Math 5652: Introduction to Stochastic Processes Homework 5 Solutions You are welcome and encouraged to discuss the problems with your classmates; please write up your own solutions, and indicate collaborators on your write-up. (1) (10 points) (Durrett 3.13) In the Duke vs. Miami football game, possessions alternate between Duke who has the ball for an average of 2 min and Miami who has the ball for an average of 6 min. (a) In the long run, what fraction of time does Duke have the ball? (b) Suppose that on each possession Duke scores a touchdown with probability 1/4, while Miami scores with probability 5/6 (note: not 1 as in the book, I don’t believe Miami is that good). On average how many touchdowns will each team score per hour? Note: you can (but don’t have to) solve this problem using the theory of continuous-time Markov chains. Solution: Let’s first solve this by renewal processes: this is naturally modeled as an alternating renewal process, with states “ball passed to Duke” and “ball passed to Miami”. The long-term fraction of time Duke has the ball is therefore 1 2min = . 2min + 6min 4 What are the assumptions we made here? We’re assuming that times of possession by Duke are iid, times of possession by Miami are iid, and that the Duke times are independent of the Miami times. All of these are subject to some suspicion, but fortunately the law of large numbers result we’re using here can take quite a bit of battering with dependencies. If we assumed that the team holds the ball for independent, exponentially distributed lengths of time with those means, we could also set up a CTMC with transition rate matrix D M 1 1 D − 2min 2min Q= 1 1 M − 6min 6min and solve for the invariant distribution: − 12 πD + 16 πM = 0, πD + πM = 1 so πD = 14 is the proportion of time Duke has the ball. Note that the rates in the rate matrix are inverses of the mean times of possession: rate is measured in inverse-time units. For part (b), the number of times Duke has the ball during the course of an hour is 1 4 · 1hr = 7.5. 2min This is the number of cycles the alternating renewal process goes through (so we could have divided 1 hour by the cycle time of 8 minutes). In particular, Miami also gets the ball 7.5 times in an hour. Note, the number of times Duke has the ball in an hour is 1 actually a random quantity, but this should be its mean. Since each time the probability that they score is 1/4 for Duke (and 5/6 for Miami), the mean number of scores is 7.5 · 5 1 = 1.875 for Duke; 7.5 · = 6.25 for Miami. 4 6 We’re using here the fact that the mean of the sum of a random number of iid random variables is the product of the means (this appeared in Section 2.3 in Durrett, or on our Homework 3 (problem 3). (2) (10 points) (Durrett 4.2) A small computer store has room to display up to three computers for sale. Customers come at times of a Poisson process with rate 2 per week to buy a computer, and will buy one if at least one is available. When the store has only one computer left, it places an order for two more computers, but the order takes an exponentially distributed time with mean 1 week to arrive. While the store is waiting for delivery, sales may reduce the inventory to 0. (a) Write down the matrix of transition rates Qij and solve πQ = 0 to find the stationary distribution. (b) At what rate (number per week) does the store make sales? Solution: (a) This is a rare example of a chain where 2 computers arrive at once, so if we index states by the number of computers in the store, the state can change by 2. Recall that to determine the transition rate, you look at the time until a particular transition would occur if the other transitions weren’t in the system at all. Transitioning down from n to n − 1 computers in the store happens at times of a Poisson process with rate 2/week, so the time until that transition would happen (if no other possibilities were available) is exponential with rate 2/week. This 2/week is the rate q(n, n − 1) for n = 3, 2, 1. For transitioning up, if we’re in state 1, then we’ve just ordered two more computers. If no other possibilities were there, the time until the two computers arrive would be exponential with mean 1 week, hence rate 1/week. This is the rate q(1, 3). If we’re in state 0, it means that we’ve ordered two more computers but they haven’t arrived yet. Since the time until their arrival is exponential, the remaining time is still exponential with mean 1 week, hence rate 1/week; this is the rate q(0, 2). Here’s the picture: 2/week 2/week 2/week 0 1 1/week 2 3 1/week 2 Consequently, the transition rate matrix is 1 2 3 0 0 −1 0 1 0 1 2 −3 0 1 Q= 2 0 2 −2 0 3 0 0 2 −2 where the rates are measured in inverse weeks. Solving for the stationary distribution means solving the equations − π(0) + 2π(1) = 0 − 3π(1) + 2π(2) = 0 π(1) − 2π(3) = 0 π(0) + . . . + π(3) = 1. Note that I can omit the equation that corresponds to one of the columns of the matrix; I’ve omitted the one that involves three variables. The solution comes out to π = (0.4, 0.2, 0.3, 0.1). (b) The store makes sales whenever a customer walks in and finds the store not in state 0. By the PASTA property, the probability that the customer finds the store not in state 0 is 1 − π(0) = 0.6. Now, the process of sales will not be a Poisson process (because this thinning is not independent across customers), but still, the long-term rate at which sales happen is 2/week · 0.6 = 1.2/week. Another way to compute this number is to observe that the rate of making sales is equal to the rate at which the store orders new computers. Orders for new computers get placed every time you visit state 1. From the stationary distribution (of this irreducible, finite-state CTMC), in a week you spend 0.2 weeks in state 1. Every visit to state 1 lasts a time with mean 1/3 week, so the average number of visits to state 1 in a week is 0.2/(1/3) = 0.6. On each visit, you order 2 computers, so the average number of computers you order in a week is 0.6 · 2 = 1.2. (3) (10 points) (Durrett 4.7) Two people who prepare tax forms are working in a store at a locall mall. Each has a chair next to his desk where customers can sit and be served. In addition, there is one chair where customers can sit and wait. Customers arrive at rate λ, but will go away if there is someone already sitting in the waiting chair. Suppose that tax preparer i requires an exponential amount of time with rate µi , and that when both of them are free, an arriving customer is equally likely to choose either one. (a) Formulate a Markov chain model for this system with 5 states, corresponding to which tax preparers are working and whether the waiting chair is occupied. Carefully state what your states represent. (b) Consider the special case of λ = 2, µ1 = 3, µ2 = 5 (note: not µ2 = 3 as in the book). Find the stationary distribution. What is the proportion of time when both 3 tax preparers are working? (Hint: this should correspond to two states of your chain.) Solution: (a) The 5 states we need are: 0 (system empty); 1A and 1B for one tax preparer working (it matters which one is working, because the rates at which they fill out forms are different); 2 (both tax preparers working; and 3 (both working, plus someone is waiting in the chair). Here’s the picture of the transitions. I’m assuming tax preparer A works at rate µ1 , and B works at rate µ2 . Note that the arrival rate (which increases the number of customers) is λ in all states (it’s split up into two λ/2 transitions from state 0); the service rate from state3 is µ1 + µ2 and goes into state 2 (the customer who was waiting goes into service), while from state 2 the total service rate is µ1 + µ2 but it’s split up into µ2 (into state 1A, B done and A working) and µ1 (into 1B, A done and B working). λ λ/2 1A µ1 0 µ2 λ/2 λ µ2 µ1 1B 2 λ 3 µ1 + µ2 (b) The proportion of time when both tax preparers are busy is π(2) + π(3). The stationary distribution here solves π(0) · λ = π(1A) · µ1 + π(1B) · µ2 π(1A) · (λ + µ1 ) = π(2) · µ2 + π(0) · λ/2 π(1B) · (λ + µ2 ) = π(2) · µ1 + π(0) · λ/2 π(2) · (λ + µ1 + µ2 ) = π(1A) · λ + π(1B) · λ + π(3) · (µ1 + µ2 ) π(3) · (µ1 + µ2 ) = π(2) · λ π(0) + π(1A) + π(1B) + π(2) + π(3) = 1. We didn’t have to write out all the top five equations – only four of them are independent, so if you were solving the system by hand you would drop one of them. We could have tried for detailed balance here, but we’d fail. We know that it’s unlikely to succeed P from the fact that we get 5 detailed balance equations, plus the normalization π(i) = 1, which gives 6 equations in 5 unknowns. (In detailed balance, the equations you get aren’t linearly dependent.) The solution (which I obtain by asking a computer) is π=( 30 10 6 4 1 , , , , ). 51 51 51 51 51 4 Note that it doesn’t satisfy detailed balance, for example π(0) · λ/2 6= π(1A) · µ1 . The proportion of time both preparers are busy is π(2) + π(3) = 5 ≈ 0.098, 51 or just under 10% of the time. (4) (10 points) (Durrett 4.15) A computer lab has three laser printers that are hooked to the network. A working printer will function for an exponential amount of time with mean 20 days. Upon failure it is immediately sent to the repair facility. There machines are worked on by two repairmen who can each repair one printer in an exponential amount of time with mean 2 days. However, it is not possible for two people to be working on the same printer. (a) Formulate a Markov chain model for the number of working printers, and find the stationary distribution. (b) How often are both repairmen busy? (c) What is the average number of machines in use? Solution: (a) The state of the chain is the number of working printers, 0 through 3. The rate of transitioning down is x/20days when x printers are working: if x things can break, the time for the first of them to break is exponential with x times the rate. The rate of transitioning up is 1/2days if there are 2 working printers (only one broken), or 1/1day if there are 0 or 1 working printers (at least two broken). Note that you do not fix two printers simultaneously: you fix one printer at a time, twice as fast. The stationary distirbution solves the detailed balance equations: π(0) · 1 = π(1) · 1/20 π(1) · 1 = π(2) · 2/20 π(2) · 1/2 = π(3) · 3/20 π(0) + . . . + π(2) = 1 You know you can solve these because there are 4 equations in 4 unknowns. The solution is π=( 3 60 600 2000 , , , ). 2663 2663 2663 2663 (b) Both repairmen are busy if we’re in states 0 or 1, so the fraction of time is 63 ≈ 0.024. 2663 This corresponds to about two days in every semester. (Note that we are dealing with an irreducible, finite-state continuous-time Markov chain, so the limit theorems apply.) π(0) + π(1) = 5 (c) The average number of machines in use (i.e., working) is 3 X n · π(n) = n=0 7260 ≈ 2.72. 2663 (5) (10 points) (Durrett 4.19–4.20) Consider a barbershop with one barber who can cut hair at rate 4 (people per hour), and three waiting chairs. Customers arrive at rate 5 per hour. Customers who arrive to a fully occupied shop leave without being served. Find the stationary distribution for the number of customers in the shop, and the average number of customers served per hour. Solution: The state of the Markov chain is the number of people in the shop. The chain transitions at rate 5/hr up from states 0 through 3, and at rate 4/hr down from states 1 through 4. The stationary distribution satisfies detailed balance: π(0) · 5 = π(1) · 4 π(1) · 5 = π(2) · 4 π(2) · 5 = π(3) · 4 π(3) · 5 = π(4) · 4 π(0) + . . . + π(4) = 1 Note that this is 5 equations in 5 unknowns, hence solvable. The solution is π(n) = 5/4−1 (5/4)n π(0) with π(0) = (5/4) 4 −1 ≈ 0.173. Numerically, π ≈ (0.173, 0.217, 0.271, 0.339, 0.423). The rate at which customers are served can be computed either as λ(1 − π(4)) or as µ(1 − π(0)). The former looks at people walking into the shop; the latter looks at people walking out of the shop. The two are equal because the number of people in the shop isn’t growing or shrinking over time. Thus, the rate in question is ≈ 2.88 people per hour. (6) (10 points) (Durrett 4.32) Consider a taxi station at an airport where taxis and (groups of) customers arrive at times of independent Poisson processes with rates 2 per minute and 3 per minute respectively. A taxi will wait for a customer no matter how many other taxis are present, but if an arriving group of people doesn’t find a taxi, they leave to find alternative transportation. (a) Set up an infinite-state Markov chain to model this problem. The state should correspond to the number of waiting taxis. (b) Find the proportion of arriving customers that get taxis. (c) Find the average number of taxis waiting. Solution: 6 (a) From the problem statement, we don’t need to model waiting people, only waiting taxis, so the states of the Markov chain are 0, 1, 2, ... corresponding to the number of waiting taxis. The transition rate increasing the number of waiting taxis is 2/min; this is q(n, n + 1) for n ≥ 0. The transition rate decreasing the number of waiting taxis is 3/min; this is q(n, n − 1) for n ≥ 1. (b) We are dealing with an irreducible CTMC, and we’ll shortly see that it does have a stationary distribution. Namely, writing down the detailed balance equations, 2 2 π(n) · 2 = π(n + 1) · 3 =⇒ π(n + 1) = π(n) = . . . = ( )n+1 π(0), 3 3 1 2 and hence π(0)(1 + 2/3 + (2/3) + . . . ) = 1 so π(0) = 3 . By the PASTA property, the proportion of customers who get taxis is the proportion of time taxis are waiting, i.e. 1 − π(0) = 2/3. (c) The average number of taxis waiting is the mean of the geometric distribution with parameter 1/3, and the only thing we need to be careful of is whether this is the geometric that’s “number of failures until the first success” or “index of the first success”. It’s the former, because it is equal to 0 with a positive probability. The mean is 1 − 1 = 2. 1/3 (The mean of the “index of the first success” geometric is 1/p, where p is the success probability, here 1/3. The mean of the “number of failures until the first success” is clearly one less than that.) Of course, you could also evaluate the infinite sum ∞ X 1 2 k · ( )k ; 3 3 k=0 I’ve explained how you go about doing that in the solution to Problem 7 of Homework 4. 7
© Copyright 2024