1 of 27

1

(Refer to section 15.6 in text (Branching processes) for

discussion on the extinction probability).

20.1 Extinction Probability for Queues:

  • A customer arrives at an empty server and immediately goes

for service initiating a busy period. During that service period,

other customers may arrive and if so they wait for service.

The server continues to be busy till the last waiting customer

completes service which indicates the end of a busy

period. An interesting question is whether the busy periods

are bound to terminate at some point ? Are they ?

PILLAI

20. Extinction Probability for Queues

and Martingales

2 of 27

2

Do busy periods continue forever? Or do such

queues come to an end sooner or later? If so, how ?

  • Slow Traffic ( )

Steady state solutions exist and the probability of extinction

equals 1. (Busy periods are bound to terminate with

probability 1. Follows from sec 15.6, theorem 15-9.)

  • Heavy Traffic ( )

Steady state solutions do not exist, and such queues can be

characterized by their probability of extinction.

  • Steady state solutions exist if the traffic rate Thus

  • What if too many customers rush in, and/or the service

rate is slow ( ) ? How to characterize such queues ?

PILLAI

3 of 27

3

Extinction Probability for Population Models

PILLAI

Fig 20.1

4 of 27

4

  • Offspring moment generating function:

Queues and Population Models

  • Population models

: Size of the nth generation

: Number of offspring for the ith member of

the nth generation. From Eq.(15-287), Text

Let

PILLAI

(20-1)

Fig 20.2

5 of 27

5

Extinction probability satisfies the equation

which can be solved iteratively as follows:

and

PILLAI

(20-2)

(20-3)

(20-4)

(20-5)

6 of 27

6

Let

  • Left to themselves, in the long run, populations either

die out completely with probability , or explode with

probability 1- (Both unpleasant conclusions).

  • Review Theorem 15-9 (Text)

PILLAI

(20-6)

(20-7)

(a)

(b)

Fig 20.3

7 of 27

7

Note that the statistics depends both on the arrival as well

as the service phenomena.

Queues :

Customers that arrive

during the first service time

Service time of

first customer

Service time of

second customer

First

customer

Busy period

PILLAI

Fig 20.4

8 of 27

8

PILLAI

  • : Inter-departure statistics generated by arrivals
  • : Traffic Intensity Steady state

Heavy traffic

  • Termination of busy periods corresponds to extinction of

queues. From the analogy with population models the

extinction probability is the unique root of the equation

  • Slow Traffic :

Heavy Traffic :

i.e., unstable queues either terminate their busy periods

with probability , or they will continue to be busy with

probability 1- . Interestingly, there is a finite probability of

busy period termination even for unstable queues.

: Measure of stability for unstable queues.

9 of 27

9

Example 20.1 : M/M/ 1 queue

From (15-221), text,we have

Number of arrivals between any two departures follows

a geometric random variable.

PILLAI

(20-8)

(20-10)

(20-9)

Fig 20.5

10 of 27

10

Example 20.2 : Bulk Arrivals M[x]/M/ 1 queue

Compound Poisson Arrivals : Departures are exponential

random variables as in a Poisson process with parameter

Similarly arrivals are Poisson with parameter However each arrival can contain multiple jobs.

Let

and

represents the bulk arrival statistics.

PILLAI

Fig 20.6

11 of 27

11

Inter-departure Statistics of Arrivals

PILLAI

(20-11)

(20-12)

12 of 27

12

Bulk Arrivals (contd)

  • Compound Poisson arrivals with geometric rate
  • Doubly Poisson arrivals gives

PILLAI

(20-13)

(20-14)

(20-15)

M/M/1

(a)

(b)

Fig 20.7

13 of 27

13

Example 20.3 : M/En / 1 queue (n-phase exponential service)

From (16-213)

Example 20.4 : M/D/1 queue

Letting in (16.213),text, we obtain

so that

(20-17)

(20-16)

PILLAI

(20-18)

14 of 27

14

PILLAI

20.2 Martingales

Martingales refer to a specific class of stochastic processes

that maintain a form of “stability” in an overall sense. Let

refer to a discrete time stochastic process. If n refers

to the present instant, then in any realization the random

variables are known, and the future values

are unknown. The process is “stable” in the sense

that conditioned on the available information (past and

present), no change is expected on the average for the future

values, and hence the conditional expectation of the

immediate future value is the same as that of the present

value. Thus, if

(20-19)

15 of 27

15

PILLAI

for all n, then the sequence {Xn} represents a Martingale.

Historically martingales refer to the “doubling the stake”

strategy in gambling where the gambler doubles the bet on

every loss till the almost sure win occurs eventually at which

point the entire loss is recovered by the wager together with

a modest profit. Problems 15-6 and 15-7, chapter 15, Text

refer to examples of martingales. [Also refer to section 15-5,

Text].

If {Xn} refers to a Markov chain, then as we have

seen, with

Eq. (20-19) reduces to the simpler expression [Eq. (15-224),

Text]

(20-20)

16 of 27

16

PILLAI

For finite chains of size N, interestingly, Eq. (20-20) reads

implying that x2 is a right-eigenvector of the transition

probability matrix associated with the eigenvalue 1.

However, the “all one” vector is always

an eigenvector for any P corresponding to the unit eigenvalue

[see Eq. (15-179), Text], and from Perron’s theorem and the

discussion there [Theorem 15-8, Text] it follows that, for

finite Markov chains that are also martingales, P cannot be

a primitive matrix, and the corresponding chains are in fact

not irreducible. Hence every finite state martingale has

at least two closed sets embedded in it. (The closed sets in the

two martingales in Example 15-13, Text correspond to two

absorbing states. Same is true for the Branching Processes

discussed in the next example also. Refer to remarks

following Eq. (20-7)).

(20-21)

17 of 27

17

PILLAI

Example 20.5: As another example, let {Xn} represent the

branching process discussed in section 15-6, Eq. (15-287),

Text. Then Zn given by

is a martingale, where Yi s are independent, identically

distributed random variables, and refers to the extinction

probability for that process [see Theorem 15.9, Text].

To see this, note that

where we have used the Markov property of the chain,

(20-22)

(20-23)

since Yi s are

independent of Xn

use (15-2)

18 of 27

18

PILLAI

the common moment generating function P(z) of Yi s, and

Theorem 15-9, Text.

Example 20.6 (DeMoivre’s Martingale): The gambler’s ruin

problem (see Example 3-15, Text) also gives rise to various

martingales. (see problem 15-7 for an example).

From there, if Sn refers to player A’s cumulative capital

at stage n, (note that S0 = $ a ), then as DeMoivre has observed

generates a martingale. This follows since

where the instantaneous gain or loss given by Zn+1 obeys

and hence

(20-24)

(20-25)

(20-26)

19 of 27

19

PILLAI

since {Sn} generates a Markov chain.

Thus

i.e., Yn in (20-24) defines a martingale!

Martingales have excellent convergence properties

in the long run. To start with, from (20-19) for any given

n, taking expectations on both sides we get

Observe that, as stated, (20-28) is true only when n is known

or n is a given number.

As the following result shows, martingales do not fluctuate

wildly. There is in fact only a small probability that a large

deviation for a martingale from its initial value will occur.

(20-27)

(20-28)

20 of 27

20

PILLAI

Hoeffding’s inequality: Let {Xn} represent a martingale and

be a sequence of real numbers such that the random

variables

Then

Proof: Eqs. (20-29)-(20-30) state that so long as the

martingale increments remain bounded almost surely, then

there is only a very small chance that a large deviation occurs

between Xn and X0. We shall prove (20-30) in three steps.

  1. For any convex function f (x), and we have

(Fig 20.8)

(20-30)

(20-29)

(20-31)

21 of 27

21

PILLAI

which for

and

gives

Replacing a in (20-32) with any zero mean random variable

Y that is bounded by unity almost everywhere, and taking

expected values on both sides we get

Note that the right side is independent of Y in (20-33).

On the other hand, from (20-29)

and since Yi s are bounded by unity, from (20-32) we get

(as in (20-33))

(20-32)

(20-33)

(20-34)

Fig 20.8

22 of 27

22

(ii) To make use of (20-35), referring back to the Markov

inequality in (5-89), Text, it can be rewritten as

and with

But

(20-35)

(20-36)

(20-37)

(20-38)

PILLAI

use (20-29)

23 of 27

23

Substituting (20-38) into (20-37) we get

(iii) Observe that the exponent on the right side of (20-39) is

minimized for and hence it reduces to

The same result holds when XnX0 is replaced by X0Xn,

and adding the two bounds we get (20-30), the Hoeffding’s

inequality.

From (20-28), for any fixed n, the mean value

E{Xn} equals E{X0}. Under what conditions is this result

true if we replace n by a random time T ? i.e., if T is a

random variable, then when is

PILLAI

(20-39)

(20-40)

24 of 27

24

The answer turns out to be that T has to be a stopping time.

What is a stopping time?

A stochastic process may be known to assume a

particular value, but the time at which it happens is in general

unpredictable or random. In other words, the nature of the

outcome is fixed but the timing is random. When that outcome

actually occurs, the time instant corresponds to a stopping

time. Consider a gambler starting with $a and let T refer to the

time instant at which his capital becomes $1. The random

variable T represents a stopping time. When the capital

becomes zero, it corresponds to the gambler’s ruin and that

instant represents another stopping time (Time to go home for

the gambler!)

PILLAI

(20-41)

25 of 27

25

Recall that in a Poisson process the occurrences of the first,

second, arrivals correspond to stopping times

Stopping times refer to those random instants at which there

is sufficient information to decide whether or not a specific

condition is satisfied.

Stopping Time: The random variable T is a stopping time

for the process X(t), if for all is a

function of the values of the process up to

t, i.e., it should be possible to decide whether T has occurred

or not by the time t, knowing only the value of the process

X(t) up to that time t. Thus the Poisson arrival times T1 and T2

referred above are stopping times; however T2T1 is not

a stopping time.

A key result in martingales states that so long as

PILLAI

26 of 27

26

T is a stopping time (under some additional mild restrictions)

Notice that (20-42) generalizes (20-28) to certain random

time instants (stopping times) as well.

Eq. (20-42) is an extremely useful tool in analyzing

martingales. We shall illustrate its usefulness by rederiving the

gambler’s ruin probability in Example 3-15, Eq. (3-47), Text.

From Example 20.6, Yn in (20-24) refer to a martingale in the

gambler’s ruin problem. Let T refer to the random instant at

which the game ends; i.e., the instant at which either player A

loses all his wealth and Pa is the associated probability of ruin

for player A, or player A gains all wealth $(a + b) with

probability (1 – Pa). In that case, T is a stopping time

and hence from (20-42), we get

PILLAI

(20-42)

27 of 27

27

since player A starts with $a in Example 3.15. But

Equating (20-43)-(20-44) and simplifying we get

that agrees with (3-47), Text. Eq. (20-45) can be used to derive

other useful probabilities and advantageous plays as well. [see

Examples 3-16 and 3-17, Text].

Whatever the advantage, it is worth quoting the master

Gerolamo Cardano (1501-1576) on this: “The greatest

advantage in gambling comes from not playing at all.”

PILLAI

(20-45)

(20-43)

(20-44)