of size @xmath433 for a constant @xmath434 , which exists by bounded independence . let @xmath435 for @xmath436 , where @xmath437 is a large enough constant to be defined later . [ le : pexpectal ] if @xmath438 holds for all @xmath439 and @xmath440 and @xmath441 then @xmath442 . we have , by the definition of expected interference ( explanations below ) , @xmath443 where the first inequality follows from the definition of sets @xmath444 and the assumption of the claim , the second one follows by @xmath435 and @xmath445 , the third one is a rearrangement of the sum , the fourth one follows by the fact that @xmath446 for every @xmath447 and @xmath448 ( here , @xmath449 ) , and the last one follows because @xmath450 . thus , if @xmath441 then the claim follows . let us put the nodes in an arbitrary order and let @xmath451 denote the number of rounds @xmath452 s.t . @xmath453 , where @xmath454 is the @xmath455-th node in @xmath456 . by corollary  [ co : pexpectation ] , @xmath457= o(\phi_i^{-k})\cdot|h| $ ] holds for each @xmath458 . let @xmath459 denote the number of rounds in @xmath129 when @xmath460 . by claim  [ le : pexpectal ] , @xmath461 $ ] can be bounded as follows , @xmath462\leq\sum_{i}\sum_{j}e[z_{i , j } ] \leq \sum_i|s_i\setminus s_{i-1}|\cdot o(\phi_i^{-k})\cdot |h| \leq \frac{\sigma}{3}|h|,\ ] ] where the last inequality holds if @xmath463 for a large enough constant @xmath464 ; we have @xmath465 and @xmath466 with @xmath467 ( by definition ) , so we have @xmath468 . each @xmath451 can be considered as the sum of binary random variables similar to that in the proof of lemma  [ le : phi ] . thus , @xmath459 can also be seen as the sum of binary random variables . moreover , the binary random variables satisfy the conditions of the chernoff bound in lemma  [ le : chernoff ] . thus , by taking @xmath469 and @xmath470 , we have : @xmath471\leq 2^{-\sigma|h|/3}\le n^{-3}. $ ] [ le : broadgood ] let @xmath472 , @xmath473 and @xmath474 , where @xmath475 are the parameters of . let @xmath56 be a round such that for a node @xmath20 , @xmath476 and @xmath477 . + if a node in @xmath332 transmits in round @xmath56 then it mass - delivers , with probability at least @xmath478 . let @xmath1 be the transmitting node , which could possibly be @xmath20 itself . the probability that no other node in @xmath479 transmits is @xmath480 where we used lemma  [ ieq ] with the assumption that @xmath481 and the bounded contention assumption .    on the other hand , we have that @xmath482\ge 9/10 $ ] . indeed , @xmath483\ge 9/10 $ ] follows by the bounded interference assumption and markov inequality , so it suffices to show that @xmath484 , which we have because for each node @xmath485 , @xmath486 , implying that @xmath487 thus , we have that with probability @xmath478 , @xmath1 transmits , no other node in @xmath217 transmits and the interference from @xmath488 at @xmath1 is at most @xmath68 , so @xmath1 delivers its message , by . * proposition [ pr : pdecrease ] * _ assume that constants @xmath137 are large enough . for each node @xmath1 and phase @xmath129 , if at least @xmath138-fraction of the rounds of @xmath129 are of high contention , then @xmath139 nodes in @xmath140 mass - deliver , with probability @xmath135 . _    let @xmath489 . let us choose constants @xmath490 such that prop . [ pr : pgoodroundl ] holds for @xmath491 and @xmath492 and such that @xmath493 is large enough , as stated below , where @xmath475 are the parameters of . we will use the fact that in prop . [ pr : pgoodroundl ] , @xmath394 has the following dependency on @xmath494 : @xmath495 , where @xmath0 is the edge change parameter ( see the proof of prop . [ pr : lowc ] ) . we set @xmath496 . namely , if we choose @xmath137 large enough ( satisfying the relation above ) , then we have that with probability @xmath135 , there are at least @xmath497 rounds @xmath358 such that @xmath498 and @xmath499 . let @xmath56 be such a round .    for each node @xmath500 , it holds that @xmath501 and @xmath502 . let us fix a node @xmath500 . first note that @xmath503 , implying that @xmath504 . it remains to bound the expected interference at @xmath20 by nodes in @xmath488 . this interference can be split into two parts : 1 . the interference by nodes in @xmath505 and 2 . the interference by nodes in @xmath506 . the first part can be bounded by @xmath507 using a computation as in the proof of lemma  [ le : broadgood ] . the second part can be bounded as follows : the contention in the area @xmath506 is at most @xmath394 and the distance of those nodes to node @xmath20 is at least @xmath76 , so the expected interference by nodes in @xmath506 is at most @xmath508 , and is less than @xmath509 if @xmath76 is large enough , as @xmath510 . here we used the assumption that @xmath511 . recall that there are at least @xmath512 high contention rounds for node @xmath1 , i.e. rounds where @xmath122 . let @xmath56 be such a round . by the bounded independence property , there is a @xmath513-cover @xmath39 of @xmath119 of constant size . by the pigeonhole principle , there is a node @xmath399 such that @xmath514 .    by summarizing the above said , we get that there are at least @xmath497 rounds @xmath56 s.t . for all nodes @xmath500 , @xmath515 and @xmath516 . on the other hand , there are at least @xmath512 rounds where there is a node in @xmath119 that has @xmath517 . thus , there are at least @xmath518 rounds @xmath56 with the following property : there is a node @xmath500 such that @xmath519 and @xmath516 . fix such round @xmath56 and node @xmath20 . by lemma [ le : broadgood ] , there is a node @xmath520 that transmits ( the probability of this is at least @xmath521 ) and delivers its message with probability @xmath522 . thus , the expected number of nodes in @xmath119 that deliver their message during @xmath129 is @xmath523 . the proof now follows by applying a chernoff bound with the assumption that the constant @xmath128 is large enough : @xmath524 . * proposition  [ pr : idle ] * _ assume that @xmath137 are large enough . for each node @xmath1 and phase @xmath129 , if at least @xmath141-fraction of the rounds of @xmath129 are low contention rounds , then with probability @xmath135 , in at least @xmath142-fraction of the rounds of @xmath129 , @xmath1 will detect idle channel and have low contention and low interference . _    let @xmath525 . assume that @xmath137 large enough , such that prop . [ pr : pgoodroundl ] holds for @xmath526 and @xmath527 , where @xmath528 is the parameter of . let @xmath418 denote the event that there are at least @xmath529 good rounds for @xmath1 in phase @xmath129 . by prop . [ pr : pgoodroundl ] , we have @xmath419 = 1-o(n^{-3})\ge 19/20 $ ] , if @xmath128 is large enough . given @xmath418 , there are at least @xmath530 rounds @xmath56 that are both good and low contention for @xmath1 . let @xmath159 denote the set of such rounds and let @xmath350 be a binary random variable with value 1 if and only if @xmath1 detects idle channel in round @xmath161 . let @xmath531 . for each round @xmath161 , since @xmath56 is a good round and @xmath532 , it holds with probability at least @xmath141 that the interference at node @xmath1 from nodes in @xmath119 is at most @xmath528 . given this and the fact that in low contention rounds we have @xmath533 , @xmath1 will detect idle channel with probability at least @xmath534 in round @xmath56 . thus , in each round @xmath161 , irrespective of prior rounds , we have @xmath535\ge 81/100 $ ] . this implies : @xmath420\ge ( 9 ^ 2/10 ^ 2)|h'|\ge      \frac{9 ^ 2}{10 ^ 2}\cdot \frac{9 ^ 2}{10 ^ 2}|h|$ ] and @xmath536 \ge ( 19/20)\cdot\frac{9 ^ 4}{10 ^ 4}|h| > 0.62|h|.\ ] ] just as in the proof of lemma  [ le : phi ] , we can now apply chernoff bound to obtain that @xmath537 < n^{-3}$ ] if @xmath128 is large enough . this completes the proof by recalling that all rounds of @xmath370 are low contention and low interference rounds for node @xmath1 . * theorem [ thm : broadcast ] * _ assume the edge change rate @xmath100 is sufficiently small . there are constants @xmath201 , such that when running bcast(@xmath114 ) in the synchronous mode , each node @xmath1 receives the message in @xmath202 rounds w.h.p . _    let us fix constants @xmath155 so that props . [ pr : pdecrease ] and  [ pr : idle ] hold with interference threshold @xmath203 , where @xmath204 and @xmath205 are the parameters corresponding to precision @xmath183 . we set the passiveness parameter of try&adjust to @xmath206 and the stable distance parameter @xmath207 . consider a node @xmath20 that receives the message in round @xmath56 . let @xmath1 be such that @xmath208 in the time interval @xmath209 $ ] ( and both stay alive during @xmath96 ) . the theorem follows by an induction and union bound from the claim below . node @xmath1 gets the message of @xmath20 during @xmath96 , with probability @xmath210 . we prove the claim by contradiction , and assume that @xmath1 can not get the message during @xmath96 . let us split @xmath96 into phases ( for @xmath20 ) and , similar to the proof of thm . [ thm : localbroadcast ] , classify the phases @xmath129 into types : ( type a ) at least @xmath138-th of rounds in @xmath129 are high contention rounds for @xmath20  @xmath211 , and ( type b ) at least @xmath141-th of rounds in @xmath129 are low contention rounds for @xmath20  @xmath212 . we show that with probability @xmath135 , all phases in @xmath96 are of type b. consider a type a phase @xmath129 . we know from prop .  [ pr : pdecrease ] that , with probability @xmath135 , there is a set @xmath39 of @xmath139 nodes in @xmath140 that deliver their messages and restart try&adjust during @xmath129 . we split @xmath39 into three subsets , @xmath213  those inserted by churn during @xmath129 , @xmath214  those inserted by edge change during @xmath129 and @xmath215  the rest . consider @xmath214 first . we know that in each local neighborhood , there are at most @xmath216 nodes arriving due to edge changes . note that @xmath217 can be covered with @xmath218 local neighborhoods ; hence , the total number of nodes arriving in @xmath217 due to edge changes is @xmath219 . since @xmath220 , setting @xmath221 a small enough constant gives @xmath222 . now consider @xmath215 . by the primitive , for each node @xmath223 , all nodes in @xmath224 also restart try&adjust , setting their transmission probability to @xmath225 . by the setting of @xmath226 , the probability that a node restarting try&adjust in phase @xmath129 transmits again in @xmath129 is at most @xmath227 . thus , with probability at least @xmath135 , the nodes in @xmath214 constitute an @xmath228-packing of @xmath140 and are at most @xmath229 . as for @xmath213 , the probability that a newly arriving node transmits during phase @xmath129 is at most @xmath227 , so @xmath230 w.h.p . these bounds lead to a contradiction  @xmath231 , if constant @xmath128 is large enough . thus , each phase @xmath129 of @xmath96 is of type b with probability @xmath135 . it remains to recall that @xmath96 contains constant number of phases . now assume that @xmath129 is of type b. in a similar way as in theorem  [ thm : localbroadcast ] , we can apply prop . [ pr : idle ] and show that if @xmath232 at the beginning of @xmath129 , then by the end of @xmath129 , the effect on @xmath71 is equivalent to applying at least @xmath233 of @xmath234 operations on @xmath235 . since @xmath236 at the beginning of @xmath96 is at least @xmath225 , it will take at most 11 phases to increase the probability to the value @xmath164 . then , a single phase will suffice for @xmath20 to deliver its message ( including to node @xmath1 ) , with probability at least @xmath210 . the basic observation is that if all the nodes start running bcast@xmath240 simultaneously , a _ constant density dominating set _ can be computed in @xmath200 rounds ( cf . @xcite ) , where an @xmath33-dominating set of density @xmath538 is a set @xmath39 of nodes such that for each node @xmath20 , @xmath539 . the dominator algorithm is as follows : all nodes run bcast@xmath240 simultaneously , and 1 . if a node @xmath1 stops by then it is a _ dominator _ , if a node @xmath20 stops by detecting of node @xmath1 then it is dominated by @xmath1 . having formed a constant density dominating set , it remains to disseminate the message using only dominators . in order for the set of dominators to derive the connectivity properties of the original graph , we need that @xmath30 forms a @xmath540-bounded independence _ metric _ space .    in the static spontaneous setting , there is a uniform algorithm that performs broadcast in @xmath541 rounds , w.h.p . [ thm : static - spont - bcast ]    the algorithm for spontaneous broadcast consists of two stages : 1 . compute a constant density @xmath542-dominating set @xmath543 , 2 . transmit the message using only the nodes in @xmath543 .    [ [ dominating - set . ] ] dominating set . + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +    the dominating set is constructed by running bcast@xmath240 in the spontaneous mode , i.e. all nodes start running the algorithm simultaneously . let @xmath543 be the set of nodes that stop the algorithm by . since the dominated nodes use @xmath544 as a stopping condition , @xmath543 is a @xmath542-dominating set . moreover , @xmath543 is a @xmath545-packing , which implies that each in - ball @xmath46 of radius @xmath546 contains at most @xmath547 dominators . in particular each node @xmath20 is dominated by at most constant number of dominators . the proof the algorithm terminates after at most @xmath200 rounds is almost identical to the proof of theorem  [ thm : broadcast ] . [ [ broadcast . ] ] broadcast . + + + + + + + + + +    recall that we assume that the communication graph is connected and has diameter @xmath243 . also , since @xmath548 is a metric , the graph is undirected . the broadcast part is as follows : in the first round , the source node transmits the message to its neighbors ; each dominator @xmath20 , upon receiving the message , transmits it in each round with probability @xmath232 until detecting ( @xmath183 ) , where @xmath235 is a small enough constant . note that as soon as all dominators successfully transmit at least once , all nodes will get the message . moreover , if the constant @xmath235 is small enough , then the two algorithms can be run simultaneously : the key point is that the number of dominators in each @xmath549-neighborhood is bounded by a constant ( not depending on @xmath235 ) . this ensures that the nodes _ need not know @xmath16 _ , in order to coordinate the two algorithms . it remains to show that the message will get to all dominators in @xmath244 rounds using the broadcast algorithm . consider a graph @xmath129 defined over the dominating set @xmath543 , where for every pair of nodes @xmath550 , @xmath551 form an edge if @xmath552 . the diameter of @xmath129 is at most @xmath243 . note that for every pair of nodes @xmath553 with @xmath554 , the corresponding dominators @xmath555 and @xmath556 are adjacent in @xmath129 . indeed , by the definition of the dominating set , we have @xmath557 let @xmath558 be two arbitrary nodes in @xmath543 and let @xmath19 be the path of length at most @xmath243 in @xmath238 connecting nodes @xmath555 and @xmath556 . by the observation above , if we replace each node @xmath559 with its dominator @xmath560 , we obtain a path @xmath561 of length @xmath46 in @xmath129 , connecting @xmath555 and @xmath556 . the completes the proof of the claim .    for every transmitting node @xmath562 , the probability that @xmath274 delivers its message to all its neighbors in @xmath129 is @xmath563 in each round @xmath56 , if constant @xmath235 is sufficiently small . let @xmath39 denote the set of neighbors of node @xmath274 in @xmath129 , i.e. the nodes of @xmath543 that are at distance at most @xmath564 from @xmath274 . it suffices to show that all nodes in @xmath39 receive the message in a fixed round @xmath56 where @xmath274 transmits with @xmath563 probability . this event holds if the interference at @xmath274 is no more than @xmath68  event @xmath565 , and no other node transmits in @xmath566  event @xmath567 , in round @xmath56 . by the properties of the dominating set , the contention in a ball of radius @xmath568 is at most @xmath569 . similarly to the proof of prop . [ pr : pinterferenceboundl ] , it can be shown that the expected interference by nodes in @xmath570 is @xmath571 . thus , by markov inequality , @xmath572 if @xmath235 is small enough . on the other hand , since the contention in @xmath566 is @xmath571 , @xmath573 follows by lemma  [ ieq ] . thus , @xmath574 . given that each informed node in @xmath543 has probability at least @xmath575 of successfully broadcasting the message , the rest of the proof essentially follows along the lines of the proof of  ( * ? ? ? * lemma 6 ) . we present a sketch of the proof for completeness of the argument . let @xmath576 be the set of nodes in @xmath543 that have been informed by round @xmath56 , where @xmath577 contains only the source node . let us fix a node @xmath578 and let @xmath579 be the distance ( in graph @xmath129 ) from @xmath1 to the nearest node in @xmath576 . note that @xmath580 . the difference @xmath581 is the progress made in round @xmath56 and is a bernoulli random variable with @xmath582\ge \eta$ ] for all @xmath56 when @xmath583 and @xmath584 otherwise . let @xmath585 be a random variable that has the same distribution as @xmath586 when @xmath583 and is an i.i.d . bernoulli random variable with mean @xmath587 otherwise . let @xmath588 . note that node @xmath1 has been informed by round @xmath56 iff @xmath589 . thus , we need to bound the probability @xmath590 . let @xmath591 . it is easy to show that the sequence @xmath592 is a submartingale . moreover , for a round @xmath593 and constant @xmath594 , @xmath595 implies that @xmath596 . since the sequence @xmath592 is a submartingale , we can apply azuma - hoeffding bound to show that @xmath597 . now the theorem follows by union bound over all nodes , by choosing the constant @xmath260 large enough . * theorem  [ thm : brlowerbound ] * _ for every ( possibly randomized ) broadcast algorithm @xmath246 that uses neither node coordinates nor primitive , there is a @xmath247-bounded - independence metric space where @xmath246 needs @xmath248 rounds to do broadcast in a @xmath249-broadcastable network , even if the nodes have and primitives and operate spontaneously . _ assume that @xmath598 . we present the construction using a distance function @xmath548 : it is then straightforward to construct the corresponding path - loss matrix . denote @xmath599 . first , assume the nodes operate non - spontaneously , i.e. a non - source node may need to receive a message in order to start participating in a protocol . recall that @xmath600 . consider @xmath16 points @xmath601 , such that for every @xmath602 , it holds that @xmath603 , @xmath604 , @xmath605 and @xmath606 , where @xmath607 ( see the diagram in fig . [ fig : nonspon ] ) . clearly , this set of points forms a @xmath608-bounded independence metric space . we place @xmath16 wireless nodes at distinct points @xmath601 uniformly at random . let @xmath195 be the node at @xmath609 . we assume , further , that communication only happens according to ; in particular , if the interference at a node is more than @xmath68 then _ none _ of its neighbors receives its transmission . note that broadcast in this network can be completed in 2 steps , starting at any point . note also that @xmath610 can not be directly reached from nodes @xmath195 with @xmath611 . moreover , if at least @xmath612 nodes @xmath195 with @xmath611 transmit simultaneously , _ no node _ receives a message , including the potential communication between @xmath613 and @xmath610 . this follows by observing that @xmath614 : the signal power at the neighboring nodes must be more than the interference threshold , otherwise a node could receive two signals of the same power . assume @xmath195 with some @xmath611 is the source . at the first round of the algorithm , nodes @xmath615 receive the message . let @xmath616 denote the event that @xmath613 transmits and no more than @xmath617 nodes @xmath195 with @xmath611 transmit in round @xmath56 . by the observations above , @xmath610 will not receive the message until @xmath616 happens . moreover , during the subsequent steps of the algorithm , until @xmath616 happens for the first time , all nodes at @xmath615 will have the same history and will be symmetric with respect to and primitives .    it remains to bound the expected time until @xmath616 happens for the first time . we can assume w.l.o.g . that in each round there are no more than @xmath187 nodes transmitting . as discussed above , if @xmath610 is not informed in such a round , then the nodes that transmitted in the given round can learn at best that none of them is at @xmath613 and stop transmitting thereafter . thus , we can assume that after each unsuccessful round there are at most @xmath618 nodes that stop transmitting and the probability @xmath619 of success at round @xmath620 ( if no success occurred before round @xmath33 ) is at most @xmath621 where the numerator counts the number subsets of an @xmath622-element set that contain a fixed element ( the node @xmath613 ) and no more than @xmath187 elements in total , and the denominator counts all subsets containing no more than @xmath187 elements . a further straightforward calculation shows that the expected number of rounds until the first success is @xmath248 ( see e.g.  ( * ? ? ?
Abstract:

Answer: we give efficient algorithms for the fundamental problems of broadcast and local broadcast in dynamic wireless networks . we propose a general model of communication which captures and includes both fading models ( like sinr ) and graph - based models ( such as quasi unit disc graphs , bounded - independence graphs , and protocol model ) . the only requirement is that the nodes can be embedded in a bounded growth quasi - metric , which is the weakest condition known to ensure distributed operability . both the nodes and the links of the network are dynamic : nodes can come and go , while the signal strength on links can go up or down . the results improve some of the known bounds even in the static setting , including an optimal algorithm for local broadcasting in the sinr model , which is additionally uniform ( independent of network size ) . an essential component is a procedure for balancing contention , which has potentially wide applicability . the results illustrate the importance of carrier sensing , a stock feature of wireless nodes today , which we encapsulate in primitives to better explore its uses and usefulness .