MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2410106254 · doi:10.1287/opre.2016.1499

Modeling Load and Overwork Effects in Queueing Systems with Adaptive Service Rates

2016· article· en· W2410106254 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Delasay, Ármann Ingólfsson, Bora Kolfal

Bibliographic record

VenueOperations Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAdvanced Queuing Theory Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceQueueing theoryServerStaffingProcess (computing)Service (business)Real-time computingDistributed computingComputer networkOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Servers in many real queueing systems do not work at a constant speed. They adapt to the system state by speeding up when the system is highly loaded or slowing down when load has been high for an extended time period. Their speed can also be constrained by other factors, such as geography or a downstream blockage. We develop a state-dependent queueing model in which the service rate depends on the system “load” and “overwork.” Overwork refers to a situation where the system has been under a heavy load for an extended time period. We quantify load as the number of users in the system, and we operationalize overwork with a state variable that is incremented with each service completion in a high-load period and decremented at a rate that is proportional to the number of idle servers during low-load periods. Our model is a quasi-birth-and-death process with a special structure that we exploit to develop efficient and easy-to-implement algorithms to compute system performance measures. We use the analytical model and simulation to demonstrate how using models that ignore adaptive server behavior can result in inconsistencies between planned and realized performance and can lead to suboptimal, unstable, or oscillatory staffing decisions.

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)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations45
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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