2013
DOI: 10.1145/2494232.2465746
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sharp bounds in stochastic network calculus

Abstract: The practicality of the stochastic network calculus (SNC) is often questioned on grounds of potential looseness of its performance bounds. In this paper it is uncovered that for bursty arrival processes (specifically Markov-Modulated On-Off (MMOO)), whose amenability to per-flow analysis is typically proclaimed as a highlight of SNC, the bounds can unfortunately indeed be very loose (e.g., by several orders of magnitude off). In response to this uncovered weakness of SNC, the (Standard) per-flow bounds are her… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

2
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Figure 10 indicates that the upper and lower bounds for Aloha are quite tight. For CSMA/CA, however, only the upper bounds remain reasonably tight whereas the lower bounds tend to degrade with the number of hops k. This is due to the underlying application of the Boole's inequality, which is known to be loose in the case of correlated arrivals (see, e.g., [10]).…”
Section: Numerical Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Figure 10 indicates that the upper and lower bounds for Aloha are quite tight. For CSMA/CA, however, only the upper bounds remain reasonably tight whereas the lower bounds tend to degrade with the number of hops k. This is due to the underlying application of the Boole's inequality, which is known to be loose in the case of correlated arrivals (see, e.g., [10]).…”
Section: Numerical Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This saturation condition translates into system theoretic terms as follows: the input signal to the second system in Figure 4 is the infinite signal A 2 (t) = ∞ for ∀t (also called the impulse), whereas the corresponding output, i.e., the impulse-response, is the signal S 2 (t), or S 2 (0, t) in the notation from Eq. (10). Therefore, the construction of S 2 (s, t) is analogous to the construction of impulse-response functions in LTI systems, which are the output from an LTI system with input given by the Kronecker signal (see [26]).…”
Section: A Centralized Schedulingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…for some 0 < K < 1; see Theorem 1 in [15], which recovers Theorem 2.1 from [44]. In turn, the pre-factor from Eq.…”
Section: B Review Of Martingale Resultsmentioning
confidence: 60%