MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2953987477 · doi:10.22215/etd/2018-12930

Sample Size Determination for Markovian Queueing Models

2018· dissertation· en· W2953987477 on OpenAlexaff
Tianyi Dai

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQueueing theoryLayered queueing networkSample size determinationComputer scienceSample (material)Mean value analysisInferenceApplied mathematicsAlgorithmStatisticsMathematicsArtificial intelligencePhysicsComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this thesis, we focus on the sample size of two variants of the standard M/M/1 queueing model.The reason is that variants of the standard M/M/1 queueing model are extensively used in the real world.There are many fields in which queueing models can be utilized.In these applications, parameter plays an extremely important role.For example, the paper (Choudhury and Borthakur, 2008) studied inference for parameters of the M/M/1 queueing model.Therefore, in order to guarantee the precision of parameters estimated in these queueing models, the sample size determination is proposed in this thesis.Firstly, we show how a Bayesian approach could be applied to these models to obtain the minimal sample size required by the given precision.Then, we will illustrate in detail how to use R, a statistical software, to compute the sample size for these models.

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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.191
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.144

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.191
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0030.005
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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.330 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicStatistical Methods and Bayesian InferenceFrench-language works237,207