The authors present random early detection (RED) gateways for congestion avoidance in packet-switched networks. The gateway detects incipient congestion by computing the average queue size. The gateway could notify connections of congestion either by dropping packets arriving at the gateway or by setting a bit in packet headers. When the average queue size exceeds a present threshold, the gateway drops or marks each arriving packet with a certain probability, where the exact probability is a function of the average queue size. RED gateways keep the average queue size low while allowing occasional bursts of packets in the queue. During congestion, the probability that the gateway notifies a particular connection to reduce its window is roughly proportional to that connection's share of the bandwidth through the gateway. RED gateways are designed to accompany a transport-layer congestion control protocol such as TCP. The RED gateway has no bias against bursty traffic and avoids the global synchronization of many connections decreasing their window at the same time. Simulations of a TCP/IP network are used to illustrate the performance of RED gateways. >

/pdf/random-early-detection-gateways-for-congestion-avoidance-34o7r9dqub.pdf

Random early detection gateways for congestion avoidance

The stability of a queueing network with interdependent servers is considered. The dependency among the servers is described by the definition of their subsets that can be activated simultaneously. Multihop radio networks provide a motivation for the consideration of this system. The problem of scheduling the server activation under the constraints imposed by the dependency among servers is studied. The performance criterion of a scheduling policy is its throughput that is characterized by its stability region, that is, the set of vectors of arrival and service rates for which the system is stable. A policy is obtained which is optimal in the sense that its stability region is a superset of the stability region of every other scheduling policy, and this stability region is characterized. The behavior of the network is studied for arrival rates that lie outside the stability region. Implications of the results in certain types of concurrent database and parallel processing systems are discussed. >

/pdf/stability-properties-of-constrained-queueing-systems-and-1ejlpmfzvp.pdf

Stability properties of constrained queueing systems and scheduling policies for maximum throughput in multihop radio networks

problems To understand the class of polynomial-time solvable problems, we must first have a formal notion of what a "problem" is. We define an abstract problem Q to be a binary relation on a set I of problem instances and a set S of problem solutions. For example, an instance for SHORTEST-PATH is a triple consisting of a graph and two vertices. A solution is a sequence of vertices in the graph, with perhaps the empty sequence denoting that no path exists. The problem SHORTEST-PATH itself is the relation that associates each instance of a graph and two vertices with a shortest path in the graph that connects the two vertices. Since shortest paths are not necessarily unique, a given problem instance may have more than one solution. This formulation of an abstract problem is more general than is required for our purposes. As we saw above, the theory of NP-completeness restricts attention to decision problems: those having a yes/no solution. In this case, we can view an abstract decision problem as a function that maps the instance set I to the solution set {0, 1}. For example, a decision problem related to SHORTEST-PATH is the problem PATH that we saw earlier. If i = G, u, v, k is an instance of the decision problem PATH, then PATH(i) = 1 (yes) if a shortest path from u to v has at most k edges, and PATH(i) = 0 (no) otherwise. Many abstract problems are not decision problems, but rather optimization problems, in which some value must be minimized or maximized. As we saw above, however, it is usually a simple matter to recast an optimization problem as a decision problem that is no harder. Encodings If a computer program is to solve an abstract problem, problem instances must be represented in a way that the program understands. An encoding of a set S of abstract objects is a mapping e from S to the set of binary strings. For example, we are all familiar with encoding the natural numbers N = {0, 1, 2, 3, 4,...} as the strings {0, 1, 10, 11, 100,...}. Using this encoding, e(17) = 10001. Anyone who has looked at computer representations of keyboard characters is familiar with either the ASCII or EBCDIC codes. In the ASCII code, the encoding of A is 1000001. Even a compound object can be encoded as a binary string by combining the representations of its constituent parts. Polygons, graphs, functions, ordered pairs, programs-all can be encoded as binary strings. Thus, a computer algorithm that "solves" some abstract decision problem actually takes an encoding of a problem instance as input. We call a problem whose instance set is the set of binary strings a concrete problem. We say that an algorithm solves a concrete problem in time O(T (n)) if, when it is provided a problem instance i of length n = |i|, the algorithm can produce the solution in O(T (n)) time. A concrete problem is polynomial-time solvable, therefore, if there exists an algorithm to solve it in time O(n) for some constant k. We can now formally define the complexity class P as the set of concrete decision problems that are polynomial-time solvable. We can use encodings to map abstract problems to concrete problems. Given an abstract decision problem Q mapping an instance set I to {0, 1}, an encoding e : I → {0, 1}* can be used to induce a related concrete decision problem, which we denote by e(Q). If the solution to an abstract-problem instance i I is Q(i) {0, 1}, then the solution to the concreteproblem instance e(i) {0, 1}* is also Q(i). As a technicality, there may be some binary strings that represent no meaningful abstract-problem instance. For convenience, we shall assume that any such string is mapped arbitrarily to 0. Thus, the concrete problem produces the same solutions as the abstract problem on binary-string instances that represent the encodings of abstract-problem instances. We would like to extend the definition of polynomial-time solvability from concrete problems to abstract problems by using encodings as the bridge, but we would like the definition to be independent of any particular encoding. That is, the efficiency of solving a problem should not depend on how the problem is encoded. Unfortunately, it depends quite heavily on the encoding. For example, suppose that an integer k is to be provided as the sole input to an algorithm, and suppose that the running time of the algorithm is Θ(k). If the integer k is provided in unary-a string of k 1's-then the running time of the algorithm is O(n) on length-n inputs, which is polynomial time. If we use the more natural binary representation of the integer k, however, then the input length is n = ⌊lg k⌋ + 1. In this case, the running time of the algorithm is Θ (k) = Θ(2), which is exponential in the size of the input. Thus, depending on the encoding, the algorithm runs in either polynomial or superpolynomial time. The encoding of an abstract problem is therefore quite important to our under-standing of polynomial time. We cannot really talk about solving an abstract problem without first specifying an encoding. Nevertheless, in practice, if we rule out "expensive" encodings such as unary ones, the actual encoding of a problem makes little difference to whether the problem can be solved in polynomial time. For example, representing integers in base 3 instead of binary has no effect on whether a problem is solvable in polynomial time, since an integer represented in base 3 can be converted to an integer represented in base 2 in polynomial time. We say that a function f : {0, 1}* → {0,1}* is polynomial-time computable if there exists a polynomial-time algorithm A that, given any input x {0, 1}*, produces as output f (x). For some set I of problem instances, we say that two encodings e1 and e2 are polynomially related if there exist two polynomial-time computable functions f12 and f21 such that for any i I , we have f12(e1(i)) = e2(i) and f21(e2(i)) = e1(i). That is, the encoding e2(i) can be computed from the encoding e1(i) by a polynomial-time algorithm, and vice versa. If two encodings e1 and e2 of an abstract problem are polynomially related, whether the problem is polynomial-time solvable or not is independent of which encoding we use, as the following lemma shows. Lemma 34.1 Let Q be an abstract decision problem on an instance set I , and let e1 and e2 be polynomially related encodings on I . Then, e1(Q) P if and only if e2(Q) P. Proof We need only prove the forward direction, since the backward direction is symmetric. Suppose, therefore, that e1(Q) can be solved in time O(nk) for some constant k. Further, suppose that for any problem instance i, the encoding e1(i) can be computed from the encoding e2(i) in time O(n) for some constant c, where n = |e2(i)|. To solve problem e2(Q), on input e2(i), we first compute e1(i) and then run the algorithm for e1(Q) on e1(i). How long does this take? The conversion of encodings takes time O(n), and therefore |e1(i)| = O(n), since the output of a serial computer cannot be longer than its running time. Solving the problem on e1(i) takes time O(|e1(i)|) = O(n), which is polynomial since both c and k are constants. Thus, whether an abstract problem has its instances encoded in binary or base 3 does not affect its "complexity," that is, whether it is polynomial-time solvable or not, but if instances are encoded in unary, its complexity may change. In order to be able to converse in an encoding-independent fashion, we shall generally assume that problem instances are encoded in any reasonable, concise fashion, unless we specifically say otherwise. To be precise, we shall assume that the encoding of an integer is polynomially related to its binary representation, and that the encoding of a finite set is polynomially related to its encoding as a list of its elements, enclosed in braces and separated by commas. (ASCII is one such encoding scheme.) With such a "standard" encoding in hand, we can derive reasonable encodings of other mathematical objects, such as tuples, graphs, and formulas. To denote the standard encoding of an object, we shall enclose the object in angle braces. Thus, G denotes the standard encoding of a graph G. As long as we implicitly use an encoding that is polynomially related to this standard encoding, we can talk directly about abstract problems without reference to any particular encoding, knowing that the choice of encoding has no effect on whether the abstract problem is polynomial-time solvable. Henceforth, we shall generally assume that all problem instances are binary strings encoded using the standard encoding, unless we explicitly specify the contrary. We shall also typically neglect the distinction between abstract and concrete problems. The reader should watch out for problems that arise in practice, however, in which a standard encoding is not obvious and the encoding does make a difference. A formal-language framework One of the convenient aspects of focusing on decision problems is that they make it easy to use the machinery of formal-language theory. It is worthwhile at this point to review some definitions from that theory. An alphabet Σ is a finite set of symbols. A language L over Σ is any set of strings made up of symbols from Σ. For example, if Σ = {0, 1}, the set L = {10, 11, 101, 111, 1011, 1101, 10001,...} is the language of binary representations of prime numbers. We denote the empty string by ε, and the empty language by Ø. The language of all strings over Σ is denoted Σ*. For example, if Σ = {0, 1}, then Σ* = {ε, 0, 1, 00, 01, 10, 11, 000,...} is the set of all binary strings. Every language L over Σ is a subset of Σ*. There are a variety of operations on languages. Set-theoretic operations, such as union and intersection, follow directly from the set-theoretic definitions. We define the complement of L by . The concatenation of two languages L1 and L2 is the language L = {x1x2 : x1 L1 and x2 L2}. The closure or Kleene star of a language L is the language L*= {ε} L L L ···, where Lk is the language obtained by

Introduction to Algorithms, Second Edition

The Theory of Matrices. By F R. Gantmacher. Two volumes, pp. 374 and 276. 1959. (Translated from the Russian by K. A. Hirsch; Chelsea Publishing Company, New York)

/pdf/sequencing-and-scheduling-algorithms-and-complexity-lnutyrr3kz.pdf

Sequencing and scheduling: algorithms and complexity

Probabilistic analysis of algorithms

We report on a rather extensive simulation effort directed at evaluating the merits of two scheduling strategies, FCFS and SSTF, for moving-arm disks under stationary request arrival process. For First-Come-First-Served (FCFS) scheduling, analytic results for the mean waiting time are also given (in a closed form). If the objective of a schedule is to minimize the mean waiting time (or queue size) and its variance, the results seem to confirm the overall superiority of Shortest-Seek-Time-First (SSTF), particularly for medium and heavy traffic. This holds also when the input is highly correlated or addresses the cylinders nonuniformly. These results contradict some statements published in recent years. The domain of policies where SSTF is optimal is considered. The simulation methodology is described in some detail.

Disk scheduling: FCFS vs.SSTF revisited

An exact analysis is given of the main parameters that characterize the properties of the Capetanakis-Tsybakov-Mikhailov collision resolution algorithm with the free-access (continuous input) protocol In particular, the distributions of the collision resolution interval, the delay experienced by a packet, and the state of the top level of the stack that is maintained by the algorithm are determined

Analysis of a stack algorithm for random multiple-access communication

Two queues are fed by independent, time-homogeneous Poisson arrival processes. One server is available to handle both. All service durations, in both queues, are drawn independently from the same distribution. A setup time is incurred whenever the server moves (switches) from one queue to the other. We prove that in order to minimize the sum of discounted setup charges and holdings costs, assumed linear in queue length and having the same rate at the two queues, the service at each queue should be exhaustive, A “threshold policy” is defined as a policy under which the server switches (from an empty queue) only when the other reaches a critical size. It is shown to be a likely candidate for the optimal policy, both for the discounted version and for the long-time average criterion.The steady-state performance of this policy (under somewhat more general distributional assumptions) and the optimal thresholds are determined for a number of cases.

On the optimal control of two queues with server setup times and its analysis

A standard combinatorial problem is to estimate the number (T) of coupons, drawn at random, needed to complete a collection of all possible m types. Generalizations of this problem have found many engineering applications. The usefulness of the model is hampered by the difficulties in obtaining numerical results for moments or distributions. We show two computational paradigms that are well suited for this type of problems: one, following Flajolet et al. [21], is the calculus of generating functions over regular languages. We use it to provide relatively efficient answers to several questions about the sampling process – we show it is possible to compute arbitrarily accurate approximations for quantities such as E[T], in a time which is linear in m for any type distribution, while an exponential time is required for exact calculation. It also leads to a proof of a long-standing folk-theorem, concerning the extremality of uniform reference probabilities. The second method is a generalization of the Poisson...

Micha Hofri

Papers

Probabilistic analysis of algorithms

Disk scheduling: FCFS vs.SSTF revisited

Analysis of a stack algorithm for random multiple-access communication

On the optimal control of two queues with server setup times and its analysis

The coupon-collector problem revisited — a survey of engineering problems and computational methods