<i>M/M/c</i> Queue with Two Priority Classes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper provides the first exact analysis of a preemptive M/M/c queue with two priority classes having different service rates. To perform our analysis, we introduce a new technique to reduce the two-dimensionally infinite Markov chain (MC), representing the two class state space, into a one-dimensionally infinite MC, from which the generating function (GF) of the number of low-priority jobs can be derived in closed form. (The high-priority jobs form a simple M/M/c system and are thus easy to solve.) We demonstrate our methodology for the c = 1, 2 cases; when c > 2, the closed-form expression of the GF becomes cumbersome. We thus develop an exact algorithm to calculate the moments of the number of low-priority jobs for any c ≥ 2. Numerical examples demonstrate the accuracy of our algorithm and generate insights on (i) the relative effect of improving the service rate of either priority class on the mean sojourn time of low-priority jobs; (ii) the performance of a system having many slow servers compared with one having fewer fast servers; and (iii) the validity of the square root staffing rule in maintaining a fixed service level for the low-priority class. Finally, we demonstrate the potential of our methodology to solve other problems using the M/M/c queue with two priority classes, where the high-priority class is completely impatient.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".