arXiv:1406.0285v1 [cs.PF] 2 Jun 2014 h te ad h he pedcsaeteoln suppleme online 2014 the Systems” are Dynamic appendices Event ”Discrete three the hand, other the ∗ h anrslso hspprwl epbihdi ”Discrete in published be will paper this of results main The on hc ed opromnecmuaino hssse.Finally system. this of computation com unified performance to a to used of is leads means which method by point matrix-analytic obtained The be (3) can algorithm. condition differential Lipschitz a sem and operator limit, the field to structure phase-type the Introducing a (2) up th setting by for satisfied where equations vector, analysis vector probability differential detailed of system a res dimensional Providing new (1) some discu makes When follows: paper this as limit. model, mean-field supermarket the general and more a semigroup operator wh the method with matrix-analytic bined generalized a times provides service and non-exponential distributions, with and (MAPs) Processes Arrival challe and interesting, limited, always is non- model are supermarket times a service such the of and non-Poisson are manag processes resource transportatio arrival of and study systems the manufacturing in networks, role computer key a play that scheme control hspprdsrbsaspraktmdlwt o-oso inputs non-Poisson with model supermarket a describes paper This a with networks queueing parallel of class a are models Supermarket h hns nvriyo ogKn,Sai,NT ogKong Hong N.T, Shatin, Kong, Hong of University Chinese The lc-tutrdSpraktModels Supermarket Block-Structured asa nvriy ihaga 604 China 066004, Qinhuangdao University, Yanshan eateto optrSine&Engineering & Science Computer of Department h naineo niomn factors environment of invariance the colo cnmc n aaeetSciences Management and Economics of School ac 5 2014 25, March onCS Lui C.S. John unLnLi Quan-Lin Abstract 1 tr aeilfrti ae ulse in published paper this for material ntary sgvna nipratresult. important an as given is vn yai ytm”21.On 2014. Systems” Dynamic Event gopadt h mean- the to and igroup ewrs hnthe When networks. n xoeta,analysis exponential, xetdfraction expected e hs-ye(PH) Phase-type : mn f uhas, such of, ement lsadadvances and ults c sfis com- first is ich nging. uetefixed the pute euesome use we , Markovian : ∗ adaptive n sn such ssing infinite- n matrix- numerical examples to illustrate how the performance measures of this supermarket model depend on the non-Poisson inputs and on the non-exponential service times. Thus the results of this paper give new highlight on understanding influence of non- Poisson inputs and of non-exponential service times on performance measures of more general supermarket models. Keywords: Randomized load balancing; Supermarket model; Matrix-analytic method; Operator semigroup; Mean-field limit; Markovian arrival processes (MAP); Phase-type (PH) distribution; Invariance of environment factors; Doubly exponential tail; RG-factorization.
1 Introduction
Supermarket models are a class of parallel queueing networks with an adaptive control scheme that play a key role in the study of resource management of, such as computer networks (e.g., see the dynamic randomized load balancing), manufacturing systems and transportation networks. Since a simple supermarket model was discussed by Mitzen- macher [23], Vvedenskaya et al [32] and Turner [30] through queueing theory as well as Markov processes, subsequent papers have been published on this theme, among which, see, Vvedenskaya and Suhov [33], Jacquet and Vvedenskaya [8], Jacquet et al [9], Mitzen- macher [24], Graham [5, 6, 7], Mitzenmacher et al [25], Vvedenskaya and Suhov [34], Luczak and Norris [20], Luczak and McDiarmid [18, 19], Bramson et al [1, 2, 3], Li et al [17], Li [13] and Li et al [15]. For the fast Jackson networks (or the supermarket networks), readers may refer to Martin and Suhov [22], Martin [21] and Suhov and Vvedenskaya [29]. The available results of the supermarket models with non-exponential service times are still few in the literature. Important examples include an approximate method of integral equations by Vvedenskaya and Suhov [33], the Erlang service times by Mitzenmacher [24] and Mitzenmacher et al [25], the PH service times by Li et al [17] and Li and Lui [16], and the ansatz-based modularized program for the general service times by Bramson et al [1, 2, 3]. Little work has been done on the analysis of the supermarket models with non-Poisson inputs, which are more difficult and challenging due to the higher complexity of that N arrival processes are superposed. Li and Lui [16] and Li [12] used the superposition of N MAP inputs to study the infinite-dimensional Markov processes of supermarket modeling type. Comparing with the results given in Li and Lui [16] and Li [12], this
2 paper provides more necessary phase-level probability analysis in setting up the infinite- dimensional system of differential vector equations, which leads some new results and methodologies in the study of block-structured supermarket models. Note that the PH distributions constitute a versatile class of distributions that can approximate arbitrarily closely any probability distribution defined on the nonnegative real line, and the MAPs are a broad class of renewal or non-renewal point processes that can approximate arbitrarily closely any stochastic counting process (e.g., see Neuts [27, 28] and Li [11] for more details), thus the results of this paper are a key advance of those given in Mitzenmacher [23] and Vvedenskaya et al [32] under the Poisson and exponential setting. The main contributions of this paper are threefold. The first one is to use the MAP inputs and the PH service times to describe a more general supermarket model with non- Poisson inputs and with non-exponential service times. Based on the phase structure, we define the random fraction vector and construct an infinite-dimensional Markov process, which expresses the state of this supermarket model by means of an infinite-dimensional Markov process. Furthermore, we set up an infinite-dimensional system of differential vector equations satisfied by the expected fraction vector through a detailed probability analysis. To that end, we obtain an important result: The invariance of environment fac- tors, which is a key for being able to simplify the differential equations in a vector form. Based on the differential vector equations, we can provide a generalized matrix-analytic method to investigate more general supermarket models with non-Poisson inputs and with non-exponential service times. The second contribution of this paper is to provide phase- structured expression for the operator semigroup with respect to the MAP inputs and to the PH service times, and use the operator semigroup to provide the mean-field limit for the sequence of Markov processes who asymptotically approaches a single trajectory identified by the unique and global solution to the infinite-dimensional system of limiting differential vector equations. To prove the existence and uniqueness of solution through the Picard approximation, we provide a unified computational method for establishing a Lipschitz condition, which is crucial in all the rigor proofs involved. The third contribution of this paper is to provide an effective matrix-analytic method both for computing the fixed point and for analyzing performance measures of this supermarket model. Further- more, we use some numerical examples to indicate how the performance measures of this supermarket model depend on the non-Poisson MAP inputs and on the non-exponential PH service times. Therefore, the results of this paper gives new highlight on understand-
3 ing performance analysis and nonlinear Markov processes for more general supermarket models with non-Poisson inputs and non-exponential service times. The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we first introduce a new MAP whose transition rates are controlled by the number of servers in the sys- tem. Then we describe a more general supermarket model of N identical servers with MAP inputs and PH service times. In Section 3, we define a random fraction vector and construct an infinite-dimensional Markov process, which expresses the state of this supermarket model. In Section 4, we set up an infinite-dimensional system of differential vector equations satisfied by the expected fraction vector through a detailed probability analysis, and establish an important result: The invariance of environment factors. In Section 5, we show that the mean-field limit for the sequence of Markov processes who asymptotically approaches a single trajectory identified by the unique and global solution to the infinite-dimensional system of limiting differential vector equations. To prove the existence and uniqueness of the solution, we provide a unified matrix-differential algo- rithm for establishing the Lipschitz condition. In Section 6, we first discuss the stability of this supermarket model in terms of a coupling method. Then we provide a generalized matrix-analytic method for computing the fixed point whose doubly exponential solution and phase-structured tail are obtained. Finally, we discuss some useful limits of the frac- tion vector u(N) (t) as N → ∞ and t → +∞. In Section 7, we provide two performance measures of this supermarket model, and use some numerical examples to indicate how the performance measures of this system depend on the non-Poisson MAP inputs and on the non-exponential PH service times. Some concluding remarks are given in Section 8. Finally, Appendices A and C are respectively designed for the proofs of Theorems 1 and 3, and Appendix B contains the proof of Theorem 2, where the mean-field limit of the sequence of Markov processes in this supermarket model is given a detailed analysis through the operator semigroup.
2 Supermarket Model Description
In this section, we first introduce a new MAP whose transition rates are controlled by the number of servers in the system. Then we describe a more general supermarket model of N identical servers with MAP inputs and PH service times.
4 2.1 A new Markovian arrival process
Based on Chapter 5 in Neuts [28], the MAP is a bivariate Markov process {(N(t), J(t)) : t ≥ 0} with state space S = {1, 2, 3,...} × {1, 2,...,mA}, where {N(t) : t ≥ 0} is a counting pro- cess of arrivals and {J(t) : t ≥ 0} is a Markov environment process. When J(t) = i, if the random environment shall go to state j in the next time, then the counting process
{N(t) : t ≥ 0} is a Poisson process with arrival rate di,j for 1 ≤ i, j ≤ mA. The matrix D with elements di,j satisfies D 0. The matrix C with elements ci,j has negative diagonal elements and nonnegative off-diagonal elements, and the matrix C is invertible, where ci,j is a state transition rate of the Markov chain {J(t) : t ≥ 0} from state i to state j for i 6= j. The matrix Q = C + D is the infinitesimal generator of an irreducible Markov chain. We assume that Qe = 0, where e is a column vector of ones with a suitable size. Hence, we have mA mA c = − d + c . i,i i,j i,j j X=1 Xj=6 i Let mA
− c1,j c1,2 · · · c1,mA j=16 P mA c − c · · · c 2,1 2,j 2,mA C = j=26 , . . . . P. .. . . . . . mA cmA,1 cmA,2 ··· − cmA,j j=6 m A P C(N)= C − Ndiag(De),
D(N)= ND, where mA mA mA diag(De) = diag d , d ,..., d . 1,j 2,j mA,j j j j X=1 X=1 X=1 Then Q (N)= C(N)+ D(N) = [C − Ndiag(De)] + ND is obviously the infinitesimal generator of an irreducible Markov chain with mA states.
Thus (C(N), D(N)) is the irreducible matrix descriptor of a new MAP of order mA. Note that the new MAP is non-Poisson and may also be non-renewal, and its arrival rate at each environment state is controlled by the number N of servers in the system.
5 Note that Q (N) e = [C − Ndiag(De)] e + NDe = 0, the Markov chain Q (N) with mA states is irreducible and positive recurrent. Let ωN be the stationary probability vector of the Markov chain Q (N). Then ωN depends on the number N ≥ 1, and the stationary arrival rate of the MAP is given by NλN = NωN De.
2.2 Model description
Based on the new MAP, we describe a more general supermarket model of N identical servers with MAP inputs and PH service times as follows: Non-Poisson inputs: Customers arrive at this system as the MAP of irreducible matrix descriptor (C (N) , D (N)) of size mA, whose stationary arrival rate is given by
NλN = NωN De. Non-exponential service times: The service times of each server are i.i.d. and are of phase type with an irreducible representation (α, T ) of order mB, where the row vector α is a probability vector whose jth entry is the probability that a service begins in phase th j for 1 ≤ j ≤ mB; T is a matrix of size mB whose (i, j) entry is denoted by ti,j with 0 0 0 0 T ti,i < 0 for 1 ≤ i ≤ mB, and ti,j ≥ 0 for i 6= j. Let T = −T e = t1,t2,...,tmB 0, where “AT ” denotes the transpose of matrix (or vector) A. When a PH service time is in phase i, the transition rate from phase i to phase j is ti,j, the service completion rate is 0 ti , and the output rate from phase i is µi = −ti,i. At the same time, the mean of the PH service time is given by 1/µ = −αT −1e. Arrival and service disciplines: Each arriving customer chooses d ≥ 1 servers independently and uniformly at random from the N identical servers, and waits for its service at the server which currently contains the fewest number of customers. If there is a tie, servers with the fewest number of customers will be chosen randomly. All customers in any server will be served in the FCFS manner. Figure 1 gives a physical interpretation for this supermarket model.
Remark 1 The block-structured supermarket models can have many practical applica- tions to, such as, computer networks and manufacturing system, where it is a key to introduce the PH service times and the MAP inputs to such a practical model, because the PH distributions contain many useful distributions such as exponential, hyper-exponential
6 PH 0 State 1 t1 service State 1 Server 1 t1,2 t c Nd1, j 1 2,1 1,2 PH c 2,1 service 0 Server t MAP 2 State 2 2 input 2 State 2 State j t c c Nd2, j 1,mB 1, mA mA ,1 PH d1 t service 2,mB tm ,2 c c Server B 2,mA mA,2 N 1 Nd mjA, d t 0 PH mB State mB Server service State mA N
Arrival processes Routing policy PH service processes
Figure 1: The supermarket model with MAP inputs and PH service times and Erlang distributions; while the MAPs include, for example, Poisson process, PH- renewal processes, and Markovian modulated Poisson processes (MMPPs). Note that the probability distributions and stochastic point processes have extensively been used in most practical stochastic modeling. On the other hand, in many practical applications, the block-structured supermarket model is an important queueing model to analyze the relation between the system performance and the job routing rule, and it can also help to design reasonable architecture to improve the performance and to balance the load.
3 An Infinite-Dimensional Markov Process
In this section, we first define the random fraction vector of this supermarket model. Then we use the the random fraction vector to construct an infinite-dimensional Markov process, which describes the state of this supermarket model. (N) For this supermarket model, let nk;i,j (t) be the number of servers with at least k customers (note that the serving customer is also taken into account), and with the MAP (N) be in phase i and the PH service time be in phase j at time t ≥ 0. Clearly, 0 ≤ n0;i (t) ≤ N (N) and 0 ≤ nk;i,j (t) ≤ N for k ≥ 1, 1 ≤ i ≤ mA and 1 ≤ j ≤ mB. Let
n(N) (t) U (N) (t)= 0;i , 1 ≤ i ≤ m , 0;i N A
7 and for k ≥ 1 n(N) (t) U (N) (t)= k;i,j , 1 ≤ i ≤ m , 1 ≤ j ≤ m . k;i,j N A B (N) Then Uk;i,j (t) is the fraction of servers with at least k customers, and with the MAP be in phase i and the PH service time be in phase j at time t. Using the lexicographic order we write (N) (N) (N) (N) U0 (t)= U0;1 (t) ,U0;2 (t) ,...,U0;mA (t) for k ≥ 1
U (N) (t)= U (N) (t) ,U (N) (t) ,...,U (N) (t) ; . . . ; k k;1,1 k;1,2 k;1,mB U (N) (t) ,U (N) (t) ,...,U (N) (t) , k;mA,1 k;mA,2 k;mA,mB and (N) (N) (N) (N) U (t)= U0 (t) ,U1 (t) ,U2 (t) ,... . (1) Let a = (a1, a2, a3,...) and b = (b1, b2, b3,...). We write a < b if ak < bk for some k ≥ 1; a ≤ b if ak ≤ bk for every k ≥ 1.
For a fixed quaternary array (t,N,i,j) with t ≥ 0,N ∈ {1, 2, 3,...} , i ∈ {1, 2,...,mA} (N) (N) and j ∈ {1, 2,...,mB}, it is easy to see from the stochastic order that nk;i,j (t) ≥ nk+1;i,j (t) for k ≥ 1. This gives (N) (N) (N) U1 (t) ≥ U2 (t) ≥ U3 (t) ···≥ 0 (2) and (N) (N) (N) (N) 1= U0 (t) e ≥ U1 (t) e ≥ U2 (t) e ≥ U3 (t) e ≥···≥ 0. (3)
Note that the state of this supermarket model is described as the random fraction vector U (N) (t) for t ≥ 0, and U (N) (t) ,t ≥ 0 is a stochastic vector process for each N = 1, 2,.... Since the arrival process to this supermarket model is the MAP and the service times in each server are of phase type, U (N) (t) ,t ≥ 0 is an infinite-dimensional Markov process whose state space is given by
(N) (N) (N) (N) ΩN = h0 , h1 , h2 . . . : h0 is a probability vector of size mA, n(N) (N) (N) (N) e h1 ≥ h2 ≥ h3 ≥···≥ 0, hk is a row vector of size mAmB for k ≥ 1, (N) (N) (N) 1= h0 e ≥ h1 e ≥ h2 e ≥···≥ 0, (N) and Nhk is a row vector of nonnegative integers for k ≥ 0 , (4) o 8 We write (N) (N) u0;i (t)= E U0;i (t) and for k ≥ 1 h i (N) (N) uk;i,j (t)= E Uk;i,j (t) . Using the lexicographic order we write h i
(N) (N) (N) (N) u0 (t)= u0;1 (t) , u0;2 (t) , . . . , u0;mA (t) and for k ≥ 1
u(N) (t)= u(N) (t) , u(N) (t) , . . . , u(N) (t) ; . . . ; k k;1,1 k;1,2 k;1,mB u(N) (t) , u(N) (t) , . . . , u(N) (t) , k;mA,1 k;mA,2 k;mA,mB
(N) (N) (N) (N) u (t)= u0 (t) , u1 (t) , u2 (t) ,... . It is easy to see from Equations (2) and (3) that
(N) (N) (N) u1 (t) ≥ u2 (t) ≥ u3 (t) ···≥ 0 (5) and (N) (N) (N) 1= u0 (t) e ≥ u1 (t) e ≥ u2 (t) e ≥···≥ 0. (6) In the remainder of this section, for convenience of readers, it is necessary to explain the structure of this long paper which is outlined as follows. Part one: The limit of the sequence of Markov processes. It is seen from (1) and (4) that we need to deal with the limit of the sequence U (N) (t) of infinite-dimensional Markov processes. This is organized in Appendix B by means of the convergence theorems of operator semigroups, e.g., see Ethier and Kurtz [4] for more details. Part two: The existence and uniqueness of the solution. As seen from Theorem 2 and (27), we need to study the two means E U (N) (t) and E [U (t)] = (N) (N) (N) limN→∞ E U (t) , or u (t) and u (t) = limN→∞ u (t). To that end, Section 4 sets up the system of differential vector equations satisfied by u(N) (t), while Section 5 provides a unified matrix-differential algorithm for establishing the Lipschitz condition, which is a key in proving the existence and uniqueness of the solution to the limiting system of differential vector equations satisfied by u (t) through the Picard approximation. Part three: Computation of the fixed point and performance analysis. Section 6 discusses the stability of this supermarket model in terms of a coupling method, and provide an effective matrix-analytic method for computing the fixed point. Section 7 analyzes the performance of this supermarket model by means of some numerical examples.
9 4 The System of Differential Vector Equations
In this section, we set up an infinite-dimensional system of differential vector equations satisfied by the expected fraction vector through a detailed probability analysis. Specif- ically, we obtain an important result: The invariance of environment factors, which is a key to rewriting the differential equations as a simple vector form. To derive the system of differential vector equations, we first discuss an example with the number k ≥ 2 of customers through the following three steps: Step one: Analysis of the Arrival Processes In this supermarket model of N identical servers, we need to determine the change in the expected number of servers with at least k customers over a small time period [0, dt). When the MAP environment process {J (t) : t ≥ 0} jumps form state l to state i for 1 ≤ l, i ≤ mA and the PH service environment process {I (t) : t ≥ 0} sojourns at state j for 1 ≤ j ≤ mB, one arrival occurs in a small time period [0, dt). In this case, the rate that any arriving customer selects d servers with at least k − 1 customers at random and joins the shortest one with k − 1 customers, is given by
mA (N) (N) uk−1;l,j (t) dl,i − uk;i,j (t) (di,1, di,2,...,di,mA ) e Xl=1 h i (N) × Lk;l (uk−1 (t) , uk (t)) Ndt, (7) where
m−1 d−m d mB mB L(N) (u (t) , u (t)) = Cm u(N) (t) − u(N) (t) u(N) (t) k;l k−1 k d k−1;l,j k;l,j k;l,j m j j X=1 X=1 h i X=1 h i m−1 d−1 mB d − m + Cm u(N) (t) − u(N) (t) d k−1;l,j k;l,j r1, r2, . . . , rm m=1 j=1 r1+r2+···+rmA =d−m A X X h i mX A r ≥ Pi=6 l i 1 0≤rj ≤d−m,1≤j≤mA ri m1−1 mA mB d m−1 mB N m N N × u( ) (t) + Cm 1 Cm1 u( ) (t) − u( ) (t) k;i,j d m m k−1;l,j k;l,j i j m m j Y=1 X=1 h i X=2 X1=1 X=1 h i
10 Each of the d selected servers is at the MAP phase l, and there is at least one server with the shortest queue length k-1. (Part I) In the d selected servers, there is In the d selected servers with no less only one server with the shortest than k-1 customers, there is at least queue length k-1 and with the MAP one server with the shortest queue phase l; there exists at least one length k-1, and with the MAP phase server is at the MAP phase il; and l; there is also at least one server all the other d-1 selected servers w i t h the shortest queue length k -1 contain no less than k customers. and with the MAP phase il. (Part II) (Part III)
Figure 2: A set decomposition of all possible events
ni mA mB m − m1 (N) (N) × uk−1;i,j (t) − uk;i,j (t) n ,n ,...,n n1+n2+···+nmA =m−m1 1 2 mA i=1 j=1 mX Y X h i P A n ≥1 i=6 l i 0≤nj ≤m−m1,1≤j≤mA ri d − m mA mB × u(N) (t) . (8) k;i,j r +r +···+r =d−m r1, r2, . . . , rmA i=1 j=1 1 2 XmA Y X h i 0≤rj ≤d−m,1≤j≤mA (N) (N) Note that uk−1;l,j (t) dl,i − uk;i,j (t) (di,1, di,2,...,di,mA ) e is the rate that any arriving customer joinsh one server with the shortest queue length k −i 1, where the MAP goes to phase i from phase l, and the PH service time is in phase j. Now, we provide a detailed interpretation for how to derive (8) through a set decom- position of all possible events given in Figure 2, where each of the d selected servers has at least k − 1 customers, the MAP arrival environment is in phase i or l, and the PH service environment is in phase j. Hence, the probability that any arriving customer selects d servers with at least k − 1 customers at random and joins a server with the shortest queue length k − 1 and with the MAP phase i or l is determined by means of Figure 2 through the following three parts: Part I: The probability that any arriving customer joins a server with the shortest queue length k − 1 and with the MAP phase l, and the queue lengths of the other selected
11 d − 1 servers are not shorter than k − 1, is given by
m−1 d−m d mB mB Cm u(N) (t) − u(N) (t) u(N) (t) , d k−1;l,j k;l,j k;l,j m=1 j j X X=1 h i X=1 h i m where Cd = d!/ [m! (d − m)!] is a binomial coefficient, and
m−1 mB u(N) (t) − u(N) (t) k−1;l,j k;l,j j X=1 h i is the probability that any arriving customer who can only choose one server makes m − 1 independent selections during the m − 1 servers with the queue length k − 1 and with d−m mB (N) the MAP phase l at time t; while j=1 uk;l,j (t) is the probability that there are d − m servers whose queue lengthsnP are noth shorterio than k and with the MAP phase l. Part II: The probability that any arriving customer joins a server with the shortest queue length k − 1 and with the MAP phase l; and the queue lengths of the other selected d − 1 servers are not shorter than k − 1, and there exist at least one server with no less than k customers and with the MAP phase i 6= l, is given by
m−1 d−1 mB Cm u(N) (t) − u(N) (t) d k−1;l,j k;l,j m=1 j X X=1 h i r m m i d − m A B × u(N) (t) , k;i,j r1, r2, . . . , rm r1+r2+···+rmA =d−m A i=1 j=1 mX Y X h i A ≥ Pi=6 l ri 1 0≤rj ≤d−m,1≤j≤mA
n n where when r1 + r2 + · · · + rmA = n, = mA is a multinomial ri! r1, r2, . . . , rmA i=1 coefficient. Q Part III: If there are m selected servers with the shortest queue length k−1 where there are m1 servers with the MAP phase l and m−m1 servers with the MAP phases i 6= l, then the probability that any arriving customer joins a server with the shortest queue length k − 1 and with the MAP phase l is equal to m1/m. In this case, the probability that any arriving customer joins a server with the shortest queue length k − 1 and with the MAP phase l, the queue lengths of the other selected d − 1 servers are not shorter than k − 1,
12 is given by
m1−1 d m−1 mB m N N Cm 1 Cm1 u( ) (t) − u( ) (t) d m m k−1;l,j k;l,j m=2 m =1 j X X1 X=1 h i ni mA mB m − m1 (N) (N) × uk−1;i,j (t) − uk;i,j (t) n ,n ,...,n n1+n2+···+nmA =m−m1 1 2 mA i=1 j=1 mX Y X h i P A n ≥1 i=6 l i 0≤nj ≤m−m1,1≤j≤mA ri mA mB d − m (N) × uk;i,j (t) . r , r , . . . , r r +r +···+r =d−m 1 2 mA i=1 j=1 1 2 XmA Y X h i 0≤rj ≤d−m,1≤j≤mA Using the above three parts, (7) and (8) can be obtained immediately.
For any two matrices A = (ai,j) and B = (bi,j), their Kronecker product is defined as
A ⊗ B = (ai,jB), and their Kronecker sum is given by A ⊕ B = A ⊗ I + I ⊗ B. The following theorem gives an important result, called the invariance of environment factors, which will play an important role in setting up the infinite-dimensional system of differential vector equations. This enables us to apply the matrix-analytic method to the study of more general supermarket models with non-Poisson inputs and non-exponential service times.
Theorem 1 m−1 d mA mB L(N) u(N) (t) ⊗ α, u(N) (t) = Cm u(N) (t) α − u(N) (t) 1;l 0 1 d 0;l j 1;l,j m=1 j X Xl=1 X=1 d−m mA mB × u(N) (t) (9) 1;l,j j Xl=1 X=1 and for k ≥ 2 m−1 d mA mB L(N) u(N) (t) , u(N) (t) = Cm u(N) (t) − u(N) (t) k;l k−1 k d k−1;l,j k;l,j m=1 j X Xl=1 X=1 d−m mA mB × u(N) (t) . (10) k;l,j j Xl=1 X=1 (N) (N) (N) (N) (N) (N) Thus L1;l u0 (t) ⊗ α, u1 (t) and Lk;l uk−1 (t) , uk (t) for k ≥ 2 are independent of the MAP phase l ∈ {1, 2,...,m A}. In this case, we have
(N) (N) (N) def (N) (N) (N) L1;l u0 (t) ⊗ α, u1 (t) = L1 u0 (t) ⊗ α, u1 (t) (11) 13 and for k ≥ 2
(N) (N) (N) def (N) (N) (N) Lk;l uk−1 (t) , uk (t) = Lk uk−1 (t) , uk (t) . (12) Proof: See Appendix A. It is seen from the invariance of environment factors in Theorem 1 that Equation (7) is rewritten as, in a vector form,
(N) (N) uk−1 (t) (D ⊗ I) − uk (t) [diag (De) ⊗ I] n (N) (N) (N) o × Lk uk−1 (t) , uk (t) Ndt. (13) (N) (N) (N) (N) (N) (N) Note that L1 u0 (t) ⊗ α, u1 (t) and Lk uk−1 (t) , uk (t) are scale for k ≥ 2. Step two: Analysis of the Environment State Transitions in the MAP When there are at least k customers in the server, the rate that the MAP environment process jumps from state l to state i with rate cl,j, and no arrival of the MAP occurs during a small time period [0, dt), is given by
mA (N) (N) uk;l,j(t)cl,i + uk,i,j(t) (di,1, di,2,...,di,mA ) e Ndt. " # Xl=1 This gives, in a vector form,
(N) uk (t) ([C + diag (De)] ⊗ I) Ndt. (14)
Step three: Analysis of the Service Processes To analyze the PH service process, we need to consider the following two cases: 0 Case one: One service completion occurs with rate tl during a small time period [0, dt). In this case, when there are at least k +1 customers in the server, the rate that a customer is completed its service with entering PH phase j and the MAP is in phase i is given by
u(N) (t)t0α + u(N) (t)t0α + · · · + u(N) (t)t0 α Ndt. k+1;i,1 1 j k+1;i,2 2 j k+1;i,mB mB j h i Case two: No service completion occurs during a small time period [0, dt), but the MAP is in phase i and the PH service environment process goes to phase j. Thus, when there are at least k customers in the server, the rate of this case is given by
u(N) (t)t + u(N) (t)t + u(N) (t)t + · · · + u(N) (t)t Ndt. k;i,1 1,j k;i,2 2,j k;i,3 3,j k;i,mB mB ,j h i
14 Thus, for the PH service process, we obtain that in a vector form,
(N) (N) 0 uk (t) (I ⊗ T )+ uk+1 (t) I ⊗ T α Ndt (15) h i Let
n(N)(t)= n(N) (t),n(N) (t),...,n(N) (t); . . . ; k k;1,1 k;1,2 k;1,mB n(N) (t),n(N) (t),...,n(N) (t) . k;mA,1 k;mA,2 k;mA,mB Then it follows from Equation (13) to (15) that
(N) (N) (N) (N) (N) (N) dE nk (t) = uk−1 (t) (D ⊗ I) − uk (t) [diag (De) ⊗ I] Lk uk−1 (t) , uk (t)
h i nn (N) (N) o 0 +uk (t) {[C + diag (De)] ⊕ T } + uk+1 (t) I ⊗ T α Ndt. o (N) (N) Since E nk (t)/N = uk (t) and A ⊗ I + I ⊗ B = A ⊕ B, we obtain h i du(N)(t) k = u(N) (t) (D ⊗ I) − u(N) (t) (t) [diag (De) ⊗ I] L(N) u(N) (t) , u(N) (t) dt k−1 k k k−1 k n (N) (N) o 0 + uk (t) {[C + diag (De)] ⊕ T } + uk+1 (t) I ⊗ T α . (16) Using a similar analysis to Equation (16), we obtain an infinite-dimensional system of differential vector equations satisfied by the expected fraction vector u(N) (t) as follows:
du(N)(t) 1 = u(N) (t) ⊗ α (D ⊗ I) − u(N) (t) [diag (De) ⊗ I] L(N) u(N) (t) ⊗ α, u(N) (t) dt 0 1 1 0 1 nh (N) i (N) o0 + u1 (t) {[C + diag (De)] ⊕ T } + u2 (t) I ⊗ T α , (17) and for k ≥ 2
du(N)(t) k = u(N) (t) (D ⊗ I) − u(N) (t) [diag (De) ⊗ I] L(N) u(N) (t) , u(N) (t) dt k−1 k k k−1 k n (N) (N) o 0 + uk (t) {[C + diag (De)] ⊕ T } + uk+1 (t) I ⊗ T α , (18) with the boundary condition
du(N)(t) 0 = u(N)(t) (C + D) , (19) dt 0
(N) u0 (t)e = 1; (20) and with the initial condition (N) uk (0) = gk, k ≥ 1, (21)
15 where
g1 ≥ g2 ≥ g3 ≥···≥ 0 and
1= g0e ≥ g1e ≥ g2e ≥···≥ 0.
Remark 2 It is necessary to explain some probability setting for the invariance of envi- ronment factors. It follows from Theorem 1 that
d d u(N) (t) e − u(N) (t) e (N) (N) (N) 0 1 L1 u0 (t) ⊗ α, u1 (t) = h u(N) (t)ie − hu(N) (t) e i 0 1 and for k ≥ 2
d d u(N) (t) e − u(N) (t) e (N) (N) (N) k−1 k Lk uk−1 (t) , uk (t) = . h u(N) (t)ie − hu(N) (t) e i k−1 k Note that the two expressions will be useful in our later study, for example, establishing the Lipschitz condition, and computing the fixed point. Specifically, for d = 1 we have
(N) (N) (N) L1 u0 (t) ⊗ α, u1 (t) = 1 and for k ≥ 2 (N) (N) (N) Lk uk−1 (t) , uk (t) = 1. For d = 2 we have
(N) (N) (N) (N) (N) L1 u0 (t) ⊗ α, u1 (t) = u0 (t) e + u1 (t) e> 1 and for k ≥ 2 (N) (N) (N) (N) (N) Lk uk−1 (t) , uk (t) = uk−1 (t) e + uk (t) e.
(N) (N) (N) (N) (N) (N) This shows that L1 u0 (t) ⊗ α, u1 (t) ,L2 u1 (t) , u2 (t) ,... is not a prob- ability vector.
5 The Lipschitz Condition
In this section, we show that the mean-field limit of the sequence of Markov processes asymptotically approaches a single trajectory identified by the unique and global solution to the infinite-dimensional system of limiting differential vector equations. To that end,
16 we provide a unified matrix-differential algorithm for establishing the Lipschitz condition, which is a key in proving the existence and uniqueness of the solution by means of the Picard approximation according to the basic results of the Banach space. (N) Let TN (t) be the operator semigroup of the Markov process U (t),t ≥ 0 . If 1 f :ΩN → C , where ΩN = g ∈ ΩN : ge< +∞ , then for g ∈ ΩN and t ≥ 0 n o TN (t)f(ge)= E [f(UN (t) | UN (0) = g] .
We denote by AN the generating operator of the operator semigroup TN (t), it is easy to see that TN (t) = exp {AN t} for t ≥ 0. In Appendix B, we will provide a detailed analysis for the limiting behavior of the sequence {(U(N)(t),t ≥ 0} of Markov processes for N = 1, 2, 3,..., where two formal limits for the sequence {AN } of generating operators and for the sequence {TN (t)} of operator semigroups are expressed as A = limN→∞ AN and T (t) = limN→∞ TN (t) for t ≥ 0, respectively. We write m−1 d−m d mA mB mA mB L (u (t) ⊗ α, u (t)) = Cm (u (t) α − u (t)) u (t) , 1 0 1 d 0,l j 1;l,j 1;l,j m j j X=1 Xl=1 X=1 Xl=1 X=1 for k ≥ 2 m−1 d mA mB L (u (t) , u (t)) = Cm (u (t) − u (t)) k k−1 k d k−1;l,j k;l,j m j X=1 Xl=1 X=1 d−m mA mB × u (t) . k;l,j j Xl=1 X=1 (N) (N) Let u(t) = limN→∞ u (t) where uk (t) = limN→∞ uk (t) for k ≥ 0 and t ≥ 0. Based on the limiting operator semigroup T (t) or the limiting generating operator A, as N →∞ it follows from Equations (17) to (21) that u(t) is a solution to the system of differential vector equations as follows: du (t) 1 = {[u (t) ⊗ α] (D ⊗ I) − u (t) [diag (De) ⊗ I]} L (u (t) ⊗ α, u (t)) dt 0 1 1 0 1 0 + u1(t) {[C + diag (De)] ⊕ T } + u2 (t) I ⊗ T α , (22) and for k ≥ 2 du (t) k = {u (t) (D ⊗ I) − u (t) [diag (De) ⊗ I]} L (u (t) , u (t)) dt k−1 k k k−1 k 0 + uk (t) {[C + diag (De)] ⊕ T } + uk+1 (t) I ⊗ T α , (23) 17 with the boundary condition
(N) (N) u0 (t)= u0 (0) exp {(C + D) t} , (24)
(N) u0 (t) e = 1, (25) and with initial condition
uk (0) = gk, k ≥ 0. (26)
Based on the solution u(t, g) to the system of differential vector equations (22) to (26), we define a mapping: g → u(t, g). Note that the operator semigroup T(t) acts in the space L, where L = C(Ω) is the Banach space of continuous functions f : Ω → R with uniform metric kfk = max |f(u)|, and u∈e e Ωe (N) (N) (N) Ω= {u : u1 ≥ u2 ≥ u3 ≥···≥ 0; 1= u0 e ≥ u1 e ≥ u2 e ≥···≥ 0}
e for the vector u = (u0, u1, u2,...) with u0 be a probability vector of size mA and the size of the row vector uk be mAmB for k ≥ 1. If f ∈ L and g ∈ Ω, then
T(t)f(g)= f (u(t, g)) . e
The following theorem uses the operator semigroup to provide the mean-field limit in this supermarket model. Note that the mean-field limit shows that there always exists the limiting process {U (t) ,t ≥ 0} of the sequence {U (N) (t) ,t ≥ 0} of Markov processes, and also indicates the asymptotic independence of the block-structured queueing processes in this supermarket model.
Theorem 2 For any continuous function f :Ω → R and t> 0,
lim sup |TN (t)f(g) − f(u(t; g))| = 0, N→∞g∈Ω and the convergence is uniform in t with any bounded interval.
Proof: See Appendix B. (N) Finally, we provide some interpretation on Theorem 2. If limN→∞ U (0) = u(0) = (N) g ∈ Ω in probability, then Theorem 2 shows that U (t) = limN→∞ U (t) is concentrated on the trajectory Γg = {u(t, g) : t ≥ 0}. This indicates the functional strong law of large numbers for the time evolution of the fraction of each state of this supermarket model,
18 thus the sequence U (N) (t) ,t ≥ 0 of Markov processes converges weakly to the expected fraction vector u(t,g) as N →∞, that is, for any T > 0
lim sup U (N) (s) − u(s, g) = 0 in probability. (27) N→∞ 0≤s≤T
In the remainder of this section, we provide a unified matrix-differential algorithm for ∞ 1 ∞ establishing a Lipschitz condition for the expected fraction vector f : R+ → C R+ . The Lipschitz condition is a key for proving the existence and uniqueness of solution to the infinite-dimensional system of limiting differential vector equations (22) to (26). On the other hand, the proof of the existence and uniqueness of solution is standard by means of the Picard approximation according to the basic results of the Banach space. Readers may refer to Li, Dai, Lui and Wang [15] for more details. To provide the Lipschitz condition, we need to use the derivative of the infinite- ∞ 1 ∞ dimensional vector G : R+ → C R+ . Thus we first provide some definitions and preliminaries for such derivatives as follows. ∞ 1 ∞ For the infinite-dimensional vector G : R+ → C R+ , we write x = (x1,x2,x3,...) and G(x) = (G1(x), G2(x), G3(x),...), where xk and G k(x) are scalar for k ≥ 1. Then the matrix of partial derivatives of the infinite-dimensional vector G(x) is defined as
∂G (x) ∂G (x) ∂G (x) 1 2 3 · · · ∂x1 ∂x1 ∂x1 ∂G1(x) ∂G2(x) ∂G3(x) ∂G(x) · · · DG(x)= = ∂x2 ∂x2 ∂x2 , (28) ∂x ∂G (x) ∂G (x) ∂G (x) 1 2 3 · · · ∂x3 ∂x3 ∂x3 . . . . . . if each of the partial derivatives exists. ∞ 1 ∞ For the infinite-dimensional vector G : R+ → C R+ , if there exists a linear operator ∞ 1 ∞ ∞ A : R+ → C R+ such that for any vector h ∈ R and a scalar t ∈ R