Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b6zl4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-05T23:07:46.353Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

EQUILIBRIUM STRATEGIES IN QUEUES BASED ON TIME OR INDEX OF ARRIVAL

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 December 2009

Moshe Haviv
Affiliation:
Department of Statistics, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem 91905, Israel E-mail: haviv@mscc.huji.ac.il; mskella@mscc.huji.ac.il; mskerner@mscc.huji.ac.il
Offer Kella
Affiliation:
Department of Statistics, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem 91905, Israel E-mail: haviv@mscc.huji.ac.il; mskella@mscc.huji.ac.il; mskerner@mscc.huji.ac.il
Yoav Kerner
Affiliation:
Department of Statistics, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem 91905, Israel E-mail: haviv@mscc.huji.ac.il; mskella@mscc.huji.ac.il; mskerner@mscc.huji.ac.il
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In most decision models dealing with unobservable stochastic congested environments, one looks for a (Nash) equilibrium behavior among customers. This is a strategy that, if adopted by all, then under the resulting steady-state conditions; the best response for an individual is to adopt this strategy too. The purpose of this article is to look for a simple decision problem but where the assumption of steady-state conditions is removed. Specifically, we consider an M/M/N/N loss model in which one pays for trying to get service but is rewarded only if one finds an available server. The initial conditions at time 0 are common knowledge and each customer possesses his arrival time as his private information. The equilibrium profile tells each arrival whether to try (randomization allowed) given his time of arrival. We show that all join up to some point of time. At this point, there is a quantum drop in the joining probability from one to some fraction. From then on, their joining probability continuously converges to the equilibrium joining probability under the model that assumes steady state.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

References

1.Hassin, R. & Haviv, M. (2003). To Queue or not to queue: Equilibrium behavior in queueing system. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Lin, K.Y. & Ross, S.M. (2003). Admission control with incomplete information of a queueing system. Operations Research 51: 645654.Google Scholar
3.Lin, K.L. & Ross, S.M. (2004). Optimal admission control for a single-server loss queue. Journal of Applied Probability 41: 535546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Ross, S.M. (1996). Stochastic processes, 2nd ed.New York: Wiley.Google Scholar