Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b95js Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-05T18:09:57.001Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

DEPENDENCE ORDERING FOR QUEUING NETWORKS WITH BREAKDOWN AND REPAIR

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 September 2006

Hans Daduna ,
Rafał Kulik ,
Cornelia Sauer  and
Ryszard Szekli
Hans Daduna
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, Hamburg University, 20146 Hamburg, Germany, E-mail: [email protected]
Rafał Kulik
Affiliation:
School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Sydney, NSW.2006, Australia, E-mail: [email protected], and, Mathematical Institute, Wrocław University, 50-384 Wrocław, Poland
Cornelia Sauer
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, Hamburg University, 20146 Hamburg, Germany, E-mail: [email protected]
Ryszard Szekli
Affiliation:
Mathematical Institute, Wrocław University, 50-384 Wrocław, Poland, E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this article we introduce isotone differences stochastic ordering of Markov processes on lattice ordered state spaces as a device to compare the internal dependencies of two such processes. We derive a characterization in terms of intensity matrices. This enables us to compare the internal dependency structure of different degradable Jackson networks in which the nodes are subject to random breakdowns and repairs. We show that the performance behavior and the availability of such networks can be compared.

Type
Research Article
Information
Probability in the Engineering and Informational Sciences , Volume 20 , Issue 4 , October 2006 , pp. 575 - 594
Copyright
© 2006 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bäuerle, N. (1997). Monotonicity results for MR/GI/1 queues. Journal of Applied Probability 34: 514–524.Google Scholar
Bäuerle, N. & Rolski, T. (1998). A monotonicity result for the workload in Markov-modulated queues. Journal of Applied Probability 35: 741–747.Google Scholar
Daduna, H., Kulik, R., Sauer, C., & Szekli, R. (2005). Isotone differences ordering for unreliable Markovian queueing networks. Preprint No. 2005-04, Department of Mathematics, Center of Mathematical Statistics and Stochastic Processes, Hamburg University.
Daduna, H. & Szekli, R. (1995). Dependencies in Markovian networks. Advances in Applied Probability 28: 226–254Google Scholar
Daduna, H. & Szekli, R. (2005). Dependence ordering for Markov processes on partially ordered spaces. Mittag-Leffler Report 16, Fall 2004/2005.
Daduna, H. & Szekli, R. (2005). Dependence ordering of queueing network processes. Preprint, submitted.
Disney, R.L. & Kiessler, P.C. (1987). Traffic processes in queueing networks. A Markov renewal approach. Johns Hopkins Series in the Mathematical Sciences, 4. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.
Heyman, D.P. & Sobel, M.J. (2004). Stochastic models in operations research. Vol. II: Stochastic optimization. Reprint of the 1984 original. New York: Dover.
Hu, T. & Pan, X. (2000). Comparisons of dependence for stationary Markov processes. Probability in the Engineering and Informational Sciences 14: 299–315.Google Scholar
Jackson, J.R. (1957). Networks of waiting lines. Operations Research 4: 518–521.Google Scholar
Joe, H. (1997). Multivariate models and dependence concepts. Monographs on Statistics and Applied Probability, No. 73. London: Chapman & Hall.
Kanter, M. (1985). Lower bounds for the probability of overload in certain queueing networks. Journal of Applied Probability 22: 429–436.Google Scholar
Kulik, R. (2004). Monotonicity in lag for non-monotone Markov chains. Probability in the Engineering and Informational Sciences 18: 485–492.Google Scholar
Müller, A. & Stoyan, D. (2002). Comparison methods for stochastic models and risks. New York: Wiley.
Sauer, C. & Daduna, H. (2003). Availability formulas and performance measures for separable degradable networks. Economic Quality Control 18: 165–194.Google Scholar