1

Impact of Node Speed on Throughput of
Energy-Constrained Mobile Networks with
Wireless Power Transfer

arXiv:1506.06575v2 [] 8 Sep 2017

Seung-Woo Ko and Seong-Lyun Kim
Abstract: A wireless charging station (WCS) transfers energy wirelessly to nodes within its charging range. This paper investigates
the impact of node speed on throughput of WCS overlaid mobile
ad-hoc networks (MANET) when packet transmissions are constrained by energy status of each node. Nodes in such a network
shows twofold charging pattern depending on their moving speeds.
A slow moving node outside WCS charging regions resorts to wait
energy charging from WCSs for a long time while that inside WCS
charging regions consistently recharges the battery. A fast moving node waits and recharges directly contrary to the slow moving
node. Reflecting these phenomena, we design a two-dimensional
Markov chain of which the state dimensions respectively represent
remaining energy and distance to the nearest WCS normalized by
node speed. Solving this enables to provide the following three impacts of speed on throughput. Firstly, higher node speed improves
throughput by reducing the inter-meeting time between nodes and
WCSs. Secondly, such throughput improvement by higher speed is
replaceable with larger battery capacity. Finally, we prove that the
throughput scaling is independent of node speed.
Index Terms: Wireless power transfer, energy provision, wireless
charging station, node speed, battery capacity, node density, scaling law.

I. INTRODUCTION
A. Motivation
Wireless mobile devices are currently pervasive, and the number of the devices is expected to be ever-growing when internetof-things (IoT) and wearable devices emerge in the near future.
This tendency makes their energy supply not only huge but also
frequent that the existing wired charging technologies cannot
cope with. Faced with the energy supply problem, wireless
power transfer (WPT) is fast becoming recognized as a viable
solution [1]. A node can recharge its battery without plugs and
wires if there is an apparatus enabling to perform WPT, known
as a wireless charging station (WCS).
This paper deals with the throughput of wireless networks
when WCSs are deployed. Mobile devices are recharged by
WCS via magnetic resonance coupling [2] of which the efficiency is high only within a few meters. A node receives energy
only when it is located in the said charging region of WCS. The
S.-W. Ko is with the Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, The University of Hong Kong, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong (email: swko@eee.hku.hk).
S.-L. Kim is with the School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea (email:
slkim@ramo.yonsei.ac.kr).
S.-W. Ko is the corresponding author.

Fig. 1. The pattern of wireless charging when node speed is slow. During the
period that a node is in the charging region of the WCS, it receives energy from
WCS continuously. Once a node is out of the charging range, on the other
hand, it takes a long time to receive energy from WCS again.

throughput of the IoT device is thus greatly influenced by its energy status that depends on its mobility pattern, especially the
moving speed, determining how frequently it can visit WCSs.
Fig. 1 shows a graphical illustration explaining the impact of
speed. When a node moves slowly, it remains in the charging
region of the WCS and can receive energy from the WCS sequentially. Once it is out of the region, on the other hand, it takes
a long time to receive energy again. In other words, an irregular energy provision occurs such that some devices consistently
receive energy from WCSs while others suffer from the lack of
energy supply, encouraging to revisit the throughput of wireless
powered mobile networks.
B. Prior Works
The most common WPT method is the magnetic inductive
coupling that electric power is delivered by means of an induced
magnetic field. The drawback of this method is its power transfer efficiency that diminishes significantly unless the transmitter
and the receiver are close in contact. Recently, there have been
efforts to develop WPT technology of which the efficiency remains high within several-meters range. In [2], Kurs et al. suggested a novel method called magnetic resonant coupling where
electric power is transferred from one to the other with high efficiency when two devices are tuned to the same resonant frequency. However, its high efficiency requirement is so tight
that it is vulnerable to the misalignment between a transmitter and a receiver. Some sophisticated tracking and alignment
techniques are proposed for practical use, i.e. frequency match-

1229-2370/15/$10.00 c 2017 KICS

2

ing [4], impedance matching [5] and resonant isolation [6]. By
exploiting them, magnetic resonant coupling is well adapted to
mobile environments, and enables to recharge not only small
electronic devices but also large electric vehicles [7].
There are several studies incorporating WPT into MANET.
In [8] and [9], the authors suggested a wireless charging vehicle (WCV) that visits all nodes to recharge their battery, and
found the optimal travel path to avoid the battery depletion of
each node. Li et al. introduced a Qi-ferry [10], which is similar
to WCV except the fact Qi-ferry consumes its own residual energy when it is moving. In other words, longer travel distance of
Qi-ferry visits more nodes whereas accelerates its energy depletion. They optimized its travel path reflecting the above tradeoff.
A distributed WPT scheme is proposed in [11] where multiple
mobile chargers wirelessly provide energy to sensors by exploiting the limited network information. These papers [8]–[11] are
based on the assumption that WPT-enabled devices have knowledge of full or limited geographical information for all rechargeable nodes, hardly estimated in mobile environments.
In [12], Huang analyzed the performance of an energyconstrained mobile network assuming the energy arrival process
of each node as an independent and identically distributed (i.i.d.)
sequence, which is relevant when many WCSs are employed and
the moving speed of each node is fast. In [13], He et al. derived a
necessary condition of the number of WCSs needed to continue
the operation of each node. In [14], Dai et al. derived Quality
of Energy Provisioning (QoEP), the expected portion of time a
node sustains its operation. They show that QoEP converges to
one as battery capacity or node speed increases. Their analysis
is based on the spatial distribution of nodes. Since various mobility models follow the same spatial distribution, only the lower
and upper bounds of QoEP are provided. A Markovian mobility model is utilized in [15] and [16] where a node can move to
a few finite points according to predetermined transition probabilities, enabling to study delay-limited and delay-tolerant communications, respectively. An intentional movement to a location providing WPT caused by the motivation of battery charging, called a spatial attraction, is studied in [17] showing that
the coverage rate can be improved by the optimally controlled
power and charging range.
The aforementioned prior works overlook the impact of
node speed affecting the process of energy arrival significantly, thereby making an impact on throughput of the energyconstrained network where a packet transmission is constrained
by the energy status of each node. This paper aims at establishing the relationship between the node speed and the throughput
in a mathematical manner. To the best of our knowledge, there
is no work on figuring out the above impact.
C. Contributions and Organization
To investigate the impact of node speed on energy provision
and corresponding throughput, we develop a new framework using a two-dimensional Markov chain. Its horizontal and vertical state dimensions respectively represent the remaining energy
and the distance to the nearest WCS. We derive its steady-state
probabilities and express throughput as a function of node speed.
The main contributions of this paper are summarized below.
• Higher node speed reduces the frequency of lengthy inter-

meeting times between a node and a WCS and eventually improves the throughput. The inter-meeting time is interpreted
as an energy-starving duration. We explain the phenomenon
through the stochastic distribution of the inter-meeting time in
Proposition 1.
• A slow-moving node stays in the charging region for a long
time. It saves enough energy to endure a lengthy inter-meeting
time if its battery capacity, the maximum amount of energy
stored in the battery, is large enough. In Proposition 2, we show
that a slow-moving node achieves the same throughput performance as a fast moving one when the battery capacity becomes
infinite.
• In Proposition 3, we show that the throughput scaling is cal
 min(1, m ) 1
n
where n and m respecculated as Θ min 1, m
n c
tively denote the number of nodes and WCSs, and c is a constant
(0 < c < 1). As the network becomes denser, the throughput
solely depends on the ratio m
n and becomes independent of node
speed unless nodes are stationary.
Note that the approach in this work is similar to that of our
previous work [18] as both apply a Markov chain to model an
energy-constrained mobile network. In [18], it is assumed that
nodes follow the i.i.d. mobility model, allows us to include only
the residual energy status as a Markov chain state. On the other
hand, our current work focuses on finite node speed, which limits node movement within a restricted area. In other words, the
current node location depends on the previous one. Therefore,
we should express not only the residual energy, but also the location information of a node when designing a Markov chain
model. Our paper illustrates that the throughput under the i.i.d.
mobility model in [18] can be understood as an upper bound of
that under the finite node speed. This upper bound is achievable
when i) node speed becomes faster, ii) battery capacity becomes
larger or iii) node density increases.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows: In Section II,
we explain our models and metrics. In Section III, we introduce
a two-dimensional Markov chain design and derive its steady
state probabilities. In Section IV, we verify how the impact of
node speed on the throughput is influenced by battery capacity
and node density. Finally, we conclude this paper in Section V.
II. MODELS AND METRICS
A. Network Description
Consider a wireless network where n nodes
√ and√m WCSs
are randomly located in a torus area of size S × S square
meter. Time is divided into equal length slots. In each slot, a
node randomly changes its direction and moves at a speed of v
(meter/time slot). Therefore, we have:
kXi (t + 1) − Xi (t)k = v,

(1)

where Xi (t) is the location of node i at slot t and k · k means
the Euclidian distance. The purpose of this mobility modelling
is to focus on the impact of node speed, the primary issue of
this paper. Although this model may not be entirely realistic, it
1 We recall that the following notation: (i) f (n) = O(g(n)) means that there
exists a constant c and integer N such that f (n) ≤ cg(n) for n > N . (ii)
f (n) = Θ(f (n)) means that f (n) = O(g(n)) and g(n) = O(f (n)).

3

enables us to develop a tractable approach placing emphasis on
node speed.
A node can transmit its packet to one of neighbors within
transmission range r. According to the protocol model [22], the
packet transmitted from node i to node j is successfully delivered when the distances between node j and the other transmitting nodes are no less than r. If the transmission range r is too
large, the transmission often fails because there are many interfering nodes. In order to avoid excessive interference, we set the
transmission range r to the average distance to the nearest node
in the area:
√
√
n−1
Z √ Sπ 
SΓ(n)
S
πx2

√
dx =
r=
1−
(2)
1 ≈ 2 n,
S
2Γ n + 2
0
R∞
where Γ(z) = 0 tz−1 e−t dt is the gamma function.
B. Two-Phase Routing
A pair of source and destination nodes is given randomly. Unless there is the corresponding destination node of a source node
in transmission range r, its packet should be delivered via a relay node. In this paper, the transmission policy follows the twophase routing [21]:
• Mode switch. In each time slot, a node becomes a transmitter
or a receiver with probability q or 1 − q, respectively.
• Phase 1. In odd time slots, let us consider node i becomes a
transmitter. If there is at least one receiver within transmission
range r, node i forwards its packet to one of them. This receiver
node can be the destination of node i.
• Phase 2. In even time slots, let us consider node i becomes a
receiver. If there is at least one transmitter within transmission
range r and one of them has a packet whose destination is node
i, it forwards the packet to node i. This transmitter can be the
source of node i.
In [21], the throughput of the two-phase routing is defined as
follows:
Definition 1. (Throughput) Let Mi (t) be the number of node i
packets that its corresponding destination node receives during
t time slots. We say that a long-term per node throughput of Λ
is feasible for every S-D pair if:
1
lim inf Mi (t) ≥ Λ.
t→∞ t

(3)

Hereafter, the long-term per node throughput is abbreviated as
the throughput. When a transmitter forwards a packet, a constant amount of energy is consumed2 . In [18], it is defined as
one unit of energy. A node is active when it has at least one unit
of energy. Otherwise, the node is inactive. We define the active
probability pon as the probability a node has at least one unit of
energy. In [18], the throughput Λ is expressed in terms of the
active probability Pon as follows:


π
π
1
Λ = · q · pon · e− 4 qpon · 1 − e 4 (−1+q) .
(4)
2
2 It is implicitly assumed that a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) is fixed
and constant power is required to deliver a packet within the transmission range.
It is interesting to adjust a control to improve the energy efficiency, which is
outside the scope of current work.

It is shown that the throughput Λ of the two-phase routing depends on the number of active nodes, which is determined by an
energy recharging process according to our recharging mechanism introduced in the following subsection.
C. Recharging Mechanism by Wireless Charging Stations
Inactive nodes cannot transmit the packets in their buffers. In
order to recharge the batteries of them, m WCSs are deployed
in the network. WCSs recharges nodes via magnetic resonance
coupling. No interference between data transmission and energy
transfer exists because each of them use a separated band.
The energy transferred to a mobile is determined by the product of the maximum deliverable units of energy E and the energy transfer efficiency τ (x), where x is the distance to its associated WCS. Let Ry denote the maximum distance that a node
can receive y units of energy. Without loss of generality, the efficiency τ (x) is a monotone decreasing function of x, and the
charging range Ry is determined by finding the value of x that
E · τ (x) becomes y, such that Ry = {x : E · τ (x) = y}.
For tractable analysis, the efficiency τ (x) is independent of
node speed. Let us denote by Yj (t) the location of WCS j
in time t. The distance between node i and WCS j becomes
kXi (t) − Yj (t)k where k · k means the Euclidean distance, and
the recharged units of energy υ (kXi (t) − Yj (t)k) is
υ(kXi (t) − Yj (t)k) =

 E if kXi (t) − Yj (t)k ≤ RE
k if Rk+1 < kXi (t) − Yj (t)k ≤ Rk , k = 1, · · · , E − 1,

0 else,
(5)
where RE < RE−1 < · · · < R1 . Throughout this paper, we use the energy transfer efficiency function in [9], i.e,
τ (x) = −0.0958x2 − 0.0377x + 1.0, which is obtained through
the curve fitting of the experimental results of [3]. Let us define
charging range as the maximum distance that a node receives
at least one unit of energy from a WCS. Given the recharging
mechanism of (5), the charging range is R1 . The time required
to receive energy from a WCS to a node is extremely short compared to one time slot3 . This means that the contact duration
is long enough to deliver up to E units of energy unless node
speed becomes infinite.
The battery of each node is recharged by one of WCSs. Even
though a node is in the charging regions in multiple WCSs, it
is assumed to associate with only one WCS due to the practical alignment technique, and the maximum recharged energy
within one time slot is E units of energy. The maximum battery
capacity of each node is set to L units of energy. If the sum
of residual and recharged units of energy are larger than L, a
node saves L units of energy only, and the remaining is thrown
out. Each WCS can recharge up to u nodes at a time4 . When
3 It is a reasonable setting because the maximum power transfer rate of magnetic resonance coupling is 12 Watt [7] whereas that of an LTE mobile is 23
dBm.
4 The number u depends on the technique to track the resonance frequency.
For example, it is experimentally shown in [19] and [20] that up to two devices
can be charged by using the technique of the said resonant frequency splitting
and load balancing, respectively.

4

there are more than u nodes within the charging region, WCS
randomly selects u nodes among them.
Each WCS always monitors own remaining energy. If the
remaining energy is below a certain level, it communicates with
an operator station by using its communication module. The operator station then sends the charging vehicle, which recharges
the WCS before its battery runs out. This means that all WCSs
always have sufficient energy.
III. STOCHASTIC MODELING OF MOBILE NETWORKS
WITH WIRELESS CHARGING STATIONS
In this section, we design a two-dimensional Markov chain
in which the horizontal and vertical state dimensions represent
the residual energy and the distance to the nearest WCS, respectively. We first outline our Markov chain design, and then derive
its steady state probabilities to determine the active probability
Pon in (4).
A. Two-Dimensional Markov Chain
The state space of our two-dimensional Markov chain Ψ is
given as follows:
Ψ = {(e, d) : 0 ≤ e ≤ L, 0 ≤ d ≤ M } ,

the index t. The exact form of Pi,j and its derivation process are
in Appendix A. It is worth mentioning that all transition probabilities Pi,j are constant regardless of the residual energy status.
A node cannot move to the charging region intentionally because it does not know WCS’s location. Its energy status is thus
determined by incident contacts to other nodes or WCSs.
• The state transition to the left arises when the node transmits
a packet to one of neighbours nodes. Let pt denote a probability
that an active node can transmit its packet as
"

n−1 #
πr2
pt = q · 1 − 1 − (1 − q)
,
(9)
S
of which the detailed derivation process is in Appendix B. Unless its residual energy e is zero, the transmission probability pc
is constant regardless of the relative distance d of (7).
• The state transition to the right arises when the node is
recharged by a WCS. This event only happens when the node
is selected by one of WCSs is in the charging region, and these
are only stipulated on the lowest state transition (d = 0). Recall that each WCS can charge up to u nodes in a given slot.
We define a charging probability pc as the possibility the node
becomes one of u selected nodes, i.e,

(6)
pc =

where parameter e is the number of remaining units of energy,
and d is a discrete number indicating the distance to the nearest
WCS by the following rule5 :

if minj kXi (t) − Yj (t)k ≤ R1 ,

0


1
else if minj kXi (t) − Yj (t)k ≤ R1 + v,




..

.
(7)
d=
k
else if minj kXi (t) − Yj (t)k ≤ R1 + kv,




..


.



M
otherwise.
The number M in (7) is interpreted as the resolution of the
Markov chain in the sense that larger M can express the movement pattern of a node more accurately. The number d is understood as a relative distance at the point that a physical distance
is normalized by node speed v.
Figure 2 represents an example of the two-dimensional
Markov chain when WCS can deliver up to two units of energy
to a node within one time slot (E = 2). There are threefold state
transitions as follows:
• The state transition to the up or down arises when the relative
distance to the nearest WCS d of (7) becomes further or closer,
respectively. Let Pi,j detnote the probability that the relative
distance d is changed from i to j, i.e,
Pi,j (t) = Pr [d = j at t + 1 slot|d = i at t slot] .

(8)

The mobility model follows a time-invariant Markovian process
of which the transition probabilities are constant regardless of
slot t, and Pi,j (t) can be simply expressed as Pi,j by omitting
5 The mobile is assumed to always have at least one packet to transmit. It is
possible to figure out random data arrival by plugging one more dimension in
the Markov chain model in Fig. 2, which remains as a future work.

1 − γ(u, n)m

m ,
2
1 − 1 − πRS1

(10)

where
πR1 2
πR1 2
F (u − 2; n − 1,
)
S
S


u
πR1 2
−
1 − F (u − 1; n,
,
(11)
n
S

Pk
and F (k; n, p) = i=0 ni pi (1−p)n−i is the cumulative distribution function (CDF) of the binomial distribution with parameters k, n and p. Its derivation process is in Appendix B. The
number of recharged units of energy depends on the distance
to its associated WCS. Let β(i) denote a probability a node receives i units of energy as follows:
( 2
Ri −Ri+1 2
if i = 1, · · · , E − 1,
2
β(i) = R 2 R1
i
if i = E.
R1 2
γ(u, n) =1 −

A node in the charging region thus receives i units of energy
with probability pc β(i).
B. Steady State Probability and Throughput
Let πe,d denote the steady state probability when the
residual energy is e and the relative distance is d.
Then, we make the following steady state vector π =
π0,0 , · · · π0,M , π1,0 , · · · π1,M , · · · πL,0 , · · · πL,M , which is
partitioned according to the number of remaining units of energy, i.e,


(12)
π = π0 π1 · · · πL ,
where


πi = πi,0 πi,1 · · · πi,M .

(13)

5

PT

0, M

PT

2, 1

1, 0

PT

2, 0

PC β(1)

...

PT

4, 2

PT

PT

PT

PT

3, 1

3, 0

PC β(1)

...

PT

4, 1

P 1,0

4, 0

...

PT

P 1,2

PT

L-1, 1

L-1, 0

P 2,1

L, 1

P 0,1

P 1,0

PC β(1)

P 3,2

L, 2

P 2,1

P 0,1

PT

P 2,3

PT

L-1, 2

PT

P 1,0

PT

L, M

P 3,2

P 1,2

P 2,1

P 0,1

PT

PT

P 2,1

P 1,0

0, 0

P 2,3

P 3,2

3, 2

PT

L-1, M

...

PT

2, 2

P 1,2

P 2,3

PT

...

...

1, 1

P 3,2

PT

4, M

...

P 0,1

P 2,1

PT

0, 1

PT

1, 2

P 2,1

P 2,3

...

PT

0. 2

P 1,2

P 3,2

PT

3, M

...

P 3,2

PT

2, M

...

...
P 2,3

PT

1, M

PT

P 1,IN

L, 0

PC

Fig. 2. Two-dimensional Markov chain of which the horizontal and vertical state dimensions represent the number of remaining units of energy and the relative
distance to the nearest WCS normalized by node speed, respectively.

In order to derive π, we make the following balance equation:
πQ = 0,

π1 = 1,

(14)

where 1 is the column vector where every entity is one, and Q
is the generating matrix of the corresponding Markov chain:


B0 A2 A3 0 0 ... 0 0
0
 A0 A1 A2 A3 0 ... 0 0

0


 0 A0 A1 A2 A3 ... 0 0

0


 .. .. .. .. .. . . .. ..

Q= . . . . .
. (15)
. . .


 0 0 0 0 0 ... A1 A2

A3


 0 0 0 0 0 ... A0 A1 A2+A3 
0 0 0 0 0 ... 0 A0 A1+A2+A3
Its sub-matrices B0 , A0 , A1 , A2 and A3 are expressed as follows:


−P0,1−pc
P0,1
0
···
0
 P1,0 −P1,0−P1,2

P1,2
···
0




0
P2,1
−P2,1−P2,3 ···
0
B0 = 
,


..
..
..
.
..
..


.
.
.
.
0

0

0

··· −PM,M −1


pt ··· 0


A0 =  ... . . . ...  = pt I, A1 = B0−A0 ,
0 ··· pt





pc β(1) ··· 0
pc β(2) ··· 0

 .
. . .. 
. . .. 
A2 =  ...
. . , A3 =  ..
. . .


0

··· 0

0

··· 0

After solving the balance equation of (14), we acquire the active
probability Pon as
Pon

L
X
=
πi 1 = 1−π0 1.

(16)

i=1

With (4), the throughput Λ is given as


π
π
1
(17)
Λ = ·q·(1−π0 1)·e− 4 q(1−π0 1)· 1−e 4 (−1+q) .
2
IV. Performance Evaluation of Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks
with Wireless Charging Stations
A. Inter-meeting time and Throughput
In this subsection, we explain how node speed v affects the
throughput Λ by means of inter-meeting time defined as follows:
Definition 2. (Inter-meeting time) Consider there are node i and
WCS j in the network. The inter-meeting time TI is the interval
between adjacent meeting events between node i and WCS j.
TI = inf{t ≥ 0 : Zt+k = 1 | Zk = 1},

(18)

6

0

10

0.04

Throughput Λ (packet/time slot)

0.035
−1

Pr [TI>t]

10

Simulation (v=1.0 (meter/time slot))
−2

10

Simulation (v=2.0 (meter/time slot))
Simulation (v=3.0 (meter/time slot))
Simulation (v=6.0 (meter/time slot))
Simulation (i.i.d mobility model)
Analysis (v=1.0 (meter/time slot))

−3

10

Analysis (v=2.0 (meter/time slot))

0.03

0.025

Simulation
0.02

Simulation (i.i.d mobility model)
Analysis

Analysis (v=3.0 (meter/time slot))

0.015

Analysis (v=6.0 (meter/time slot))

Analysis (i.i.d mobility model)

Exponential distribution (μ=18.7174)
−4

10

0

10

1

2

10

10

0.01

3

10

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Node speed v (meter/time slot)

t

(a) Inter-meeting time

(b) Throughput

Fig. 3. (a) The stochastic distribution of inter-meeting time under various speed v. (b) Throughput as a function of speed v (S = 20, L = 10, q = 0.5, u = 1,
E = 3, n = 10, m = 1).

where Zt is an indicator to check whether a meeting event occurs between node i and WCS j at time t. If kXi (t)−Yj (t)k ≤
R1 , we set Zt to one. Otherwise, Zt = 0.
The inter-meeting time TI is closely linked to an energy starving period because a node has no opportunity to receive energy
until one of WCSs is encountered. The stochastic features of
TI is thus related to an energy provision process of an arbitrary
node. Let us denote by P an M by M matrix of which the
elements represents the transition probability Pi,j (8) (1 ≤ i,
j ≤ M ):

 

p1
P1,1 P1,2 ... P1,M −1 P1,M
 p2   P2,1 P2,2 ... P1,M −1 P2,M 

 

P = . = .
.. . .
..
.. , (19)
 ..   ..
.
.
.
. 
pM
PM,1 PM,2 ... PM −1,M PM,M
where

pi = Pi,1 Pi,2 ... Pi,M −1 Pi,M .

(20)

From P (19), we derive the stochastic distribution of intermeeting time TI in the following Proposition:
Proposition 1. The complementary cumulative distribution
function (CCDF) of the inter-meeting time TI is
Pr[TI > t] =

M
X
γi λt−1
,
i

(21)

i=1

where λi is the ith eigenvalue of P (19) (1 > λ1 > ··· > λM >
0). The coefficient γi is
γi = p0 ai bT
i ,
where vectors ai and bi are the right-hand and left-hand eigenvectors of λi such that P ai = λi ai and b∗i P = λi b∗i 6 , respectively.
6 x∗

is a conjugate transpose of x.

Proof. See Appendix D.



Figure 3 (a) depicts the CCDFs of inter-meeting time TI . We
numerically measure the inter-meeting time TI by changing the
node speed as v = 1.0, 2.0, 3.0 and 6.0 (meters/slot). The higher
is the node speed v, the less frequent are lengthy inter-meeting
times. A node with a higher speed can reach the charging region
of the WCS within a few time slots, reducing the occurrence of
lengthy inter-meeting times. A node with a higher speed can
move farther from its previous location, and whether or not to
encounter a WCS solely depends on the ratio of the charging
2
1
region to the network area, i.e., µ1 = πR
S 2 ≈ 0.053 as does the
i.i.d. mobility model. With increased node speed, the distribution converges to that of the i.i.d. mobility model following the
exponential distribution with parameter µ ≈ 18.7174.
The CCDF of TI of (21) is the sum of powered eigenvalues
with the exponent t. As t becomes larger, we approximate it
in terms of the largest eigenvalue λ1 because other terms decay
faster:
Pr[TI > t] ≈ λt1 .

(22)

The eigenvalue λ1 is called the spectral radius of matrix P (19).
As the spectral radius becomes smaller, the approximated CCDF
(22) decreases more sharply especially when t is large. This
indicates that lengthy inter-meeting times are infrequent when
λ1 is small. In Table 1, we summarize this spectral radius λ1 as
a function of node speed v and show that λ1 is a non-increasing
function of node speed v. Consequently, a higher node speed
decreases spectral radius λ1 and produces fewer occurrences of
lengthy inter-meeting times.
The above feature of the inter-meeting time affects the energy provision process. Figure 3 (b) shows this impact. When
node speed v is 0.5 (meter/time slot), the throughput is nearly
one-third of that of the i.i.d. mobility model. A node is unable to receive energy for a long time due to the lengthy intermeeting time and remains in an inactive state. This results in
a decrease in throughput. As v increases, on the other hand,

7

λ1

v=0.5
0.9985

v=1.0
0.9953

v=1.5
0.9903

v=2.0
0.9845

v=2.5
0.9780

v=3.0
0.9714

v=3.5
0.9649

v=4.0
0.9585

v=4.5
0.9534

v=5.0
0.9492

v=5.5
0.9471

v=6.0
0.9457

Table 1. Spectral radius λ1 as a function of node speed v.

Equation (22) and the spectral radius λ1 in Table 1.

0.04

Throughput Λ (packet/time slot)

0.035

E[TI ] =

t=0

0.03

0.025

simulation (v=0.5 (meter/time slot))
simulation (v=1.5 (meter/time slot))

0.02

simulation (i.i.d mobility model)
Analysis (v=0.5 (meter/time slot))

0.015

Analysis (v=1.5 (meter/time slot))
Analysis (i. i. d mobility model)

0.01

Proposition 2
0.005
0
10

∞
∞
X
X
Pr[TI > t] ≈
λ1 t =

1

10

2

10

3

10

4

t=0

1
1−λ1

(24)

When the battery capacity L is no less than E[TI ], the throughput Λ becomes the same as that in Proposition 2 (23). For example, when node speed v is 0.5 or 1.5 (meter/slot), its spectral
radius λ1 is 0.9985 or 0.9903 (see Table 1) and its corresponding E[TI ] becomes 666.67 or 103.09, respectively. As a result,
a battery capacity larger than E[TI ] is a necessary condition to
achieve Proposition 2.

10

Battery capacity L

C. Node Density and Throughput
Fig. 4. Throughput as a function of battery capacity L (S = 20, q = 0.5,
u = 1, E = 3, n = 10, m = 1).

the inter-meeting time decreases. This leads to a reduction in
energy-starving period and improvement of throughput.

Since the seminal work by Grossglauser and Tse [21], investigating the relationship between throughput Λ and node density
n has been the most fundamental issue with mobile networks;
therefore yet the impact of irregular energy provision due to low
node speed has not been studied. In this subsection, we investigate this effect through some numerical evaluations and the
following throughput scaling law.

B. Battery Capacity and Throughput
Proposition 3. The scaling law of the throughput Λ is:
Consider a slow-moving node with a rather longer sojourn
time, the duration a node remains in the charging region. The
node can receive energy continuously from the associated WCS.
Nevertheless, the node is unable to save more than L units of
energy due to the battery capacity constraint. In other words,
the node can remain active longer if the battery capacity were to
be increased. We start with the following proposition.


 m

m
Λ = Θ min 1,
cmin(1, n ) ,
n
where 0 < e− 4·a < c ≤ e− 4·a (
π
1−e− 4 (1−q) .
π·u

Proof. See Appendix F.
Proposition 2. When the battery capacity L becomes infinite,
the throughput of an energy-constrained network Λ is

π·u

PE

(25)

) < 1, and a =

k=1kβ(k)



Proposition 3 indicates that the throughput Λ is a function of
the ratio of the number of WCSs m and the number of nodes
"
( 
!#
m ) X
E

 n, and independent of node speed v. A node with low speed
π(q−1)
pc
πR1 2
q
1− 1−
kβ(k)
1−e 4
Λ = min 1,
receives energy from WCSs irregularly, yielding the decrease
2
pt
S
k=1
of throughput. Compared with fast-moving one, it needs more

 
m 

PE
πR1 2
pc
WCSs to maintain the same throughput. As the network beπ
1− 1− S
− 4 q·min 1, p
( i=kkβ(k))
t
·e
,
(23) comes denser, however, the penalty due to slow speed disappears and we only consider the ratio m
n when installing WCSs.
In order to achieve the constant throughput of Θ(1) as in [21],
which is independent of node speed v.
for example, Θ(n) WCSs is required regardless of node speed.
Proof. See Appendix E.

Note that the scaling law in Proposition 3 of (25) is the same
as that of the i.i.d. mobility model in [18]. Figure 5 shows that
Figure 4 represents the throughput Λ as a function of battery the throughput Λ always converges to that of the i.i.d. mobility
capacity L. As the battery capacity L increases, the throughput model as the number of nodes n increases. This implies that a
increases and converges according to Proposition 2 (23) (see the high node density makes nodes look as if they are moving at a
black dotted line). An interesting point is that Proposition 2 fast speed in the sense that the i.i.d. mobility model allows a
is achievable even under a finite battery capacity. If a node can node to increase moving speed v up to the network size. When
store enough energy to sustain the inter-meeting time, it remains calculating the throughput of a dense mobile network with WPT,
in an active state and achieves the throughput in Proposition 2. it is a reasonable assumption that nodes move according to the
We calculate the mean of the inter-meeting time E[TI ] utilizing i.i.d. mobility model.

8

0.04

0.055

Simulation (v=0.5 (meter/time slot))

0.05

0.035

0.03

Simulation (i.i.d mobility model)
0.025

Analysis (v=0.5 (meter/time slot))
Analysis (v=1.0 (meter/time slot))

0.02

Analysis (i.i.d mobility model)
0.015

0.01

Throughput Λ (packet/time slot)

Throughput Λ (packet/time slot)

Simulation (v=1.0 (meter/time slot))
0.045

0.04

0.035

Simulation (v=0.5 (meter/time slot))
0.03

Simulation (v=1.0 (meter/time slot))
0.025

Simulation (i.i.d mobility model)
Analysis (v=0.5 (meter/time slot))

0.02

Analysis (v=1.0 (meter/time slot))
0.005

0
1
10

0.015

2

10

3

10

Analysis (i.i.d mobility model)

0.01
1
10

2

3

10

The number of nodes n

10

The number of nodes n

(a) The number of WCSs m = 1

(b) The number of WCSs m =

n
10

Fig. 5. Throughput as a function of node density n (S = 20, q = 0.5, u = 1, E = 3, L = 10).

V. Concluding Remarks
In this paper, we determined the impact of node speed on
the throughput of an energy-constrained mobile network where
WPT-enabled apparatuses, known as WCSs, are deployed and
recharge nodes within their charging regions. There are two distinct energy provision patterns according to node speed difference. A slow-moving node outside a WCS’s charging region
waits a long time for energy supply from WCSs, whereas one
inside the charging region recharges its battery consistently. On
the other hand, a fast-moving node enables energy to be delivered from a WCS within a short interval. Such a node receives energy in a regular manner, contrary to the slow-moving
node. The analytic and numerical results showed that this distinct energy-provisioning process yields a throughput difference
between slow- and fast-moving users when the battery capacity
is finite and the network is sparse. On the other hand, if the battery capacity of a node is large enough to save sufficient energy
from WCSs or the network becomes denser, the difference between the two sets of results disappears. These findings provide
some guidelines for mobile network architectures with WPT
such as IoT. First, the charging opportunity of each node should
be prioritized according to moving speed. Once a slow-moving
node leaves a charging region, it will require a long amount of
time until it visits the charging region again, and a WCS should
recharge its battery until it is full. On the other hand, a fastmoving node does not need to charge its battery preferentially
because it can re-enter the charging region within a short interval. Second, installing WCSs in sparse regions with high mobility, such as motorways, is an efficient energy-provisioning
strategy. By exploiting the fast moving speed of vehicles, these
WCSs deliver energy to mobile nodes in a regular pattern. In
dense regions, on the other hand, the distinct energy provisioning coming from the node speed difference disappears and only
the ratio of density between nodes and WCSs determines the
throughput performance.
A weakness of this study is the simple mobility model where
each node moves without preference. In a real network, on the
other hand, users are likely to visit some popular places fre-

quently, resulting in an energy supply shortage due to the relatively high node density in the area. Further work should therefore involve user preference and verify its impact on throughput.
Another extension of this work is to inform users of the locations
of WCSs. Moreover, considering the economic aspect of WCSs
is another interesting avenue for future research.
Appendix
A. Transition Probability Pi,j of (8)
Let Dt denote the distance between a node and a WCS at
time t. Since nodes and WCSs are uniformly distributed in a
torus area, the conditional probability that Dt+1 is smaller than
or equal to x2 given Dt = x1 is
Pr[Dt+1 ≤ x2 |Dt = x1 ]

0
if v+x2 < x1 or v−x2 > x1 ,



 2

v +x1 2 −x2
2
arccos
2vx1
=
if |v−x2 | ≤ x1 < v+x2 ,

π


1
if x2−v > x1 ,

(26)

which is based on the fact that nodes and WCSs are uniformly
distributed in a torus area. From the conditional probability (26),
we derive the joint cumulative distribution function (CDF) that
Dt is smaller than or equal to x1 , and Dt+1 is smaller than or
equal to x1 :
Pr[Dt ≤ x1 ,Dt+1 ≤ x2 ]
Z x1
=
Pr[Dt+1 ≤ x2 |Dt = x]fDt (x)dx.

(27)

0

Using (27), we calculate the following joint probability:
Pr[x1 ≤ Dt ≤ x2 ,x3 ≤ Dt+1 ≤ x4 ]
=Pr[Dt ≤ x2 ,Dt+1 ≤ x4 ]−[Dt ≤ x1 ,Dt+1 ≤ x4 ]
−Pr[Dt ≤ x2 ,Dt+1 ≤ x3 ]+Pr[Dt ≤ x1 ,Dt+1 ≤ x3 ]. (28)
By inserting the boundary values of the i and j states in (7) into
x1 , x2 , x3 and x4 in (28), we can derive the joint probability

9

αi,j that relative distances d (7) at time slot t and t+1 are i and
j, respectively. In order to calculate α0,1 , for example, we set
x1 = 0, x2 = R1 , x3 = R1 and x4 = R1+v.
Define Aa,b as the joint CCDF that both relative distances dt
and dt+1 are equal to or larger than a and b when the number of
WCSs m is one, which is expressed as the sum of αi,j , i.e.,
Aa,b =

M X
M
X
αi,j .

(29)

i=a j=b

Noting that each location of WCSs is independent, we derive
Pi,j in terms of Aa,b as follows:
• If i = 0,

A m −A1,1 m



if j = 0,
1− 0,1

πR 2 m

1−
1− S1

m
m
A0,1 −A1,1
P0,j =


if j = 1,
πR 2 m

1− 1− S1



0
Otherwise.
If 0 < i < M ,

Ai,i m −Ai+1,i m
o
1− n π(R1 +(i−1)v)

2 om n
π(R1 +iv)2 m

1−
− 1−

S
S


m
m
m

+Ai+1,i+1 m
 n Ai,i −Ai+1,i 2−A
omi+1,i
n
o
π(R1 +(i−1)v)
π(R1 +iv)2 m
1−
−
1−
Pi,j =
S
S

Ai,i+1 m −Ai+1,i+1 m


 n1− π(R1 +(i−1)v)2 om −n1− π(R1 +iv)2 om

S
S


0

The denominator of (32) represents the probability that the node
is in one of the WCS’s charging regions. After substituting (30)
into (32), the charging probability pc becomes
i
m−i
2
2
A πRS1
1− πRS1
m

pc = 1−
2
1− 1− πRS1
i
m−i

Pm
2
2
1− i=0 mi A πRS1
1− πRS1

m
=
2
1− 1− πRS1

m
2
2
1− A πRS1 +1− πRS1

m
=
.
2
1− 1− πRS1
Pm



m
i=1 i

(33)

After inserting (31) into (33), we complete the proof.
C. Transmission Probability pt of (9)

•

•

If i = M ,
A
m
−AM,M m
M,M −1



π(R1 +M v)2 m

 1−
S
m
AM,M
PM,j =  π(R
2 m
1 +M v)

1−

S


0

if j = i−1,
if j = i,

Assume that a node is active. The node consumes one unit
of energy when its mode is that of a transmitter, and there is at
least one receiver within r:
(

if j = i+1,
Otherwise.

if j = M−1,
if j = M ,
Otherwise.


i )

πr2
n−1
pt = q
1− 1−
(1−q)i q n−1−i
S
i
i=0

i
n−1
Xn−1
πr2
(1−q) 1−
= q−q
q n−1−i
i
S
i=0
n−1


πr2
+q
= q−q (1−q) 1−
S
" 
n−1 #
πr2
= q 1− 1−(1−q)
S
n−1
X

B. Charging Probability pc of (10)
Given that there are i WCSs within R1 from a node, the probability that the node is charged by one of the WCSs pc (i) is
"

 
#i

πR1 2
u
f l;n−1,
min 1,
l+1
S

n−1
X

pc (i) = 1− 1−

l=0

= 1−Γi ,

where f (n;k,p) is the probability density function of the binomial distribution with parameters n, k and p, and




 u 1−F u−1;n, πR1 2
S
πR1 2
Γ = 1−F u−2;n−1,
−
.(31)
S
nπR2
The
 that there are i WCSs within R1 from a node is
 probability
πR1 2
f i;m, S . Therefore, the charging probability pc is

pc =



πR1 2
i=1pc (i)f i;m, S

m
2
1− 1− πRS1

According to [24], the CCDF of TI is
Pr[TI > t] = p0 P t−1 1

(30)

Pm

D. Proof of Proposition 1


(32)

(34)

Assume that matrix P (19) is invertible7 , it can be diagonalized
as follows:
P = V DV −1
 T 
b1
λ1 0 ··· 0
 bT 
0
λ
···
0

2

 2 
= a1 a2 ··· aM  . . .
.  . .
 .. .. . . ..  .. 
0 0 ··· λM
bT
M


(35)

7 It is a reasonable assumption that the transition probability, expressed as a
row vector in P , is independent of the current location status d of (7) unless
speed is infinite, P is likely to be a full rank matrix guaranteeing the existence
of M eigenvalues. It is also verified numerically under numerous combinations
of parameter settings.

10

Therefore, P t−1 is
λ1 t−1 0
t−1

 0 λ2
t−1
P
= a1 a2 ... aM  .
..
 ..
.


0

...
...
..
.

0
0
..
.

... λM t−1

0

bT
1
 bT
 2
 ..
 .




bT
M

t−1
t−1
t−1
= a1 bT
+a2 bT
+···+aM bT
1 λ1
2 λ2
M λM
M
X
=
Gi·(λi )t−1 ,
i=1






(36)

T
where Gi = a
i bi are M×M matrices of which the sum is an
PM
identity matrix
i=1Gi = I . Using (36), (34) is rewritten as
M
M
X
X
Pr[TI > t] =
p0 Gi 1λi t−1 =
γi·λi t−1 .
i=1

i=1

According to [23], every eigenvalue of an irreducible substochastic matrix is less than 1. Matrix P (19) is a substochastic
matrix because every row sum is 1 except the first one due to a
strictly positive transition probability P1,0 . Consequently, λi is
smaller than one for every i.

From (39), we derive the mean steady-state arrival rate λ̄:
!
!
( 
m ) X
E
E
X
πR1 2
λ̄ = φ
kAk+1 1 = pc 1− 1−
kβ(k)
S
k=1

k=1

If λ̄ < pt , the active probability Pon is
( 
!
m ) X
E
pc
πR1 2
λ̄
=
1− 1−
kβ(k) . (40)
Pon =
pt
pt
S
k=1

Otherwise, Pon = 1. After inserting (40) into (4), we obtain
Proposition 2 (23).
F. Proof of Proposition 3
For the first step, we check the ratio ppct as the number n increases:
m
1− 1− nu
pc

≈ 

π
πR2
pt
q 1−(1− S 1 )m 1−e− 4 (1−q)
m 
u

 if m = O(n)
2
π

 n q 1−(1− πR
1 m
1−e− 4 (1−q)
S )
(41)
=
1

Otherwise.



πR2

− π (1−q)
q 1−(1−

S

1 )m

1−e

4

E. Proof of Proposition 2
As the battery capacity L goes infinity, this Markov process (15) becomes batch Markovian arrival process (BMAP).
The stochastic process of BMAP can be described by the mean
steady-state arrival rate λ̄. According to [25], the authors explain
how to derive λ̄. First, an infinite generator D is calculated as
follows:
D = B0+A2+A3+···+AE−1

−P0,1
P0,1
0
 P1,0 −P1,0−P1,2
P
1,2


P2,1
−P2,1−P2,3
= 0
 ..
..
..
 .
.
.
0

0

0

···
···
···
..
.

0
0
0
..
.





 (37)



··· −PM,M −1

Let us denote by φk steady state probability that the relative distance d is k. We make the following row vector φ:


φ = φ0 , φ1 , φ2 , ···, φM
i
hP
PL
PL
PL
L
=
j=0πM,j
j=0π0,j ,
j=0π1,j ,
j=0π2,j , ···,
It can be obtained by solving the following equations:
φD = 0, φ1 = 1.

(38)

We get φk as follows:
 
m
πR1 2

1−
1−
if k = 0

S


m
π(R1 +M v)2
φk =
1−
if k = M
S

n
o
n
o

m
m
2
2


1−π(R1 +(k−1)v)
− 1−π(R1S+kv)
Otherwise
S
(39)

We already proved the upper bound according to Proposition 2
(23) as follows:


 m
m
c1 min(1, n )
(42)
Λ ≤ Λupper = Θ min 1,
n
E
π·u
where c1 = e− 4·a ( k=1kβ(k)) .
In order to derive the lower bound, consider each WCS only
delivers one unit of energy to a node in a time slot (E = 1).
Since the submatrices A2 and A3 in the generating matrix Q
(15) is null matrices, the Markov process becomes finite QuasiBirth-Death Process (QBD). In [26], the authors showed that
the steady state probability vector πk (13) of finite QBD can be
expressed in a matrix geometric form:

P

πk = v1 R1 k+v2 R2 L−k .

(43)

Here, matrices R1 and R2 are
R1 = −A2(A1+ηA0 )

−1

R2 = −A0(A1+A0 G)

−1

(44)
(45)

where η is the spectral radius of R1 , and G is the square matrix
that the every element of the first column is one and the others
are zero. Detailed derivations of R1 and R2 are in [27]. Row
vectors v1 and v2 satisfy the following conditions:




B1+R1 A0
R1 L−1(A0+R1(A0+B0 ))
v1 v2
=0
R2 L−1(R2 B0+A0 )
A0+A1+R2 A0
(46)
!

L
L
X
X
v1 R1 i+v1 R1 i 1 = 1
i=0

i=0

(47)

11

where

X1 =

pt P0,1 +pc
pt P0,1 +pc P1,2
pc P1,0 +1
pc P1,0 P2,1
pt P0,1 +pc
pt P0,1 +pc P1,2
pt
pc P1,0 +1 pc P1,0 P2,1 + P2,1 +1

X3 =

pt P0,1
pt P0,1 P1,2
pc P1,0
pc P1,0 P2,1
pt P0,1 +pc P1,2
pt P0,1 +pc
pc P1,0 +1 pc P1,0 P2,1

, X2 =

pt P0,1
pt P0,1 P1,2
pc P1,0
pc P1,0 P2,1
pt P0,1 +pc
pt P0,1 +pc P1,2
pc
pc P1,0 +1 pc P1,0 P2,1 + P2,1 +1

,

,

(48)

ab
= ad−bc.
cd

The boundary condition (46) is derived by inserting (43) into the
first and last columns of the balance equation (14), and condition
(47) means the summation of the entire steady state probabilities
is one.
From the equation (43), the active probability Pon (16) is
rewritten as follows:
Pon = 1−(v1+v2 R2 L )1

(49)

Since the active probability Pon is a non-decreasing function of
the battery capacity L, we make the following inequality condition:

where X1 , X2 and X3 are described in (48). As n increases, the
X2
2
ratios X
and X
X1 reduce to zero. From the inequalities (51) and
1
(55), the active probability Pon is
n 
m o
πR1 2
1−
1−
S
pc φ1
pc
Pon >
=
.
(56)
pt 2
pt
2
We can derive the lower bound of the throughput Λ as

 m

m
Λ > Λlower = Θ min 1,
c2 min(1, n ) ,
n

(57)

π·u

where c2 = e− 8·a . From the upper bound (42) and lower bound
(57), we complete to prove Proposition 3.

Pon ≥ 1−(v1+v2 R2 )1
!
1
1
X
X
i
i
= v1 R1 +v1 R1 1−(v1+v2 R2 )1
i=0

REFERENCES

i=0

= (v1 R1+v2 )1

(50)

All elements in matrix R1 is zero except the first row, and the
first element of v1 is zero. Therefore, v1 R1 becomes zero and
the above inequality (50) becomes
M
X
v2,i ≥ v2,0

[1]
[2]
[3]

(51)

[4]

From the condition (46), we make the following relations between v1 and v2 ,

v1 = −v2 R2+pt B0 −1 ,
(52)
v1+v2(I+R2 ) = φ.
(53)

[5]

After inserting (52) into (53), we derive v2 as

[7]

Pon ≥ v2 1 =

i=0

v2 = φ I−pt B0 −1

[8]

−1
.

(54)

According to numerical verifications, it is checked that v2,0 is an
increasing function of the resolution factor M . When M = 3,
the vector v2 becomes:


X1
1
 −X2 
v2,0 = φ pt
( pc +1)X1− ppct X2+ ppct X3 X
3

φ1 X1−φ2 X2+φ3 X3
( ppct +1)X1− ppct X2+ ppct X3


X2
X3
φ
−φ
+φ
pc 1 2 X1 3 X1
>
,
pt
2

[6]

=

[9]

[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]

(55)

J. C. Lin, “Wireless power transfer for mobile applications and health
effects," IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine, vol. 55, no. 2, pp.
250-253, April 2013.
A. Kurs, A. Karalis, R. Moffatt, J. D. Joannopoulos, P. Fisher and M.
Soljačić, “Wireless power transfer via strongly coupled magnetic resonances," Science, vol. 317, no. 5834, pp. 83-86, July 2007.
A. Kurs, R. Moffatt and M. Soljačić, “Simultaneous mid-range power
transfer to multiple devices," Appl. Phys. Lett., vol. 96, pp. 0441021−044102-3, Jan. 2010.
A. P. Sample, D. A. Meyer and J. R. Smith, “Analysis, experimental results, and range adaption of magnetically coupled resonators for wireless
power transfer," IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 58, no. 2, pp. 544-554,
Feb. 2011.
T. C. Beh, M. Kato, T. Imura, S. Oh and Y. Hori, “Automated impedance
matching system for robust wireless power transfer via magnetic resonance coupling," IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 60, no. 9, pp. 36893697, Sep. 2013.
S. K. Yoon, S. J. Kim and U. K. Kwon, “A new circuit structure for near
field wireless power transmission," in Proc. IEEE Symp. Circuit Syst. ,
Seoul, Korea, May 2012, pp. 982-985.
M. Kesler, “Highly resonant wireless power transfer: safe, efficient, and
over distance," Witricity Corporation, 2013.
L. Xie, Y. Shi, Y. T. Hou and H. D. Sherali, “Making sensor networks immoral: an energy-renewal approach with wireless power transfer," IEEE/ACM Trans. Netw., vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 1748-1761, Dec.
2012.
L. Xie, Y. Shi, Y. T. Hou, H. D. Sherali and S. F. Midkiff, “On renewable
sensor networks with wireless energy transfer: the multi-node case," in
Proc. IEEE Commun. Soc. Conf. on Sensor, Mesh and ad hoc Commun.
and Networks, Seoul, Korea, 2012, pp. 10-18.
K. Li, H. Luan and C.-C. Shen, “Qi-Ferry: Energy-constrained wireless
charging in wireless sensor networks," in Proc. IEEE Wireless Comput.
Networking and Commun., Paris, France, 2012, pp. 573-577.
A. Madhja, S. Nikoletseas, T. P. Raptis, “Distributed wireless power transfer in sensor networks with multiple mobile chargers", Comput. Networks,
vol. 80, no. 7, pp. 89-108, Apr. 2015.
K. Huang, “Spatial throughput of mobile ad hoc network with energy
harvesting," IEEE Trans. on Inf. Theory, vol. 59, no. 11, pp. 7597-7612,
Nov. 2013.
S. He, J. Chen, F. Jiang, D. K. Y. Yau, G. Xing and Y. Sun, “Energy provisioning in wireless rechargeable sensor networks," IEEE Trans. Mobile
Comput,, vol. 12, no. 10, pp. 1931-1942, Oct. 2013.

12

[14] H. Dai, G. Chen, C. Wang, S. Wang, X. Wu, and F. Wu, “Quality of energy
provisioning for wireless power transfer," IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib.
Syst., vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 527-537, Feb. 2015.
[15] D. Niyato, T. H. Pink, W. Saad and D. Kim, “Cooperation in delay tolerant networks with wireless energy transfer: performance analysis and
optimization," IEEE Trans. Veh. Tecnnol., vol. 64, no. 8, pp. 3740-3754,
Aug. 2015.
[16] D. Niyato and P. Wang, “Delay-limited communications on mobile node
with wireless energy harvesting: performance analysis and optimization,"
IEEE Trans. Veh. Tecnnol., vol. 63, no. 4, pp. 1870-1885, Aug. 2014.
[17] J. Kim, J. Park, S.-W Ko and S.-L Kim, “User attraction via wireless
charging in downlink cellular networks," in Proc. Modeling and Optimization in Mobile, Ad hoc, and Wireless Networks, Tempe, AZ, May
2016.
[18] S.-W. Ko, S. M. Yu and S.-L. Kim, “The capacity of energy-constrained
mobile networks with wireless power transfer," IEEE Commun. Lett., vol.
17, no. 3, pp. 529-532, Mar. 2013.
[19] B. Cannon, J. Hoburg, D. Stancil, and S. Goldstein, “Magnetic resonant
coupling as a potential means for wireless power transfer to multiple small
receivers," IEEE Trans. Power Electronics , vol. 27, no. 7, pp. 1819-1825,
Jul. 2009.
[20] M. Fu, T. Zhang, C. Ma, X. Zhu, “Efficiency and optimal loads analysis for multiple-receiver wireless power transfer systems," IEEE Trans.
Microwave Theory and Techniques , vol. 63, no. 3, pp. 801-812, Mar.
2015.
[21] M. Grossglauser and D. N. C. Tse, “Mobility increases the capacity of
ad hoc wireless networks," IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 10, no. 4, pp.
477-486, Aug. 2002.
[22] P. Gupta and P. R. Kumar, “The capacity of wireless networks," IEEE
Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 388-404, Mar. 2000.
[23] C. D. Meyer, Matrix analysis and applied linear algebra, Society for
Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia, 2000.
[24] A. Platis, N. Limnious and M. Le Du, “Hitting time in a finite nonhomogenous markov chain with application," Applied Stochastic Models
and Data Analysis, vol. 14, pp. 241-253, Sep, 1998.
[25] G. Bolch, S. Greiner, H. D. Meer, K. S. Trivedi, Queueing networks and
Markov chains: Modeling and performance evaluation with computer science applications, Wiley, 2006.
[26] N. Akar and K. Sohraby, “Finite and infinite QBD chains: a simple and
unifying algorithm approach," in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Comput. Commu.,
Kobe, Japan, 1997, pp. 1105-1113.
[27] V. Ramswami and G. Latouche, “A general class of Markov process with
explicit matrix-geometric solutions," OR Spektrum, vol. 9, pp. 209-218,
Feb. 1986.

