skip to main content
research-article

Inhomogeneous CTMC Birth-and-Death Models Solved by Uniformization with Steady-State Detection

Published:31 May 2020Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Time-inhomogeneous queueing models play an important role in service systems modeling. Although the transient solutions of corresponding continuous-time Markov chains (CTMCs) are more precise than methods using stationary approximations, most authors consider their computational costs prohibitive for practical application. This article presents a new variant of the uniformization algorithm that utilizes a modified steady-state detection technique. The presented algorithm is applicable for CTMCs when their stationary solution can be efficiently calculated in advance, particularly for many practically applicable birth-and-death models with limited size. It significantly improves computational efficiency due to an early prediction of an occurrence of a steady state, using the properties of the convergence function of the embedded discrete-time Markov chain. Moreover, in the case of an inhomogeneous CTMC solved in consecutive timesteps, the modification guarantees that the error of the computed probability distribution vector is strictly bounded at each point of the considered time interval.

References

  1. Zeynep Aksin, Mor Armony, and Vijay Mehrotra. 2007. The modern call-center: A multi-disciplinary perspective on operations management research. Production and Operations Management 16, 6 (Nov. 2007), 665--688. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1937-5956.2007.tb00288.xGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. leksandr Andreychenko, Pepijn Crouzen, Linar Mikeev, and Verena Wolf. 2010. On-the-fly uniformization of time-inhomogeneous infinite Markov population models. arXiv:1006.4425.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Markus Arns, Peter Buchholz, and Andriy Panchenko. 2010. On the numerical analysis of inhomogeneous continuous-time Markov chains. INFORMS Journal on Computing 22, 3 (Aug. 2010), 416--432. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1287/ijoc.1090.0357Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Gunter Bolch, Stefan Greiner, Hermann de Meer, and Kishor S. Trivedi. 2006. Queueing Networks and Markov Chains. John Wiley 8 Sons. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1002/0471791571Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Andreas Brandt and Manfred Brandt. 1999. On the M(n)/M(n)/s queue with impatient calls. Performance Evaluation 35, 1–2 (March 1999), 1--18. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/s0166-5316(98)00042-xGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Andreas Brandt and Manfred Brandt. 2002. Asymptotic results and a Markovian approximation for the M(n)/M(n)/s+GI system. Queueing Systems 41, 1–2 (2002), 73--94. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1015781818360Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Lawrence Brown, Noah Gans, Avishai Mandelbaum, Anat Sakov, Haipeng Shen, Sergey Zeltyn, and Linda Zhao. 2005. Statistical analysis of a telephone call center. Journal of the American Statistical Association 100, 469 (March 2005), 36--50. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1198/016214504000001808Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Maciej Rafał Burak. 2015. Inhomogeneous CTMC model of a call center with balking and abandonment. Studia Informatica 36, 2 (2015), 23--34. DOI:https://doi.org/10.21936/si2015_v36.n2.712Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Maciej Rafał Burak. 2017. Computing discrete poisson probabilities for uniformization algorithm. Studia Informatica 38, 1B (2017), 77--88. DOI:https://doi.org/10.21936/si2017_v38.n1B.795Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Mehmet Tolga Cezik and Pierre L’Ecuyer. 2008. Staffing multiskill call centers via linear programming and simulation. Management Science 54, 2 (Feb. 2008), 310--323. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1070.0824Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Stefan Creemers, Mieke Defraeye, and Inneke Van Nieuwenhuyse. 2014. G-RAND: A phase-type approximation for the nonstationary queue. Performance Evaluation 80 (Oct. 2014), 102--123. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.peva.2014.07.025Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Mieke Defraeye and Inneke Van Nieuwenhuyse. 2015. Staffing and scheduling under nonstationary demand for service: A literature review. Omega 58 (April 2015), 4–25. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2015.04.002Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Alexandre Deslauriers, Pierre L’Ecuyer, Juta Pichitlamken, Armann Ingolfsson, and Athanassios N. Avramidis. 2007. Markov chain models of a telephone call center with call blending. Computers 8 Operations Research 34, 6 (June 2007), 1616--1645. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cor.2005.06.019Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. James Dong and Ward Whitt. 2014. Stochastic grey-box modeling of queueing systems: Fitting birth-and-death processes to data. Queueing Systems 79, 3–4 (Dec. 2014), 391--426. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11134-014-9429-3Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Zohar Feldman, Avishai Mandelbaum, William A. Massey, and Ward Whitt. 2008. Staffing of time-varying queues to achieve time-stable performance. Management Science 54, 2 (Feb. 2008), 324--338. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1070.0821Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Noah Gans, Ger Koole, and Avishai Mandelbaum. 2003. Telephone call centers: Tutorial, review, and research prospects. Manufacturing 8 Service Operations Management 5, 2 (April 2003), 79--141. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.5.2.79.16071Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Winfried K. Grassmann. 1978. Transient solutions in Markovian queueing systems. Computers 8 Operations Research 5, 2 (Jan. 1978), 161. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0548(78)90010-2Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Linda Green, Peter Kolesar, and Anthony Svoronos. 1991. Some effects of nonstationarity on multiserver Markovian queueing systems. Operations Research 39, 3 (June 1991), 502--511. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.39.3.502Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Linda V. Green, Peter J. Kolesar, and João Soares. 2001. Improving the SIPP approach for staffing service systems that have cyclic demands. Operations Research 49, 4 (Aug. 2001), 549--564. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.49.4.549.11228Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Linda V. Green, Peter J. Kolesar, and João Soares. 2003. An improved heuristic for staffing telephone call centers with limited operating hours. Production and Operations Management 12, 1 (2003), 46--61. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1937-5956.2003.tb00197.xGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Linda V. Green, Peter J. Kolesar, and Ward Whitt. 2007. Coping with time-varying demand when setting staffing requirements for a service system. Production and Operations Management 16, 1 (Jan. 2007), 13--39. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1937-5956.2007.tb00164.xGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Donald Gross and Douglas R. Miller. 1984. The randomization technique as a modeling tool and solution procedure for transient Markov processes. Operations Research 32, 2 (April 1984), 343--361. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.32.2.343Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Kirsten Henken. 2007. Dynamic Contact Centers with Impatient Customers and Retrials. VDM Publishing.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Armann Ingolfsson, Elvira Akhmetshina, Susan Budge, Yongyue Li, and Xudong Wu. 2007. A survey and experimental comparison of service-level-approximation methods for nonstationary M(t)/M/s(t) queueing systems with exhaustive discipline. INFORMS Journal on Computing 19, 2 (May 2007), 201--214. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1287/ijoc.1050.0157Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Armann Ingolfsson, Fernanda Campello, Xudong Wu, and Edgar Cabral. 2010. Combining integer programming and the randomization method to schedule employees. European Journal of Operational Research 202, 1 (April 2010), 153--163. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2009.04.026Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Armann Ingolfsson and Ling Tang. 2012. Efficient and reliable computation of birth-death process performance measures. INFORMS Journal on Computing 24, 1 (Feb. 2012), 29--41. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1287/ijoc.1100.0435Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Oualid Jouini, Ger Koole, and Alex Roubos. 2013. Performance indicators for call centers with impatient customers. IIE Transactions 45, 3 (March 2013), 341--354. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/0740817x.2012.712241Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Joost-Pieter Katoen and Ivan S. Zapreev. 2006. Safe on-the-fly steady-state detection for time-bounded reachability. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on the Quantitative Evaluation of Systems (QEST’06). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/qest.2006.47Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Song-Hee Kim and Ward Whitt. 2013. Statistical analysis with Little’s law. Operations Research 61, 4 (2013), 1030--1045. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.2013.1193Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Song-Hee Kim and Ward Whitt. 2014a. Are call center and hospital arrivals well modeled by nonhomogeneous Poisson processes?Manufacturing 8 Service Operations Management 16, 3 (July 2014), 464--480. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2014.0490Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Song-Hee Kim and Ward Whitt. 2014b. Choosing arrival process models for service systems: Tests of a nonhomogeneous poisson process. Naval Research Logistics 61, 1 (Jan. 2014), 66--90. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1002/nav.21568Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. Manish Malhotra, Jogesh K. Muppala, and Kishor S. Trivedi. 1994. Stiffness-tolerant methods for transient analysis of stiff Markov chains. Microelectronics Reliability 34, 11 (Nov. 1994), 1825--1841. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/0026-2714(94)90137-6Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Avishai Mandelbaum and Sergey Zeltyn. 2013. Data-stories about (im)patient customers in tele-queues. Queueing Systems 75, 2-4 (April 2013), 115--146. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11134-013-9354-xGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Ali Movaghar. 1996. On queueing with customer impatience until the beginning of service. In Proceedings of the 1996 IEEE International Computer Performance and Dependability Symposium. IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 150--157. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/ipds.1996.540216Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Jogesh K. Muppala and Kishor S. Trivedi. 1992. Numerical transient solution of finite Markovian queueing systems. In Queueing and Related Models, U. N. Bhat and I. V. Basawa (Eds.). Oxford Statistical Science Series. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 262–284.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Dianne P. O’Leary, G. W. Stewart, and James S. Vandergraft. 1979. Estimating the largest eigenvalue of a positive definite matrix. Mathematics of Computation 33, 148 (Oct. 1979), 1289. DOI:https://doi.org/10.2307/2006463Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. Andrew Reibman and Kishor Trivedi. 1988. Numerical transient analysis of Markov models. Computers 8 Operations Research 15, 1 (Jan. 1988), 19--36. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0548(88)90026-3Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Andy Rindos, Steven Woolet, Ioannis Viniotis, and Kishor Trivedi. 1995. Exact methods for the transient analysis of nonhomogeneous continuous time Markov chains. In Computations with Markov Chains. Springer, 121--133. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-2241-6_8Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Justus Arne Schwarz, Gregor Selinka, and Raik Stolletz. 2016. Performance analysis of time-dependent queueing systems: Survey and classification. Omega 63 (Sept. 2016), 170--189. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2015.10.013Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. William J. Stewart. 1994. Introduction to the Numerical Solution of Markov Chains. Vol. 41. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. William J. Stewart. 2009. Probability, Markov Chains, Queues, and Simulation: The Mathematical Basis of Performance Modeling. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Nico M. van Dijk. 1992. Uniformization for nonhomogeneous Markov chains. Operations Research Letters 12, 5 (Nov. 1992), 283--291. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-6377(92)90086-iGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Aad P. A. Van Moorsel and William H. Sanders. 1997. Transient solution of Markov models by combining adaptive and standard uniformization. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 46, 3 (1997), 430--440. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/24.664016Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  44. Aad P. A. Van Moorsel and Katinka Wolter. 1998. Numerical solution of non-homogeneous markov processes through uniformization. In Proceedings of the 12th European Simulation Multiconference on Simulation—Past, Present, and Future (ESM’98). 710--717.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Ladislaus von Bortkiewicz. 1898. Das Gesetz der kleinen Zahlen. BG Teubner, Leipzig, Germany.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. Ward Whitt. 2005. Engineering solution of a basic call-center model. Management Science 51, 2 (Feb. 2005), 221--235. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1040.0302Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Ward Whitt. 2012. Fitting birth-and-death queueing models to data. Statistics 8 Probability Letters 82, 5 (May 2012), 998--1004. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spl.2012.02.010Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Håkan L. S. Younes, Marta Kwiatkowska, Gethin Norman, and David Parker. 2006. Numerical vs. statistical probabilistic model checking. International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer 8, 3 (Jan. 2006), 216--228. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10009-005-0187-8Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Inhomogeneous CTMC Birth-and-Death Models Solved by Uniformization with Steady-State Detection

              Recommendations

              Comments

              Login options

              Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

              Sign in

              Full Access

              • Published in

                cover image ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation
                ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation  Volume 30, Issue 3
                July 2020
                127 pages
                ISSN:1049-3301
                EISSN:1558-1195
                DOI:10.1145/3403635
                Issue’s Table of Contents

                Copyright © 2020 ACM

                Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

                Publisher

                Association for Computing Machinery

                New York, NY, United States

                Publication History

                • Published: 31 May 2020
                • Online AM: 7 May 2020
                • Accepted: 1 November 2019
                • Revised: 1 September 2019
                • Received: 1 February 2019
                Published in tomacs Volume 30, Issue 3

                Permissions

                Request permissions about this article.

                Request Permissions

                Check for updates

                Qualifiers

                • research-article
                • Research
                • Refereed

              PDF Format

              View or Download as a PDF file.

              PDF

              eReader

              View online with eReader.

              eReader

              HTML Format

              View this article in HTML Format .

              View HTML Format