Paper detail

A queueing/inventory and an insurance risk model

We study an M/G/1-type queueing model with the following additional feature. The server works continuously, at fixed speed, even if there are no service requirements. In the latter case, it is building up inventory, which can be interpreted as negative workload. At random times, with an intensity ω(x) when the inventory is at level x > 0, the present inventory is removed, instantaneously reducing the inventory to zero. We study the steady-state distribution of the (positive and negative) workload levels for the cases ω(x) is constant and ω(x) = ax. The key tool is the Wiener-Hopf factorisation technique. When ω(x) is constant, no specific assumptions will be made on the service requirement distribution. However, in the linear case, we need some algebraic hypotheses concerning the Laplace-Stieltjes transform of the service requirement distribution. Throughout the paper, we also study a closely related model coming from insurance risk theory. Keywords: M/G/1 queue, Cramer-Lundberg insurance risk model, workload, inventory, ruin probability, Wiener-Hopf technique. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification: 60K25, 90B22, 91B30, 47A68.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.