MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159279836 · doi:10.1214/aoap/1015345342

Join the shortest queue: stability and exact asymptotics

2001· article· en· W2159279836 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Annals of Applied Probability · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAdvanced Queuing Theory Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsServerQueuePoolingFork–join queueQueueing theoryMathematicsJoin (topology)Computer scienceComputer networkQueue management systemCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the stability of a network serving a patchwork of overlapping regions where customers from a local region are assigned to a collection of local servers.These customers join the queue of the local server with the shortest queue of waiting customers.We then describe how the backlog in the network overloads.We do this in the simple case of two servers each of which receives a dedicated stream of customers in addition to customers from a stream of smart customers who join the shorter queue. There are three distinct ways the backlog can overload. If one server is very fast, then that server takes all the smart customers along with its dedicated customers and keeps its queue small while the dedicated customers at the other server cause the overload.We call this the unpooled case. If the proportion of smart customers is large, then the two servers overload in tandem.We call this the strongly pooled case. Finally, there is the weakly pooled case where both queues overload but in different proportions. The fact that strong pooling can be attained based on a local protocol for overlapping regions may have engineering significance. In addition, this paper extends the methodology developed in McDonald (to appear The Annals of Applied Probability) to cover periodicities. The emphasis here is on sharp asymptotics, not rough asymptotics as in large deviation theory. Moreover, the limiting distributions are for the unscaled process, not for the fluid limit as in large deviation theory. In the strongly pooled case, for instance, we give the limiting distribution of the difference between the two queues as the backlog grows.We also give the exact asymptotics of the mean time until overload.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.513

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.209 · 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