Convexification of Queueing Formulas by Mixed-Integer Second-Order Cone Programming: An Application to a Discrete Location Problem with Congestion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mixed-integer second-order cone programs (MISOCPs) form a novel class of mixed-integer convex programs, which can be solved very efficiently as a result of the recent advances in optimization solvers. This paper shows how various performance metrics of M/G/1 queues can be modeled by different MISOCPs. To motivate the reformulation method, it is first applied to a challenging stochastic location problem with congestion, which is broadly used to design socially optimal service systems. Three different MISOCPs are developed and compared on different sets of benchmark test problems. The new formulations efficiently solve very large-size test problems that cannot be solved by the two existing methods developed based on linear programming within reasonable time. The superiority of the conic reformulation method is next shown over a state-space decomposition method recently used to solve an assignment problem in queueing systems. Finally, the general applicability of the method is shown for similar optimization problems that use queue-theoretic performance measures to address customer satisfaction and service quality.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".