Advertisement

Discrete Event Dynamic Systems

, Volume 26, Issue 2, pp 367–382 | Cite as

Infinitesimal perturbation analysis of a single-stage fluid queue with loss feedback and non-responsive competing traffic

  • Richelle V. Adams
Article
  • 96 Downloads

Abstract

In this paper we perform Infinitesimal Perturbation Analysis (IPA) for a single-stage stochastic fluid queue that is shared between two competing sources, one that employs additive loss-feedback congestion control and the other that employs no congestion-control (i.e., it is unresponsive). This scenario is applicable within the realm of computer communication networks particularly at bottleneck router queues where multiple and diverse flows compete for bandwidth. We optimize the tradeoff between total loss volume and queue workload (a measure for queueing delay). Although a sound knowledge of the system’s dynamics is required to derive the IPA gradient estimators, no knowledge of the underlying probability distributions governing the system is required. What results are fairly simple counting processes, whose values can be computed directly from an ongoing live stream of traffic.

Keywords

Infinitesimal perturbation analysis IPA Stochastic fluid models Stochastic optimization Network congestion control 

References

  1. Cassandras C, Sun G, Panayiotou C (2001) Stochastic fluid models for control and optimization of systems with quality of service requirements. In: Proceedings of the 40th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, 2001, vol 2, pp 1917–22Google Scholar
  2. Cassandras C, Sun G, Panayiotou C, Wardi Y (2003) Perturbation analysis and control of two-class stochastic fluid models for communication networks. IEEE Trans Autom Control 48(5):770–82MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cassandras CG, Wardi Y, Panayiotou CG, Yao C (2010) Perturbation analysis and optimization of stochastic hybrid systems. Eur J Control 6(6):642–661MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. Nosrati S, Nikravesh S (2004) Perturbation analysis for loss volume and buffer workload in tandem two-class stochastic fluid models for communication networks. In: Proceedings of the 5th Asian Control Conference, 2004, pp 701–7Google Scholar
  5. Panayiotou C (2004) On-line resource sharing in communication networks using infinitesimal perturbation analysis of stochastic fluid models. In: Proceedings of the 43rd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), 2004, vol 1. Nassau, Bahamas, pp 563–8Google Scholar
  6. Sun G, Cassandras C, Wardi Y, Panayiotou C (2003) Perturbation analysis of stochastic flow networks. In: Proceedings of the 42nd IEEE International Conference on Decision and Control, 2004, pp 4831–6Google Scholar
  7. Sun G, Cassandras C, Wardi Y, Panayiotou C, Riley G (2004) Perturbation analysis and optimization of stochastic flow networks. IEEE Trans Autom Control 49(12):2143–59MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Sun G, Cassandras CG, Panayiotou CG (2004) Perturbation analysis of multiclass stochastic fluid models. Discret Event Dyn Syst 14(3):267–307MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. Wardi Y, Adams R, Melamed B (2010) A unified approach to infinitesimal perturbation analysis in stochastic flow models: The single-stage case. IEEE Trans Autom Control 55(1):89–103MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Wardi Y, Melamed B (2001) Estimating nonparametric IPA derivatives of loss functions in tandem fluid models. In: Proceedings of the 40th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, 2001, pp 4517–22Google Scholar
  11. Wardi Y, Melamed B, Cassandras C, Panaytou C (2002) Online IPA gradient estimators in stochastic continuous fluid models. J Optim Theory Appl 115(2):369–405MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Wardi Y, Riley G (2002) IPA for loss volume and buffer workload in tandem SFM networks. In: Proceedings of the Sixth International Workshop on Discrete Event Systems, 2002, pp 393–8Google Scholar
  13. Wardi Y, Riley G (2004) IPA for spillover volume in a fluid queue with retransmissions. In: Proceedings of the 43rd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), 2004, pp 3756–61Google Scholar
  14. Wardi Y, Riley GF (2010) Infinitesimal perturbation analysis in networks of stochastic flow models: General framework and case study of tandem networks with flow control. Discret Event Dyn Syst: Theory Appl 20(2):275–305MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. Yao C, Cassandras C (2009) Perturbation analysis and optimization of multiclass multiobjective stochastic flow models. In: Proceedings of the 48th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, 2009, pp 914–919Google Scholar
  16. Yao C, Cassandras C (2011) Perturbation analysis of stochastic hybrid systems and applications to resource contention games. Front Electr Electron Eng China 6(3):453–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Yu H, Cassandras C (2003) Perturbation analysis of feedback-controlled stochastic flow systems. In: Proceedings of the 42nd IEEE International Conference on Decision and Control, 2003, pp 6277–82Google Scholar
  18. Yu H, Cassandras C (2004) Multiplicative feedback control in communication networks using stochastic flow models. In: Proceedings of the 43rd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), 2004, pp 557–62Google Scholar
  19. Yu H, Cassandras C (2004) Perturbation analysis of feedback-controlled stochastic flow systems. IEEE Trans Autom Control 49(8):1317–32MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Yu H, Cassandras C (2004) Perturbation analysis of stochastic flow systems with multiplicative feedback. In: Proceedings of the 2004 American Control Conference, 2004, pp 5734–9Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Electrical and Computer EngineeringThe University of the West IndiesSt AugustineTrinidad and Tobago

Personalised recommendations