Telecommunication Systems

, Volume 2, Issue 1, pp 21–50 | Cite as

Reduced load approximations for loss networks

  • Andrew J. Coyle
  • William Henderson
  • Peter G. Taylor


In this paper, we present a general scheme with which to view reduced load approximations in loss networks. We use notation motivated by stochastic Petri net (SPN) representations of such models and a technique similar to that described by Ciardo and Trivedi for general SPNs. Previous reduced load approximations have involved link independence assumptions. In our method, we assume independence between sets of links rather than between themselves. Our independence assumptions are thus less drastic than those that have been made previously and better results can be expected. Several examples are given in this context.


Information System Artificial Intelligence Communication Network Stochastic Process Probability Theory 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    D.Y. Burman, J.P. Lehoczky and Y. Lim, Insensitivity of blocking probabilities in a circuit switching network, J. Appl. Prob. 21(1984)850–859.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    J.P. Buzen, Computational algorithm for closed networks with exponential servers, Comm. Assoc. Comp. Mach. 16(1973)527–531.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    G. Chiola, A software package for the analysis of generalised stochastic Petri net models,Proc. Int. Workshop on Timed Petri Nets (IEEE-CS Press, Torino, Italy, 1985).Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    S.P. Chung and K.W. Ross, Reduced load approximations for multi-rate loss networks,Proc. ITC Specialists Seminar, New Jersey (1990), 11.5.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    G. Ciardo, J. Muppala and K.S. Trivedi, SPNO: Stochastic Petri net package,Proc. 3rd Int. Workshop on Petri Nets and Performance Models, Kyoto, Japan (1989) pp. 142–151.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    G. Ciardo and K.S. Trivedi, Solution of large GSPN models,Proc. 1st Int. Conf. on the Numerical Solution of Markov Chains, Raleigh, North Carolina (1990).Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    G. Ciardo and K.S. Trivedi, A decomposition approach for stochastic Petri net models,Proc. on Petri Nets and Performance Models, Melbourne (1991) pp. 74–85.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    J.L. Coleman, W. Henderson and P.G. Taylor, A convolution algorithm for calculating exact equilibrium distributions in resource allocation problems with moderate user interference, IEEE Trans. Comm. (1992), to appear.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    J.L. Coleman, W. Henderson and P.G. Taylor, Algorithms for evaluating the normalising constant in stochastic Petri nets with product form equilibrium distributions, submitted.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Z. Dziong and J.W. Roberts, Conhestion probabilities in a circuit-switched integrated services network, Perform. Eval. 7(1987)267–284.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    D.E. Everitt and N.W. Macfadyen, Analysis of multi-cellular mobile radiotelephone systems with loss, British Telecom Technol. J. 1(1983)37–45.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    R.J. Gibbens, P.J. Hunt and F.P. Kelly, Bistability in communication networks,Disorder in Physical Systems, ed. G.R. Grimmett and D.J.A. Welsh (Oxford University Press, 1989) pp. 113–127.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    A. Girard,Routing and Dimensioning in Circuit-Switched Networks (Addison-Wesley, 1990).Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    D.P. Heyman, Asymptotic marginal independence in large networks of loss systems, Ann. Oper. Res. 8(1987)57–73.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    B. Hajek and A. Krishna, Bounds on the accuracy of the reduced-load blocking formula in some simple circuit-switched networks,Proc. 1990 BILKNET Int. Conf. on New Trends in Communication, Control and Signal Processing, Ankara, Turkey (1990).Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    J.M. Holtman, Analysis of dependence effects in telephone trunking networks, Bell Syst. Tech. J. 50(1971)2647–2662.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    J.S. Kaufman, Blocking in a shared resource enviroment, IEEE Trans. Comm. 29(1981)1474–1481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    S.S. Katz, Statistical performance analysis of a switched communications network, ITC 5(1967)566–575.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    F.P. Kelly, Blocking probabilities in large circuit switched networks, Adv. Appl. Prob. 18(1986)473–505.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    F.P. Kelly, Routing in circuit switched networks: Optimisation, shadow prices and decentralisation, Adv. Appl. Prob. 20(1988)112–144.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    F.P. Kelly, Loss networks, Ann. Appl. Prob. 1(1991)319–378.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    F. Le Gall, About loss probabilities for general routing policies in circuit-switched networks, IEEE Trans. Comm. 37(1989)57–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. [23]
    D. Mitra, Some results from an asymptotic analysis of a class of simple, circuit-switched networks,Teletraffic Analysis and Computer Performance Evaluation, ed. Tijms, Boxma and Cohen (Elsevier, New York, 1986) pp. 47–61.Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    D. Mitra and P.J. Weinberger, Probabilistic models of database locking: Solutions, computational algorithms, and asymptotics, J. Assoc. Comp. Mach. 31(1984)855–878.Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    W. Whitte, Blocking when service is required from several facilities simultaneously, AT&T Tech. J. 64(1985)1807–1856.Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    I.B. Ziedins and F.P. Kelly, Limit theorem for loss networks with diverse routing, Adv. Appl. Prob. 21(1989)804–830.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© J.C. Baltzer AG, Science Publishers 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrew J. Coyle
    • 1
  • William Henderson
    • 1
  • Peter G. Taylor
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Applied Mathematics, Teletraffic Research CentreThe University of AdelaideAdelaideAustralia

Personalised recommendations