Increasing social welfare with delays: Strategic customers in the M/G/1 orbit queue
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Strategic customers typically patronize service systems at a higher rate than the socially optimal one. Much literature has focused on inducing customers to join such systems at this latter rate. This entire literature considers nonidling policies that are the focus of queueing theory. We demonstrate that strategically imposing delays into service systems can improve the social welfare using the M/G/1 queue with orbit. This versatile queueing model has been extensively studied from a performance evaluation perspective. In this system, customers who arrive and find the server idle begin immediately their service. However, strategic customers who find the server busy decide whether to balk or join a virtual queue, that is, an orbit. Then, each time the server finishes a service, he begins to retrieve a customer from the orbit and the corresponding retrieving time is not negligible. These retrieving times function as extra delays that are imposed on customers that find a busy server. We show that when customers are strategic, there are certain ranges of the parameters where delaying the orbit customers can increase the welfare of a system or even maximize it. To this end, we characterize and compute the equilibrium strategies for the customers' joining/balking dilemma. We consider both the unobservable and observable versions of the system, and provide some insight on the optimal delay and level of information in such systems. We further show that the welfare for this system is higher than the corresponding standard M/G/1 queue with the same delay.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it