Skip to main content
Log in

Analysis of the \(M^X/G/1\) retrial queue

  • Published:
Annals of Operations Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, we are concerned with the analysis of the queue length and waiting time distributions in a batch arrival \(M^X/G/1\) retrial queue. Necessary and sufficient conditions are obtained for the existence of the moments of the queue length and waiting time distributions. We also provide recursive formulas for the higher order moments of the queue length and waiting time distributions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Artalejo, J. R. (1999a). A classified bibliography of research on retrial queues: Progress in 1990–1999. Top, 7, 187–211.

  • Artalejo, J. R. (1999b). Accessible bibliography on retrial queues. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 30, 1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Artalejo, J. R. (2010). Accessible bibliography on retrial queues: Progress in 2000–2009. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 51, 1071–1081.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Artalejo, J. R., & Gómez-Corral, A. (2008). Retrial queueing systems. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.

  • Falin, G. I. (1976). Aggregate arrival of customers in a one-line system with repeated calls. Ukrainian Mathematical Journal, 28, 437–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Falin, G. I. (1988). On a multiclass batch arrival retrial queue. Advances in Applied Probability, 20, 483–487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Falin, G. I. (1990). A survey of retrial queues. Queueing Systems, 7, 127–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Falin, G. I., & Templeton, J. G. C. (1997). Retrial queues. London: Chapman & Hall.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Grishechkin, S. A. (1992). Multiclass batch arrival retrial queues analyzed as branching process with immigration. Queueing Systems, 11, 395–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, W. P. (2002). The curious history of Faà di Bruno’s formula. The American Mathematical Monthly, 109, 217–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kawasaki, N., Takagi, H., Takahashi, Y., Hong, S.-J., & Hasegawa, T. (2000). Waiting time analysis of \(M^X/G/1\) queues with/without vacations under random order of service discipline. Journal of the Operations Research Society of Japan, 43, 455–468.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, B., & Kim, J. (2011). Higher moments of the waiting time distribution in \(M/G/1\) retrial queues. Operations Research Letters, 39, 224–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kulkarni, V. G. (1986). Expected waiting times in a multiclass batch arrival retrial queue. Journal of Applied Probability, 23, 144–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kulkarni, V. G., & Liang, H. M. (1997). Retrial queues revisited. In J. H. Dshalalow (Ed.), Frontiers in queueing: Models and applications in science and engineering (pp. 19–34). Boca Raton: CRC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Takagi, H. (1991). Queueing analysis, vol. 1: Vacation and priority systems, part 1. Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yamamuro, K. (2012). The queue length in an \(M/G/1\) batch arrival retrial queue. Queueing Systems, 70, 187–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, T., & Templeton, J. G. C. (1987). A survey on retrial queues. Queueing Systems, 2, 201–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to the reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions, which improved this paper. B. Kim’s research was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korea government (MSIP) (No. 2014R1A2A2A01005831). J. Kim’s research was supported by Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education (2014R1A1A4A01003813).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeongsim Kim.

Appendix: Proof of Lemma 4

Appendix: Proof of Lemma 4

When the batch to which the tagged customer belongs, arrives from outside the system, there are the following three cases to consider: (i) the server is busy, (ii) the server is idle and another customer of that batch starts service, not the tagged customer, (iii) the server is idle and the tagged customer starts service. Note that cases (i) and (ii) correspond to \(G=1\) (see Fig. 2) and case (iii) corresponds to \(G=0\). Let us denote the three events (i), (ii) and (iii) by \(A_1, A_2\) and \(A_3\), respectively. By the PASTA property,

$$\begin{aligned} {\mathbb {P}}(A_1)=\rho , ~ {\mathbb {P}}(A_2)=(1-\rho )\left( 1-\frac{1}{{\mathbb {E}}B}\right) , ~ {\mathbb {P}}(A_3)=\frac{1-\rho }{{\mathbb {E}}B}. \end{aligned}$$

By noting \(\{G=1\}=A_1 \cup A_2\), we have

$$\begin{aligned} {\mathbb {P}}(A_1\mid G=1)&= \frac{\rho {\mathbb {E}}B}{{\mathbb {E}}B-1+\rho }, \\ {\mathbb {P}}(A_2\mid G=1)&= \frac{(1-\rho )({\mathbb {E}}B-1)}{{\mathbb {E}}B-1+\rho }. \end{aligned}$$
Fig. 2
figure 2

The cases when \(G=1\). The arrows represent the arrival epoch of the batch to which the tagged customer belongs. The left-hand side corresponds to case (i) and the right-hand side corresponds to case (ii)

Since \(\tilde{W}^{(1)}(z,s)={\mathbb {E}}[z^{N(\tilde{\tau }^{(1)})} e^{-s(\tilde{\tau }^{(1)}-t^*)}{\mathbb {1}}_{\{\sigma >\tilde{\tau }^{(1)}\}}\mid G=1]\), we have

$$\begin{aligned} \tilde{W}^{(1)}(z,s)&= {\mathbb {P}}(A_1 \mid G=1) {\mathbb {E}}[z^{N(\tilde{\tau }^{(1)})} e^{-s(\tilde{\tau }^{(1)}-t^*)}{\mathbb {1}}_{\{\sigma >\tilde{\tau }^{(1)}\}}\mid A_1] \\&\quad +\, {\mathbb {P}}(A_2 \mid G=1) {\mathbb {E}}[z^{N(\tilde{\tau }^{(1)})} e^{-s(\tilde{\tau }^{(1)}-t^*)}{\mathbb {1}}_{\{\sigma >\tilde{\tau }^{(1)}\}}\mid A_2]. \end{aligned}$$

For convenience we set

$$\begin{aligned} \tilde{W}^{(1)}_1(z,s)&\equiv {\mathbb {E}}[z^{N(\tilde{\tau }^{(1)})} e^{-s(\tilde{\tau }^{(1)}-t^*)}{\mathbb {1}}_{\{\sigma >\tilde{\tau }^{(1)}\}}\mid A_1] \\ \tilde{W}^{(1)}_2(z,s)&\equiv {\mathbb {E}}[z^{N(\tilde{\tau }^{(1)})} e^{-s(\tilde{\tau }^{(1)}-t^*)}{\mathbb {1}}_{\{\sigma >\tilde{\tau }^{(1)}\}}\mid A_2]. \end{aligned}$$

Thus

$$\begin{aligned} \tilde{W}^{(1)}(z,s) = \frac{\rho {\mathbb {E}}B}{{\mathbb {E}}B-1+\rho } \tilde{W}^{(1)}_1(z,s)+ \frac{(1-\rho )({\mathbb {E}}B-1)}{{\mathbb {E}}B-1+\rho } \tilde{W}^{(1)}_2(z,s). \end{aligned}$$
(32)

First we compute \(\tilde{W}^{(1)}_1(z,s)\). When the tagged customer arrives while the server is busy, let \(\tau ^{(0)}\) be the beginning epoch of the service period in which the tagged customer arrives and \({\mathcal {A}}\) denote the number of customers who arrive from outside the system, excluding the tagged customer, during the time interval \((\tau ^{(0)}, \tilde{\tau }^{(1)})\). Then, by well established techniques (see, for example, Takagi 1991), we have

$$\begin{aligned} {\mathbb {E}}[ z^{{\mathcal {A}}} e^{-s(\tilde{\tau }^{(1)}-t^*)}\mid G=1] = \frac{\beta (\lambda -\lambda b(z))-\beta (s+\lambda -\lambda b(z))}{s {\mathbb {E}}S}. \end{aligned}$$

Since the size of the batch to which the tagged customer belongs has the distribution \(\frac{kb_k}{{\mathbb {E}}B}\), \(k=1,2,\ldots \), by length biased sampling, we have

$$\begin{aligned} \tilde{W}^{(1)}_1(z,s)&= \pi (z) \sum _{k=1}^\infty \frac{kb_k}{{\mathbb {E}}B}z^{k-1} \frac{\beta (\lambda -\lambda b(z))-\beta (s+\lambda -\lambda b(z))}{s {\mathbb {E}}S} \nonumber \\&= \frac{1}{{\mathbb {E}}B{\mathbb {E}}S}\pi (z)b'(z) \frac{\beta (\lambda -\lambda b(z))-\beta (s+\lambda -\lambda b(z))}{s}. \end{aligned}$$
(33)

Now we compute \(\tilde{W}^{(1)}_2(z,s)\). By the PASTA property, given that the batch which contains the tagged customer arrives while the server is idle, the probability generating function of the number of customers in the system immediately before \(t^*\) is \(\frac{q(z)}{1-\rho }\). The tagged customer belongs to a batch of size k with probability \(\frac{kb_k}{{\mathbb {E}}B}\) due to length biased sampling. The tagged customer is not selected with probability \(\frac{k-1}{k}\) given that there are k customers in the batch to which the tagged customer belongs. Thus, given \(A_2\), the tagged customer belongs to a batch of size k with probability \(\frac{\frac{kb_k}{{\mathbb {E}}B}\frac{k-1}{k}}{\sum _{j=1}^\infty \frac{jb_j}{{\mathbb {E}}B}\frac{j-1}{j}}=\frac{(k-1)b_k}{{\mathbb {E}}B-1}\). Therefore, given \(A_2\), the probability generating function of the number of customers in the orbit, excluding the tagged customer, immediately after \(t^*\) is

$$\begin{aligned} \frac{q(z)}{1-\rho }\sum _{k=2}^\infty \frac{(k-1)b_k}{{\mathbb {E}}B-1} z^{k-2}, \end{aligned}$$

where the exponent \(k-2\) of z follows because the two customers (the tagged customer and a customer selected for service) are excluded. Since the joint transform of the service time of a customer and the number of customers who arrive from outside the system during that service time is given by \(\beta (s+\lambda -\lambda b(z))\), we have

$$\begin{aligned} \tilde{W}^{(1)}_2(z,s)&=\frac{q(z)}{1-\rho } \sum _{k=2}^\infty \frac{(k-1)b_k}{{\mathbb {E}}B-1}z^{k-2} \beta (s+\lambda -\lambda b(z)) \nonumber \\&= \frac{q(z)}{(1-\rho )({\mathbb {E}}B-1)} \frac{b'(z)-\tilde{b}(z)}{z} \beta (s+\lambda -\lambda b(z)). \end{aligned}$$
(34)

Finally, substituting (33) and (34) into (32), we have (19).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kim, B., Kim, J. Analysis of the \(M^X/G/1\) retrial queue. Ann Oper Res 247, 193–210 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-015-1921-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-015-1921-6

Keywords

Mathematics Subject Classification

Navigation