MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084485622 · doi:10.1081/stm-200056021

A Retrial Queue with a Constant Retrial Rate, Server Downs and Impatient Customers

2005· article· en· W2084485622 on OpenAlexaff
Hui Li, Yiqiang Q. Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueStochastic Models · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAdvanced Queuing Theory Analysis
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityMount Saint Vincent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRetrial queueOrbit (dynamics)Exponential distributionComputer scienceQueueService (business)Constant (computer programming)Key (lock)Line (geometry)Probability-generating functionIdleMathematicsQueueing systemComputer networkReal-time computingOperations researchRandom variableStatisticsOperating systemBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we consider a retrial queueing system consisting of a waiting line of infinite capacity in front of a single server subject to breakdowns. A customer upon arrival may join the queue (waiting line) or go to the retrial orbit (another queue) to retry for service after a random time. Only the customer at the head of the retrial orbit is allowed to retry for service. Upon retrial, the customer enters the service if the server is idle; otherwise, it may go back to the retrial orbit or leave the system (become impatient). All the interarrival times, service times, server up times, server down times and retrial times are exponential, and all the necessary independence conditions in these variables are assumed. For this system, we provide sufficient conditions under which, for any given number of customers in the orbit, the stationary probability of the number of customers in the waiting line decays geometrically. We also provide explicitly an expression for the decay parameter.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.221
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations35
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStochastic ModelsSame topicAdvanced Queuing Theory AnalysisFrench-language works237,207