MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980240525 · doi:10.1017/s0001867800007795

Diffusion-Scale Tightness of Invariant Distributions of a Large-Scale Flexible Service System

2015· article· en· W1980240525 on OpenAlexaff
Alexander Stolyar

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Applied Probability · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAdvanced Queuing Theory Analysis
Canadian institutionsBell (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsInvariant (physics)ServerScalingScale invarianceLimitingScaling limitStatistical physicsAsymptotic distributionDiffusion processDiscrete mathematicsApplied mathematicsMathematical optimizationInnovation diffusionComputer scienceStatisticsComputer networkPhysicsGeometryMathematical physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A large-scale service system with multiple customer classes and multiple server pools is considered, with the mean service time depending both on the customer class and server pool. The allowed activities (routeing choices) form a tree (in the graph with vertices being both customer classes and server pools). We study the behavior of the system under a leaf activity priority (LAP) policy, introduced by Stolyar and Yudovina (2012). An asymptotic regime is considered, where the arrival rate of customers and number of servers in each pool tend to ∞ in proportion to a scaling parameter r, while the overall system load remains strictly subcritical. We prove tightness of diffusion-scaled (centered at the equilibrium point and scaled down by r −1/2) invariant distributions. As a consequence, we obtain a limit interchange result: the limit of diffusion-scaled invariant distributions is equal to the invariant distribution of the limiting diffusion process.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.234 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Applied ProbabilitySame topicAdvanced Queuing Theory AnalysisFrench-language works237,207