Using a birth‐and‐death process to estimate the steady‐state distribution of a periodic queue
Bibliographic record
Abstract
If the number of customers in a queueing system as a function of time has a proper limiting steady-state distribution, then that steady-state distribution can be estimated from system data by fitting a general stationary birth-and-death (BD) process model to the data and solving for its steady-state distribution using the familiar local-balance steady-state equation for BD processes, even if the actual process is not a BD process. We show that this indirect way to estimate the steady-state distribution can be effective for periodic queues, because the fitted birth and death rates often have special structure allowing them to be estimated efficiently by fitting parametric functions with only a few parameters, for example, 2. We focus on the multiserver Mt/GI/s queue with a nonhomogeneous Poisson arrival process having a periodic time-varying rate function. We establish properties of its steady-state distribution and fitted BD rates. We also show that the fitted BD rates can be a useful diagnostic tool to see if an Mt/GI/s model is appropriate for a complex queueing system. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Naval Research Logistics 62: 664–685, 2015
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 | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".