ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Efficient decomposition methods for the analysis of multi-facility blocking models
Full text PdfPdf (1.60 MB)
Source Journal of the ACM (JACM) archive
Volume 41 ,  Issue 4  (July 1994) table of contents
Pages: 648 - 675  
Year of Publication: 1994
ISSN:0004-5411
Authors
Adrian E. Conway  GTE Labs., Inc., Waltham, MA
Eugene Pinsky  Boston Univ., Boston, MA
Srinivasan Tridandapani  Univ. of Washington, Seattle
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 4,   Downloads (12 Months): 37,   Citation Count: 3
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues   peer to peer  

Tools and Actions: Review this Article  
Save this Article to a Binder    Display Formats: BibTex  EndNote ACM Ref   
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/179812.179838
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Three new decomposition methods are developed for the exact analysis of stochastic multi-facility blocking models of the product-form type. The first is a basic decomposition algorithm that reduces the analysis of blocking probabilities to that of two separate subsystems. The second is a generalized M-subsystem decomposition method. The third is a more elaborate and efficient incremental decomposition technique. All of the algorithms exploit the sparsity of locality that can be found in the demand matrix of a system. By reducing the analysis to that of a set of subsystems, the overall dimensionality of the problem is diminished and the computational requirements are reduced significantly. This enables the efficient computation of blocking probabilities in large systems. Several numerical examples are provided to illustrate the computational savings that can be realized.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
~AEIN, J. 1978. A multi-user-class blocked calls cleared demand access model. IEEE Trans. ~Commun. 26, 3, 378-385.
 
2
~AEIN, J., AND KOSOVYCH, S. 1977. Satellite capacity allocation. IEEE Proc. 65, 3, 332 342.
 
3
 
4
~BARBERIS, G., AND BRIGNOLO, R. 1982. Capacity allocation in a DAMA satellite system. IEEE ~Trans. Conzmun. 30, 7, 1750-1757.
 
5
~BURMAN, D. Y., LEHOCZKY, J. P., AND LIM, Y. 1984. Insensitivity of blocking probabilities in a ~circuit-switching network. J. Appl. Prob. 21,850-859.
 
6
 
7
~COURTOIS, P. J. 1977. Deconzposabdity: Queuebzg and Computer Systenz Applications. Academic ~Press, Orlando, Fla.
 
8
 
9
~FOSCmNI, G., AND GOPINATH, B. 1983. Sharing memory optimally. IEEE Trans. Commun. 31, 3, ~352 360.
 
10
~FREDRIKSON, G. 1974. Analysis of channel utilization in traffic concentrators. IEEE Trans. ~Commun. 22, 8, 1122 1129.
 
11
~GERSHT, A., AND LEE, K. 1988. Virtual circuit load control in fast packet-switched broadband ~networks. In Proceedbzgs oflEEE INFOCOM'88 (Miami, Fla.). IEEE, New York, pp. 214-220.
 
12
~GIRARD, A., AND OUIMET, Y. 1983. End-to-end blocking for circuit switched networks: Polyno-mial algorithms for some special cases, iEEE Trans. Commun. 31, 12, 1269-1273.
 
13
~HOLTZMANN, J. 1971. Analysis of dependence effects in telephone trunking networks. Bell Syst. ~Tech. J. 50, 8, 2647-2662.
 
14
~JAFARI, A., SAADAWI, T., AND SCHWARTZ, M. 1986. Blocking probability in two-way distributed ~circuit-switched CATV. 1EEE Trans. Commun, 34, 10, 977 984.
 
15
~JORDAN, S., AND VARAIYA, P. P. 1991. Throughput in multiple service, multiple resource ~communication networks. IEEE Trans. Commun 39, 8, 1216-1222.
 
16
~KATZ, S. 1967. Statistical performance analysis of a switched communication network. In ~Proceedmgs of the 5th Internatzonal Teletraffic Congress (New York, N.Y.). pp. 566 575.
 
17
~KAUFMAN, J. 1981. Blocking in a shared resource environment. IEEE Trans. Commun. 29, 10, ~pp. 1474-1481.
 
18
 
19
~KELLY, F. P. 1979. Reversbthty and Stochasnc Nem,orks. Wiley, New York.
 
20
~KELLY, F. P. 1986. Blocking probabilities m large circmt-switched networks. Adv. Appl. Prob., ~10, 473-505.
 
21
~KELLY, F. P. 1991.Loss networks. Ann. AppL Prob., 1, 3, 319-378.
22
 
23
~LIN, P., LEON, B., AND STEWART, C. 1978. Analysis of circuit switched networks employing ~originating-office control with spill-over. {EEE Trans. Conzmun. 26, 6, 754-765.
 
24
 
25
~PINSKY, E., AND CONWAY, A. E. 1990. Performance analysis of sharing policies for broadband ~networks. In Proceedings of the 7th ITC Seminar on Broadband Technologies (Morristown, N.J., ~Oct.). pp. 11.4.1 11.4.8.
 
26
 
27
 
28
~ROSS, K., AND TSANG, D. 1990. Teletraffic engineering for product-form circuit switched net- ~works. Adv. Appl. Prob., 22, 3, pp. 657-675.
 
29
 
30
~RUBIN, I., AND LEE, J. 1988. Performance analysis of interconnected metropolitan area circuit- ~switched telecommunications networks. IEEE Trans. Commun. 36, 2, 171-185.
 
31
~SIMON, H. h., AND ANDO, A. 1961. Aggregation of variables in dynamic systems. Econometriea ~29, pp. 111-138.
 
32
 
33
~TSANG, D., AND ROSS, K. 1990. Algorithms to determine exact blocking probabilities for ~multi-rate tree networks. IEEE Trans. Commun., 38, 8, 1266-1271.
 
34
~WniTT, W. 1985. Blocking when service is required from several facilities simultaneously. Bell ~Syst. Techo J., 64, 8, 1807-1856.


Collaborative Colleagues:
Adrian E. Conway: colleagues
Eugene Pinsky: colleagues
Srinivasan Tridandapani: colleagues

Peer to Peer - Readers of this Article have also read: