Congestion-Based Lead-Time Quotation for Heterogenous Customers with Convex-Concave Delay Costs: Optimality of a Cost-Balancing Policy Based on Convex Hull Functions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider a congestible system serving multiple classes of customers who differ in their delay sensitivity and valuation of service (or product). Customers are endowed with convex-concave delay cost functions. A system manager offers a menu of lead times and corresponding prices to arriving customers, who then choose the lead-time–price pair that maximizes their net utility (value minus disutility of delay and price). We investigate how such menus should be chosen dynamically (depending on the system backlog) to maximize welfare. We formulate a novel fluid model of the problem and show that the cost-balancing policy (based on the convex hulls of the delay cost functions) is socially optimal if the system manager can tell customer types apart. If types are indistinguishable to the system manager, the cost-balancing policy is also incentive compatible under social optimization. Finally, we show through a simulation study that the cost-balancing policy does well in the context of the original (stochastic) problem by testing it against various natural benchmarks.
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 | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".