Performance Analysis of a Queue with Congestion-Based Staffing Policy
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper analyzes a waiting line system that is motivated by the operations of border-crossing stations between the United States and Canada. There are two main conflicting goals in such a system: high security level, which often leads to a longer line; and good customer service, which requires a shorter line. Thus, unlike other queueing systems, maintaining the average queue length within a certain range is the primary objective. This is achieved using a staffing policy, called “congestion-based staffing,” or CBS, where the number of servers (inspection booths) is adjusted according to the queue length during a planning period. We first present an exact benchmark model of Markovian type based on the matrix-geometric solution. For practical CBS policies, we develop a set of closed-form formulas for the major performance measures based on regenerative cycle analysis and fluid limit approximation. Numerical examples show that these approximation formulas are simple, accurate, and robust for practitioners to use in designing CBS policies.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it