A note on bias optimality in controlled queueing systems
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
The use of bias optimality to distinguish among gain optimal policies was recently studied by Haviv and Puterman [1] and extended in Lewis et al. [2]. In [1], upon arrival to an M / M /1 queue, customers offer the gatekeeper a reward R . If accepted, the gatekeeper immediately receives the reward, but is charged a holding cost, c ( s ), depending on the number of customers in the system. The gatekeeper, whose objective is to ‘maximize’ rewards, must decide whether to admit the customer. If the customer is accepted, the customer joins the queue and awaits service. Haviv and Puterman [1] showed there can be only two Markovian, stationary, deterministic gain optimal policies and that only the policy which uses the larger control limit is bias optimal. This showed the usefulness of bias optimality to distinguish between gain optimal policies. In the same paper, they conjectured that if the gatekeeper receives the reward upon completion of a job instead of upon entry, the bias optimal policy will be the lower control limit. This note confirms that conjecture.
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 | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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