MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2158556837 · doi:10.1287/opre.1040.0116

An Invariance Relation and a Unified Method to Derive Stationary Queue-Length Distributions

2004· article· en· W2158556837 on OpenAlexaff
Nam Kyu Kim, Kyung C. Chae, M. L. Chaudhry

Bibliographic record

VenueOperations Research · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAdvanced Queuing Theory Analysis
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
FundersKorea Advanced Institute of Science and TechnologyKorea Institute of Science and Technology
KeywordsQueueMarkovian arrival processQueueing theoryRelation (database)Computer scienceFork–join queueDiscrete time and continuous timeMathematicsBulk queueMathematical optimizationApplied mathematicsSimple (philosophy)Queue management systemStatisticsComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For a broad class of discrete- and continuous-time queueing systems, we show that the stationary number of customers in system (queue plus servers) is the sum of two independent random variables, one of which is the stationary number of customers in queue and the other is the number of customers that arrive during the time a customer spends in service. We call this relation an invariance relation in the sense that it does not change for a variety of single-sever queues (with batch arrivals and batch services) and some multiserver queues (with batch arrivals and deterministic service times) that satisfy a certain set of assumptions. Making use of this relation, we also present a simple method of deriving the probability generating functions (PGFs) of the stationary numbers in queue and in system, as well as some of their properties. This is illustrated by several examples, which show that new simple derivations of old results as well as new results can be obtained in a unified manner. Furthermore, we show that the invariance relation and the method we are presenting are easily generalized to analyze queues with batch Markovian arrival process (BMAP) arrivals. Most of the results are presented under the discrete-time setting. The corresponding continuous-time results, however, are covered as well because deriving the results for continuous-time queues runs exactly parallel to that for their discrete-time counterparts.

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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.338 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations17
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOperations ResearchSame topicAdvanced Queuing Theory AnalysisFrench-language works237,207