MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2129682828 · doi:10.1017/s0269964813000065

WAITING TIME ANALYSIS OF MULTI-CLASS QUEUES WITH IMPATIENT CUSTOMERS

2013· article· en· W2129682828 on OpenAlexaff
Vahid Sarhangian, Barış Balciog̃lu

Bibliographic record

VenueProbability in the Engineering and Informational Sciences · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAdvanced Queuing Theory Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer sciencePoisson distributionClass (philosophy)QueueExponential distributionService (business)PreemptionPatienceQueueing systemServerDistributed computingMathematical optimizationComputer networkMathematicsOperating systemStatisticsBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we study three delay systems where different classes of impatient customers arrive according to independent Poisson processes. In the first system, a single server receives two classes of customers with general service time requirements, and follows a non-preemptive priority policy in serving them. Both classes of customers abandon the system when their exponentially distributed patience limits expire. The second system comprises parallel and identical servers providing the same type of service for both classes of impatient customers under the non-preemptive priority policy. We assume exponential service times and consider two cases depending on the time-to-abandon distribution being exponentially distributed or deterministic. In either case, we permit different reneging rates or patience limits for each class. Finally, we consider the first-come-first-served policy in single- and multi-server settings. In all models, we obtain the Laplace transform of the virtual waiting time for each class by exploiting the level-crossing method. This enables us to compute the steady-state system performance measures.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Simulation or modelinglow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Simulation or modelinghigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations12
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProbability in the Engineering and Informational SciencesSame topicAdvanced Queuing Theory AnalysisFrench-language works237,207