# Reliability and Optimization Measures of Retrial Queue with Different Classes of Customers under a Working Vacation Schedule

Authors: Sundararaman Muthusamy; Narasimhan Devadoss; Sherif I. Ammar
Journal: Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society
 (2022)

---

## Abstract

A working vacation queueing model is described in this work, with three different classes of customers: regular, priority, and disaster. The regular server serves all arriving customers, whereas the optional reservice is only provided to those who request it. The Bernoulli working vacation (BWV) schedule is considered. In WV time, the server serves at a slower rate. The generating functions (GF) technique is used to determine the system capacity of various server states. Different system performances, reliability indices, and cost optimization values are numerically shown. For the current COVID-19 pandemic situation, the motivation for this approach is presented in a telephonic communication system.


---

## Body

## 1. Introduction

Queueing theory is an area of mathematics that investigates and models the act of waiting in lines. Many researchers have studied the queueing models using vacations and different patterns of arrivals. Wireless communication networks, telephone systems, file transfer services, mail systems, and other systems, all use these types of queues. Researchers have recently proposed an alternate service mechanism with various service rates during vacation time. If no customers are in orbit, the server begins a working vacation (WV) mode. During the WV period, the server serves at a slower rate. If any customer is available in orbit at the end of the WV, the server will change the inferior service to the typical busy period. This research developed a model for the Bernoulli schedule (M/G/1/G-q/BWV) with working vacations. In the BWV schedule, the server either waits for a new customer (called a single WV) or moves on to the next WV (called multiple WV).


### 1.1. Related Literature Review

During the last two decades, the topic of retrial queues in queueing theory has been a fascinating research area. Retrial queues differ from common queueing mechanisms. When the server is busy, customers wait in a virtual pool called “orbit” and retry for service until it is received. For more information about the retrial queues, refer Artalejo and Corral [1] and Artalejo [2].In the last few decades, many researchers have widely studied two different types of customers in retrial queues. The high-priority customers are formed into a waiting line or not and served according to the discipline of preemptive or nonpreemptive. Furthermore, in some models, an arriving higher-priority customer may push out the lower-priority customers whose service is currently in progress. Priority retrial queues are used in many real-life applications like real-time systems, operating systems, and manufacturing systems. In 2015, Gao [3] developed a model retrial queueing system with two classes of customers: preemptive resumes and general retrial times, where priority customers do not queue and have an exclusive preemptive priority to receive their services over ordinary customers. Recently, many researchers developed models in priority disciplines like Wu and Lian [4] and Rajadurai [5].In 1975, Levy and Yechialli [6] introduced the vacation queueing system. The researchers can read ([7–9]) to learn more about the vacation queueing approach. Chandrasekaran et al. [10] have provided a short survey on WV queueing models. In 2002, an M/M/1 queueing system with working vacations was first introduced by Servi and Finn [11]. Later, Wu and Takagi [12] extended the M/M/1/WV queue to an M/G/1/WV queue. Arivudainambi et al. [13] introduced the M/G/1 retrial queue with a single working vacation. Furthermore, during the working vacation period, if there are customers at a lower service completion instant, the server can stop the vacation and return to the usual busy state. This policy is called “vacation interruption”. In 2014, Gao et al. [14] first developed a model of a continuous-time general retrial queue with working vacations and vacation interruption by using the supplementary variable technique. Bouchentouf et al. [15] have discussed a single server Markovian queueing model with N and D policy working vacations and vacation interruption. Seenivasan and Abinaya [16] have recently studied a Markovian queueing model with a single working vacation and catastrophic. Some researchers have discussed models in the presence of WVs, such as Gao and Liu [17], Rajadurai et al. [18], Kasim [19], and Bouchentouf [20].Gelenbe [21] was the first to investigate disasters, also known as negative arrivals or G-Queues, where it is applicable in neural networks. Do [22] has presented a survey on queueing systems with G-networks, negative customers, and applications. Choudhury and Deka [23], Yang et al. [24], Rajadurai et al. [25], and Ammar and Rajadurai [26] have recently looked at various queues in unreliable queueing systems. During the service time, a negative arrival occurs and the system will get breakdown and send for repair.


### 1.2. Motivation of the Model

The advantages and contributions of this work are as follows:Model: A novel continuous-time M/G/1 retrial queue with three separate classes of customers and optional reservice during working vacations in the Bernoulli schedule (M/G/1/G-q/BWV) is presented. In the presence of retrial queues, the primary innovation of this work is a generalization of both single (q = 0) and multiple (p=0) working vacation models. The mathematical conclusions of this model have a specific and exciting application in the telecommunication system and telephone consultation of medical service systems. They also apply to wireless sensor networks (WSNs) [27].Methodology and results: We adopt all the elapsed times for retrial, service of priority and ordinary customers, working vacation, and repair as the supplementary variables to create a Markovian process of the system and use the generating function approach to obtain the performance measures of the system.Numerical illustrations: The impacts of parameters in system performance measures and cost optimization are displayed numerically.


## 1.1. Related Literature Review

During the last two decades, the topic of retrial queues in queueing theory has been a fascinating research area. Retrial queues differ from common queueing mechanisms. When the server is busy, customers wait in a virtual pool called “orbit” and retry for service until it is received. For more information about the retrial queues, refer Artalejo and Corral [1] and Artalejo [2].In the last few decades, many researchers have widely studied two different types of customers in retrial queues. The high-priority customers are formed into a waiting line or not and served according to the discipline of preemptive or nonpreemptive. Furthermore, in some models, an arriving higher-priority customer may push out the lower-priority customers whose service is currently in progress. Priority retrial queues are used in many real-life applications like real-time systems, operating systems, and manufacturing systems. In 2015, Gao [3] developed a model retrial queueing system with two classes of customers: preemptive resumes and general retrial times, where priority customers do not queue and have an exclusive preemptive priority to receive their services over ordinary customers. Recently, many researchers developed models in priority disciplines like Wu and Lian [4] and Rajadurai [5].In 1975, Levy and Yechialli [6] introduced the vacation queueing system. The researchers can read ([7–9]) to learn more about the vacation queueing approach. Chandrasekaran et al. [10] have provided a short survey on WV queueing models. In 2002, an M/M/1 queueing system with working vacations was first introduced by Servi and Finn [11]. Later, Wu and Takagi [12] extended the M/M/1/WV queue to an M/G/1/WV queue. Arivudainambi et al. [13] introduced the M/G/1 retrial queue with a single working vacation. Furthermore, during the working vacation period, if there are customers at a lower service completion instant, the server can stop the vacation and return to the usual busy state. This policy is called “vacation interruption”. In 2014, Gao et al. [14] first developed a model of a continuous-time general retrial queue with working vacations and vacation interruption by using the supplementary variable technique. Bouchentouf et al. [15] have discussed a single server Markovian queueing model with N and D policy working vacations and vacation interruption. Seenivasan and Abinaya [16] have recently studied a Markovian queueing model with a single working vacation and catastrophic. Some researchers have discussed models in the presence of WVs, such as Gao and Liu [17], Rajadurai et al. [18], Kasim [19], and Bouchentouf [20].Gelenbe [21] was the first to investigate disasters, also known as negative arrivals or G-Queues, where it is applicable in neural networks. Do [22] has presented a survey on queueing systems with G-networks, negative customers, and applications. Choudhury and Deka [23], Yang et al. [24], Rajadurai et al. [25], and Ammar and Rajadurai [26] have recently looked at various queues in unreliable queueing systems. During the service time, a negative arrival occurs and the system will get breakdown and send for repair.


## 1.2. Motivation of the Model

The advantages and contributions of this work are as follows:Model: A novel continuous-time M/G/1 retrial queue with three separate classes of customers and optional reservice during working vacations in the Bernoulli schedule (M/G/1/G-q/BWV) is presented. In the presence of retrial queues, the primary innovation of this work is a generalization of both single (q = 0) and multiple (p=0) working vacation models. The mathematical conclusions of this model have a specific and exciting application in the telecommunication system and telephone consultation of medical service systems. They also apply to wireless sensor networks (WSNs) [27].Methodology and results: We adopt all the elapsed times for retrial, service of priority and ordinary customers, working vacation, and repair as the supplementary variables to create a Markovian process of the system and use the generating function approach to obtain the performance measures of the system.Numerical illustrations: The impacts of parameters in system performance measures and cost optimization are displayed numerically.


## 2. Nomenclature and Model Description

### 2.1. Nomenclature

(i)
Nt= Customers present in the orbit at time t(ii)
Xt= Server’s state at time t(iii)
λ1 = Regular arrival rate(iv)
λ2 = Priority arrival rate(v)
α = Disaster rate(vi)
θ = Vacation rate(vii)
r = Reservice probability(viii)
ξ10t= Elapsed retrial time(ix)
ξ20t= Priority customers’ elapsed service time(x)
ξ30t= Preemptive priority customers’ elapsed service time(xi)
ξ40t= Regular customers’ elapsed service time(xii)
ξ50t= Regular customers’ elapsed re-service time(xiii)
ξ60t= Elapsed working vacation time(xiv)
ξ70t= Elapsed repair time(xv)
νix= All of the states’ hazard rates. (i = 1,2,3,4,5,6, 7)(1)i.e.νixdx=dBix1−Bix;(xvi)
“F∗s=∫0∞e−sxdFx,(Laplace Stieltjes Transform of F (x))”(xvii)
“F¯∗s=1−F∗s/s.”(xviii)
LST of the retrial state =A∗ϑ.(xix)
LST of the priority busy states =Mp∗ϑ.(xx)
LST of the regular busy states =Mb∗ϑ.(xxi)
LST of the WV state =Mv∗ϑ.(xxii)
LST of the repair state =Mr∗ϑ.(xxiii)
First and second moments for the corresponding states =βi1andβi2 for state i.(xxiv)
Tb = Expected busy period(xxv)
Tc = Expected busy cycle(xxvi)
T0 = Expected length of empty system


### 2.2. Description of a Mathematical Model

We addressed an M/G/1 retrial queue with three different classes of customers and optional reservice during WVs under the Bernoulli schedule (M/G/1/G-q/BWV) in Figure 1. This model’s fundamental assumption is as follows:(i)
The arrival process: Assume that three types of customers arrive from outside the system using independent Poisson processes: regular, priority, and disaster. Preemptive priority customers have dominated the regular busy server during the service time of regular customers.(ii)
The retrial process: The general retrial policy was proposed in Reference [5]. Regular customers who arrive find the server accessible and get its service immediately; otherwise, they are joined into the orbit and try its request later with FCFS discipline.(iii)
Priority service process: When priority customers arrive, they find the server accessible and immediately begin its service. Assume that if the server provides service to another priority customer, the newly arriving priority customer will exit the system without receiving service.(iv)
The regular service process: The regular busy server serves an ordinary customer; if priority customers arrive, then the regular service will be disrupted. A priority customer takes precedence over an ordinary customer and the server begins its service immediately. The typical customer must wait in the service area for the remainder of the service to be completed.(v)
The reservice process: We assume that a single server provides an optional re-service. If the service is successful, the ordinary customer may rejoin the system immediately to receive the same service (optional re-service) or leave the system.(vi)
The removal rule: Negative (failure) customers arrive only during regular service hours. This kind of arrival will push regular customers (priority or ordinary) out of the service area and cause the server to fail. When a server fails, it is immediately sent to be repaired. When the repair process is finished, the server will function as if it were brand new.(vii)
The Bernoulli working vacation process: When no customers are in orbit, the server initiates a working vacation. During the WV period, the server serves at a slower service rate. If any customer is available in orbit at the end of the WV, the server will switch from the lesser service to the normal busy period. Otherwise, the server either waits with probability p to serve a new customer (a single working vacation) or takes another working vacation with probability q = 1- p (a multiple working vacations). If customers are in orbit at the end of the vacation, the server returns to its normal working state.(viii)
The times of all server states are mutually independent.Figure 1
A priority retrial queue with the M/G/1/G-q/BWV.


### 2.3. A Practical Example of the Model

We consider a telecommunication system one of the best examples of our model. Telecommunication, banks, call centers, and mobile network customers play a significant role in this COVID-19 pandemic. All the network operators work only on emergency cases with a limited number of workers. People can contact the center by communicating with a person at the help desk or customer service consultant (CSC) through the telephone (regular server). Customers can contact the center via fax, e-mail, or live chat sessions in addition to calling (priority customers). The CSC or agent picks them both up. If the agent is engaged at the time of the call, the arriving call will lose service. However, if the agent is concerned about emails or faxes, the call takes precedence over an e-mail service. The preempted service will remain in place to complete its mission. If customers are dissatisfied with the service, they will be re-serviced as soon as possible (re-service). The working server will be impacted by a weak signal (negative customers), causing the system to fail during the service period and need to be repaired immediately. If CSC gets no voice calls, faxes, or emails, it will execute some maintenance jobs to enhance the computer performance (working vacation). If an arriving message is discovered while the CSC is engaged in a voice call, the messages are temporarily stored in a retrial buffer (orbit) and served after some time (retrial time). This queueing discipline is a good approximation of this type of a telecommunication processing system.


## 2.1. Nomenclature

(i)
Nt= Customers present in the orbit at time t(ii)
Xt= Server’s state at time t(iii)
λ1 = Regular arrival rate(iv)
λ2 = Priority arrival rate(v)
α = Disaster rate(vi)
θ = Vacation rate(vii)
r = Reservice probability(viii)
ξ10t= Elapsed retrial time(ix)
ξ20t= Priority customers’ elapsed service time(x)
ξ30t= Preemptive priority customers’ elapsed service time(xi)
ξ40t= Regular customers’ elapsed service time(xii)
ξ50t= Regular customers’ elapsed re-service time(xiii)
ξ60t= Elapsed working vacation time(xiv)
ξ70t= Elapsed repair time(xv)
νix= All of the states’ hazard rates. (i = 1,2,3,4,5,6, 7)(1)i.e.νixdx=dBix1−Bix;(xvi)
“F∗s=∫0∞e−sxdFx,(Laplace Stieltjes Transform of F (x))”(xvii)
“F¯∗s=1−F∗s/s.”(xviii)
LST of the retrial state =A∗ϑ.(xix)
LST of the priority busy states =Mp∗ϑ.(xx)
LST of the regular busy states =Mb∗ϑ.(xxi)
LST of the WV state =Mv∗ϑ.(xxii)
LST of the repair state =Mr∗ϑ.(xxiii)
First and second moments for the corresponding states =βi1andβi2 for state i.(xxiv)
Tb = Expected busy period(xxv)
Tc = Expected busy cycle(xxvi)
T0 = Expected length of empty system


## 2.2. Description of a Mathematical Model

We addressed an M/G/1 retrial queue with three different classes of customers and optional reservice during WVs under the Bernoulli schedule (M/G/1/G-q/BWV) in Figure 1. This model’s fundamental assumption is as follows:(i)
The arrival process: Assume that three types of customers arrive from outside the system using independent Poisson processes: regular, priority, and disaster. Preemptive priority customers have dominated the regular busy server during the service time of regular customers.(ii)
The retrial process: The general retrial policy was proposed in Reference [5]. Regular customers who arrive find the server accessible and get its service immediately; otherwise, they are joined into the orbit and try its request later with FCFS discipline.(iii)
Priority service process: When priority customers arrive, they find the server accessible and immediately begin its service. Assume that if the server provides service to another priority customer, the newly arriving priority customer will exit the system without receiving service.(iv)
The regular service process: The regular busy server serves an ordinary customer; if priority customers arrive, then the regular service will be disrupted. A priority customer takes precedence over an ordinary customer and the server begins its service immediately. The typical customer must wait in the service area for the remainder of the service to be completed.(v)
The reservice process: We assume that a single server provides an optional re-service. If the service is successful, the ordinary customer may rejoin the system immediately to receive the same service (optional re-service) or leave the system.(vi)
The removal rule: Negative (failure) customers arrive only during regular service hours. This kind of arrival will push regular customers (priority or ordinary) out of the service area and cause the server to fail. When a server fails, it is immediately sent to be repaired. When the repair process is finished, the server will function as if it were brand new.(vii)
The Bernoulli working vacation process: When no customers are in orbit, the server initiates a working vacation. During the WV period, the server serves at a slower service rate. If any customer is available in orbit at the end of the WV, the server will switch from the lesser service to the normal busy period. Otherwise, the server either waits with probability p to serve a new customer (a single working vacation) or takes another working vacation with probability q = 1- p (a multiple working vacations). If customers are in orbit at the end of the vacation, the server returns to its normal working state.(viii)
The times of all server states are mutually independent.Figure 1
A priority retrial queue with the M/G/1/G-q/BWV.


## 2.3. A Practical Example of the Model

We consider a telecommunication system one of the best examples of our model. Telecommunication, banks, call centers, and mobile network customers play a significant role in this COVID-19 pandemic. All the network operators work only on emergency cases with a limited number of workers. People can contact the center by communicating with a person at the help desk or customer service consultant (CSC) through the telephone (regular server). Customers can contact the center via fax, e-mail, or live chat sessions in addition to calling (priority customers). The CSC or agent picks them both up. If the agent is engaged at the time of the call, the arriving call will lose service. However, if the agent is concerned about emails or faxes, the call takes precedence over an e-mail service. The preempted service will remain in place to complete its mission. If customers are dissatisfied with the service, they will be re-serviced as soon as possible (re-service). The working server will be impacted by a weak signal (negative customers), causing the system to fail during the service period and need to be repaired immediately. If CSC gets no voice calls, faxes, or emails, it will execute some maintenance jobs to enhance the computer performance (working vacation). If an arriving message is discovered while the CSC is engaged in a voice call, the messages are temporarily stored in a retrial buffer (orbit) and served after some time (retrial time). This queueing discipline is a good approximation of this type of a telecommunication processing system.


## 3. Steady-State Analysis

For the model M/G/1/G-q/BWV, the Markov process is defined as Xt,Nt,t≥0. The various server states of {X (t) = 0,1,2,3,4,5,6, and 7} are free, busy (with priority, preemptive priority, and normal customers), re-service, working vacation, and repair.The probabilities for the process are defined asQ0t=PXt=0,Nt=0 and. P0t=PXt=1,Nt=0,, Hi,nx,tdx=PXt=i,Nt=n,x<ξi0t≤x+dx,fort,x,y≥0,i=1,2,3,4,5,6,7.


### 3.1. Ergodicity Condition of the Model

We analyze the ergodicity of the embedded Markov chain at departure or vacation epochs. Let {tn; n = 1,2,…} be the sequence of epochs at which either a normal service for priority/ordinary or a lower service completion occurs or a repair period completion. The sequence of random vectors Zn=Xtn+,Ntn+ forms an embedded Markov chain in the retrial queueing system. Its state space is. S=0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7×N.Theorem 1.
The embedded Markov chainZn;n=1,2,… is ergodic if and only if ρ<A∗λ1+λ2, “where ρ=A∗λ1+λ2+λA¯∗λ1+λ2X+λ1M¯p∗α1+αβr1 and X=1+rB′M¯b∗′+αδM¯p∗αM¯p∗′+1+δM¯p∗α1+r/M¯b∗′+λ1βr1M¯b∗.Proof.
To prove the sufficient condition of ergodicity, it is very convenient to use Foster’s criterion (see Pakes [28]), which states that the chain Zn;n∈N is an irreducible and aperiodic Markov chain is ergodic if there exists a nonnegative function f (j), j ∈ N and ε > 0, such that mean drift ψj=Efzn+1−fzn/zn=j is finite for all j ∈ N and ψj≤−ε for all j ∈ N, except perhaps for a finite number j’s. In our case, we consider the function f (j) = j; then, we have the following equation:(2)ψj=A∗λ1+λ2+λA¯∗λ1+λ2X+λ1M¯p∗α1+αβr1−1,ifj=0,A∗λ1+λ2+λA¯∗λ1+λ2X+λ1M¯p∗1+αβr1−A∗λ1+λ2,ifj=1,2...
Inequalityρ<A∗λ1+λ2 is a sufficient condition for ergodicity.
To prove the necessary condition, as noted in the study of Sennott et al. [29], if the Markov chain Zn;n≥1 satisfies Kaplan’s condition, namely, ψj < ∞ for all j ≥ 0, and there exits j0 ∈ N such that ψj ≥ 0 for j ≥ j0. Notice that, in our case, Kaplan’s condition is satisfied because there is a k such that mij = 0 for j < i - k and i > 0, where Μ = (mij) is the one-step transition matrix of Zn;n∈N. Then, ρ≥A∗λ1+λ2 implies the nonergodicity of the Markov chain.


### 3.2. Steady-State Probability Equations

The method of “supplementary variable technique” (SVT) is used to generate the following different state equations,(3)λ1+λ2P0=θpQ0,(4)λ1+λ2+θQ0=θqQ0+∫0∞H1,0xν1xdx+∫0∞H5,0yν5ydy+∫0∞H6,0xν6xdx+∫0∞H7,0xν7xdx+1−r∫0∞H4,0yν4ydy,(5)dH1,nxdx+λ1+λ2+ν1xH1,nx=0,n≥1,(6)dH2,nxdx+λ1+α+ν2xH2,nx=λ1H2,n−1x,n≥1,(7)∂H3,nx,y∂x+λ1+α+ν3xH3,nx,y=λ1H3,n−1x,y,n≥1,(8)dH4,nydy+λ1+λ2+α+ν4yH4,ny=λ1H4,n−1y+∫0∞H3,nx,yν3xdx,n≥1,(9)dH5,nydy+λ1+λ2+α+ν5yH5,ny=λ1H5,n−1y+∫0∞H3,nx,yν3xdx,n≥1,(10)dH6,nxdx+λ1+θ+ν6xH6,nx=λ1H6,n−1x,n≥1,(11)dH7,nxdx+λ1+ν7xH7,nx=λ1H7,n−1x,n≥1.The boundary conditions are atx = 0 and y = 0.(12)H1,n0=∫0∞H2,nx2xdx+1−r∫0∞H4,nyν4ydx+∫0∞H5,nyν5ydx+∫0∞H6,nxν6xdx+∫0∞H7,nxν7xdx,n≥1,(13)H2,n0=λ2∫0∞H1,nxdx,n≥1,(14)H3,n0,y=λ2H4,ny,n≥0,(15)H4,00=∫0∞H1xν1xdx+θ∫0∞H6,0xdx+λ1P0,n=0,(16)H4,n0=∫0∞H1,n+1xdx+λ1∫0∞H1,nxdx+θ∫0∞H6,nxdx,n≥1,(17)H5,n0=r∫0∞H4,nyν4ydy,n≥0,(18)H6,n0=λ1+λ2Q0,n=0,0,n≥1,(19)H7,n0=α∫0∞H2,nxdx+∫0∞∫0∞H3,nx,ydxdy+∫0∞H4,nydy+∫0∞H5,nydy,n≥0.The system normalized condition is as follows:(20)P0+Q0+∑n=1∞∫0∞H1,nxdx+∑n=0∞∫0∞H2,nxdx+∫0∞∫0∞H3,nx,ydxdy+∫0∞H4,nydy+∫0∞H5,nydy+∫0∞H6,nxdx+∫0∞H7,nxdx=1


### 3.3. Probability Solutions of the Model

We define the GFs for all of the states to solve the given system of equations.Hix,z=∑n=0∞Hi,nxzn0;Hi0,z=∑n=0∞Hi,n0zn;Multiplying byzn and summing over n to get GFs for equations of (5)–(19), making calculations,(21)H1x,z=H10,z1−Axe−λ1+λ2x,(22)H2x,z=H20,z1−Mpxe−Pzx,(23)H3x,y,z=H30,y,z1−Mpxe−Pzx,(24)H4y,z=H40,z1−Mbye−Bzy,(25)H5y,z=H50,z1−Mbye−Bzy,(26)H6x,z=H60,z1−Mvxe−Wzx,(27)H7x,z=H70,z1−Mrxe−λzx,where Pz=α+λ11−z,Bz=Pz+λ21−Mp∗Pz,Wz=θ+λ11−zandλz=λ11−zUsing the equations (12)-(19) in (21)-(27), we obtain as follows:(28)H10,z=H20,zMp∗Pz+1−rH40,zMb∗Bz+H50,zMb∗Bz+H60,zMv∗Wz+H70,zMr∗λz−λ1+λ2+θpQ0.Using the equations (3)–(19) to (21)–(27) to make some manipulations, we get the partial GFs for all the states.Lemma 1.
The following are the PGFs for several states:(29)H1z=∫0∞H1x,zdx=NrzDrz,where Nrz=zQ0A¯∗λ1+λ2λ1+λ2Wz+θpXz+λ1+λ2Mv∗Wz−1−θp(30)Drz=z−A∗λ1+λ2+λ1zA¯∗λ1+λ2Xz−zλ2A¯∗λ1+λ2Qz,Qz=Mp∗Pz+αMr∗λzM¯p∗Pz,Xz=1−r+rMb∗BzMb∗Bz+αMr∗λz1+rMb∗BzM¯b∗Bz1+λ2M¯p∗Pz,H2z=∫0∞H2x,zdx=λ2Q01−Mp∗PzPz×DrzzA¯∗λ1+λ2λ1+λ2Wz+θpXz+λ1+λ2Mv∗Wz−1−θp,(31)H3z=∫0∞H3x,zdx=λ2Q01−Mb∗Bz1−Mp∗PzPz×Bz×Drz,×A∗λ1+λ2+λzA¯∗λ1+λ2λ1+λ2Mv∗Wz−1−θp+zλ1+λ2Wz+θp1−λ2A¯∗λ1+λ2Qz(32)H4z=∫0∞H4y,zdy=Q01−Mb∗BzBz×DrzA∗λ1+λ2+λzA¯∗λ1+λ2λ1+λ2Mv∗Wz−1−θp+zλ1+λ2Wz+θp1−λ2A¯∗λ1+λ2Qz,(33)H5z=∫0∞H5y,zdy=rQ01−Mb∗BzMb∗BzBz×DrzA∗λ1+λ2+λzA¯∗λ1+λ2λ1+λ2Mv∗Wz−1−θp+zλ1+λ2Wz+θp1−λ2A¯∗λ1+λ2Qz,(34)H6z=∫0∞H6x,zdx=λ1+λ2Q0Wzθ,(35)H7z=∫0∞H7x,zdx=Q01−Mr∗λzDrz×λzzA¯∗λ1+λ2λ1+λ2Wz+θpXz+λ1+λ2Mv∗Wz−1−θpδM¯p∗Pz+1+rMb∗BzM¯b∗Bz1+λ2M¯p∗PzA∗λ1+λ2+λ1zA¯∗λ1+λ2λ1+λ2Μv∗Wz−1−θp+zλ1+λ2Wz+θp1−λ2A¯∗λ1+λ2Qz,where A¯∗λ1+λ2=1−A∗λ1+λ2/λ1+λ2;Wz=θ1−Mv∗Wz/θ+λ11−z;, M¯p∗Pz=1−Mp∗Pz/Pz(36)M¯b∗Bz=1−Mb∗BzBz,M¯r∗λz=1−Mr∗λzλz
Using the normalizing conditionP0+Q0+∑i=17Hi1=1,, we obtain P0 and Q0, where P0 is the probability that the server is idle and Q0 is the probability that the server is empty in WVs.(37)Q0=R∗λ1+λ2−ρη,(38)P0=θpR∗λ1+λ2−ρ,λ1+λ2ηη=R∗λ1+λ2−ρ+λ1+λ21−Mv∗θA¯∗λ1+λ21+X1+M¯p∗αα+λ1βr1+M¯b∗B1+λ2M¯p∗α1+λ2βr1A∗λ1+λ2−λ2A¯∗λ1+λ21−Mp∗αλ1+λ2α+βr1+λ1+λ21−λ2A¯∗λ1+λ2θp,ρ=A∗λ1+λ2+λ1A¯∗λ1+λ2X+λ1M¯p∗α1+αβr1;X=1+rB′M¯b∗′+αλ2M¯p∗αM¯p∗′+1+λ2M¯p∗α1+rM¯b∗′+λ1βr1M¯b∗,M¯p∗′α=λ1α1−Μp∗α+αΜp∗′α;M¯b∗′=λ1B1−Mb∗B+BΜb∗′;B=α+λ21−Μp∗α;M¯p∗α=1−Mp∗αα;M¯b∗=1−Mb∗α+λ21−Mp∗αα+λ21−Mp∗α;.Theorem 2.
Under the stability conditionρ<A∗λ1+λ2, PGF of the number of customers in the system and orbit size distribution at a stationary point of time is as follows:(39)Ksz=Q0θ2p+λ1+λ2θ+zλ1+λ22Wzλ1+λ2θ+Nr1z+Nr2z+zNr3zDrz,(40)Nr1z=BzPz+zδM¯p∗PzM¯r∗λzzA¯∗λ1+λ2λ1+λ2Mv∗Wz−1−θpNr2z=BzPz+zM¯r∗λzzA¯∗λ1+λ2λ1+λ2Wz+θpXz,Nr3z=1−Mb∗BzPz+M¯b∗BzrMb∗Bz+M¯r∗λz1+rMb∗Bz1+λ2Μ¯p∗Pz×A∗λ1+λ2+λzA¯∗λ1+λ2λ1+λ2Mv∗Wz−1−θp+zλ1+λ2Wz+θp1−λ2A¯∗λ1+λ2Qz,Drz=z−A∗λ1+λ2+λ1zA¯∗λ1+λ2Xz−zλ2A¯∗λ1+λ2QzQz=Μp∗Pz+αMr∗λzM¯p∗PzXz=1−r+rMb∗BzMb∗Bz+αMr∗λz1+rMb∗B1−rM¯b∗B1−r1+λ2M¯p∗P1−r,Koz=Q0θ2p+λ1+λ2θ+zλ1+λ22Wzλ1+λ2θ+Nr1z+Nr2z+Nr3zDrz,Nr1z=BzPz+δM¯p∗PzM¯r∗λzzA¯∗λ1+λ2λ1+λ2Mv∗Wz−1−θp,Nr2z=BzPz+M¯r∗λzzA¯∗λ1+λ2λ1+λ2Wz+θpXz,where P0 and Q0 are as shown in equations (37) and (38).Proof.
The probability generating function of the number of customers in the systemKs (z) and the probability generating function of the number of customers in the orbit Ko (z) are obtained by using the following equations:(41)Ksz=P0+Q0+H1z+z∑i=27Hiz,Koz=P0+Q0+H1z+∑i=27Hiz.
Substituting (29)–(38) in the above results, the equations (39) and (40) can be obtained by direct calculation.


## 3.1. Ergodicity Condition of the Model

We analyze the ergodicity of the embedded Markov chain at departure or vacation epochs. Let {tn; n = 1,2,…} be the sequence of epochs at which either a normal service for priority/ordinary or a lower service completion occurs or a repair period completion. The sequence of random vectors Zn=Xtn+,Ntn+ forms an embedded Markov chain in the retrial queueing system. Its state space is. S=0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7×N.Theorem 1.
The embedded Markov chainZn;n=1,2,… is ergodic if and only if ρ<A∗λ1+λ2, “where ρ=A∗λ1+λ2+λA¯∗λ1+λ2X+λ1M¯p∗α1+αβr1 and X=1+rB′M¯b∗′+αδM¯p∗αM¯p∗′+1+δM¯p∗α1+r/M¯b∗′+λ1βr1M¯b∗.Proof.
To prove the sufficient condition of ergodicity, it is very convenient to use Foster’s criterion (see Pakes [28]), which states that the chain Zn;n∈N is an irreducible and aperiodic Markov chain is ergodic if there exists a nonnegative function f (j), j ∈ N and ε > 0, such that mean drift ψj=Efzn+1−fzn/zn=j is finite for all j ∈ N and ψj≤−ε for all j ∈ N, except perhaps for a finite number j’s. In our case, we consider the function f (j) = j; then, we have the following equation:(2)ψj=A∗λ1+λ2+λA¯∗λ1+λ2X+λ1M¯p∗α1+αβr1−1,ifj=0,A∗λ1+λ2+λA¯∗λ1+λ2X+λ1M¯p∗1+αβr1−A∗λ1+λ2,ifj=1,2...
Inequalityρ<A∗λ1+λ2 is a sufficient condition for ergodicity.
To prove the necessary condition, as noted in the study of Sennott et al. [29], if the Markov chain Zn;n≥1 satisfies Kaplan’s condition, namely, ψj < ∞ for all j ≥ 0, and there exits j0 ∈ N such that ψj ≥ 0 for j ≥ j0. Notice that, in our case, Kaplan’s condition is satisfied because there is a k such that mij = 0 for j < i - k and i > 0, where Μ = (mij) is the one-step transition matrix of Zn;n∈N. Then, ρ≥A∗λ1+λ2 implies the nonergodicity of the Markov chain.


## 3.2. Steady-State Probability Equations

The method of “supplementary variable technique” (SVT) is used to generate the following different state equations,(3)λ1+λ2P0=θpQ0,(4)λ1+λ2+θQ0=θqQ0+∫0∞H1,0xν1xdx+∫0∞H5,0yν5ydy+∫0∞H6,0xν6xdx+∫0∞H7,0xν7xdx+1−r∫0∞H4,0yν4ydy,(5)dH1,nxdx+λ1+λ2+ν1xH1,nx=0,n≥1,(6)dH2,nxdx+λ1+α+ν2xH2,nx=λ1H2,n−1x,n≥1,(7)∂H3,nx,y∂x+λ1+α+ν3xH3,nx,y=λ1H3,n−1x,y,n≥1,(8)dH4,nydy+λ1+λ2+α+ν4yH4,ny=λ1H4,n−1y+∫0∞H3,nx,yν3xdx,n≥1,(9)dH5,nydy+λ1+λ2+α+ν5yH5,ny=λ1H5,n−1y+∫0∞H3,nx,yν3xdx,n≥1,(10)dH6,nxdx+λ1+θ+ν6xH6,nx=λ1H6,n−1x,n≥1,(11)dH7,nxdx+λ1+ν7xH7,nx=λ1H7,n−1x,n≥1.The boundary conditions are atx = 0 and y = 0.(12)H1,n0=∫0∞H2,nx2xdx+1−r∫0∞H4,nyν4ydx+∫0∞H5,nyν5ydx+∫0∞H6,nxν6xdx+∫0∞H7,nxν7xdx,n≥1,(13)H2,n0=λ2∫0∞H1,nxdx,n≥1,(14)H3,n0,y=λ2H4,ny,n≥0,(15)H4,00=∫0∞H1xν1xdx+θ∫0∞H6,0xdx+λ1P0,n=0,(16)H4,n0=∫0∞H1,n+1xdx+λ1∫0∞H1,nxdx+θ∫0∞H6,nxdx,n≥1,(17)H5,n0=r∫0∞H4,nyν4ydy,n≥0,(18)H6,n0=λ1+λ2Q0,n=0,0,n≥1,(19)H7,n0=α∫0∞H2,nxdx+∫0∞∫0∞H3,nx,ydxdy+∫0∞H4,nydy+∫0∞H5,nydy,n≥0.The system normalized condition is as follows:(20)P0+Q0+∑n=1∞∫0∞H1,nxdx+∑n=0∞∫0∞H2,nxdx+∫0∞∫0∞H3,nx,ydxdy+∫0∞H4,nydy+∫0∞H5,nydy+∫0∞H6,nxdx+∫0∞H7,nxdx=1


## 3.3. Probability Solutions of the Model

We define the GFs for all of the states to solve the given system of equations.Hix,z=∑n=0∞Hi,nxzn0;Hi0,z=∑n=0∞Hi,n0zn;Multiplying byzn and summing over n to get GFs for equations of (5)–(19), making calculations,(21)H1x,z=H10,z1−Axe−λ1+λ2x,(22)H2x,z=H20,z1−Mpxe−Pzx,(23)H3x,y,z=H30,y,z1−Mpxe−Pzx,(24)H4y,z=H40,z1−Mbye−Bzy,(25)H5y,z=H50,z1−Mbye−Bzy,(26)H6x,z=H60,z1−Mvxe−Wzx,(27)H7x,z=H70,z1−Mrxe−λzx,where Pz=α+λ11−z,Bz=Pz+λ21−Mp∗Pz,Wz=θ+λ11−zandλz=λ11−zUsing the equations (12)-(19) in (21)-(27), we obtain as follows:(28)H10,z=H20,zMp∗Pz+1−rH40,zMb∗Bz+H50,zMb∗Bz+H60,zMv∗Wz+H70,zMr∗λz−λ1+λ2+θpQ0.Using the equations (3)–(19) to (21)–(27) to make some manipulations, we get the partial GFs for all the states.Lemma 1.
The following are the PGFs for several states:(29)H1z=∫0∞H1x,zdx=NrzDrz,where Nrz=zQ0A¯∗λ1+λ2λ1+λ2Wz+θpXz+λ1+λ2Mv∗Wz−1−θp(30)Drz=z−A∗λ1+λ2+λ1zA¯∗λ1+λ2Xz−zλ2A¯∗λ1+λ2Qz,Qz=Mp∗Pz+αMr∗λzM¯p∗Pz,Xz=1−r+rMb∗BzMb∗Bz+αMr∗λz1+rMb∗BzM¯b∗Bz1+λ2M¯p∗Pz,H2z=∫0∞H2x,zdx=λ2Q01−Mp∗PzPz×DrzzA¯∗λ1+λ2λ1+λ2Wz+θpXz+λ1+λ2Mv∗Wz−1−θp,(31)H3z=∫0∞H3x,zdx=λ2Q01−Mb∗Bz1−Mp∗PzPz×Bz×Drz,×A∗λ1+λ2+λzA¯∗λ1+λ2λ1+λ2Mv∗Wz−1−θp+zλ1+λ2Wz+θp1−λ2A¯∗λ1+λ2Qz(32)H4z=∫0∞H4y,zdy=Q01−Mb∗BzBz×DrzA∗λ1+λ2+λzA¯∗λ1+λ2λ1+λ2Mv∗Wz−1−θp+zλ1+λ2Wz+θp1−λ2A¯∗λ1+λ2Qz,(33)H5z=∫0∞H5y,zdy=rQ01−Mb∗BzMb∗BzBz×DrzA∗λ1+λ2+λzA¯∗λ1+λ2λ1+λ2Mv∗Wz−1−θp+zλ1+λ2Wz+θp1−λ2A¯∗λ1+λ2Qz,(34)H6z=∫0∞H6x,zdx=λ1+λ2Q0Wzθ,(35)H7z=∫0∞H7x,zdx=Q01−Mr∗λzDrz×λzzA¯∗λ1+λ2λ1+λ2Wz+θpXz+λ1+λ2Mv∗Wz−1−θpδM¯p∗Pz+1+rMb∗BzM¯b∗Bz1+λ2M¯p∗PzA∗λ1+λ2+λ1zA¯∗λ1+λ2λ1+λ2Μv∗Wz−1−θp+zλ1+λ2Wz+θp1−λ2A¯∗λ1+λ2Qz,where A¯∗λ1+λ2=1−A∗λ1+λ2/λ1+λ2;Wz=θ1−Mv∗Wz/θ+λ11−z;, M¯p∗Pz=1−Mp∗Pz/Pz(36)M¯b∗Bz=1−Mb∗BzBz,M¯r∗λz=1−Mr∗λzλz
Using the normalizing conditionP0+Q0+∑i=17Hi1=1,, we obtain P0 and Q0, where P0 is the probability that the server is idle and Q0 is the probability that the server is empty in WVs.(37)Q0=R∗λ1+λ2−ρη,(38)P0=θpR∗λ1+λ2−ρ,λ1+λ2ηη=R∗λ1+λ2−ρ+λ1+λ21−Mv∗θA¯∗λ1+λ21+X1+M¯p∗αα+λ1βr1+M¯b∗B1+λ2M¯p∗α1+λ2βr1A∗λ1+λ2−λ2A¯∗λ1+λ21−Mp∗αλ1+λ2α+βr1+λ1+λ21−λ2A¯∗λ1+λ2θp,ρ=A∗λ1+λ2+λ1A¯∗λ1+λ2X+λ1M¯p∗α1+αβr1;X=1+rB′M¯b∗′+αλ2M¯p∗αM¯p∗′+1+λ2M¯p∗α1+rM¯b∗′+λ1βr1M¯b∗,M¯p∗′α=λ1α1−Μp∗α+αΜp∗′α;M¯b∗′=λ1B1−Mb∗B+BΜb∗′;B=α+λ21−Μp∗α;M¯p∗α=1−Mp∗αα;M¯b∗=1−Mb∗α+λ21−Mp∗αα+λ21−Mp∗α;.Theorem 2.
Under the stability conditionρ<A∗λ1+λ2, PGF of the number of customers in the system and orbit size distribution at a stationary point of time is as follows:(39)Ksz=Q0θ2p+λ1+λ2θ+zλ1+λ22Wzλ1+λ2θ+Nr1z+Nr2z+zNr3zDrz,(40)Nr1z=BzPz+zδM¯p∗PzM¯r∗λzzA¯∗λ1+λ2λ1+λ2Mv∗Wz−1−θpNr2z=BzPz+zM¯r∗λzzA¯∗λ1+λ2λ1+λ2Wz+θpXz,Nr3z=1−Mb∗BzPz+M¯b∗BzrMb∗Bz+M¯r∗λz1+rMb∗Bz1+λ2Μ¯p∗Pz×A∗λ1+λ2+λzA¯∗λ1+λ2λ1+λ2Mv∗Wz−1−θp+zλ1+λ2Wz+θp1−λ2A¯∗λ1+λ2Qz,Drz=z−A∗λ1+λ2+λ1zA¯∗λ1+λ2Xz−zλ2A¯∗λ1+λ2QzQz=Μp∗Pz+αMr∗λzM¯p∗PzXz=1−r+rMb∗BzMb∗Bz+αMr∗λz1+rMb∗B1−rM¯b∗B1−r1+λ2M¯p∗P1−r,Koz=Q0θ2p+λ1+λ2θ+zλ1+λ22Wzλ1+λ2θ+Nr1z+Nr2z+Nr3zDrz,Nr1z=BzPz+δM¯p∗PzM¯r∗λzzA¯∗λ1+λ2λ1+λ2Mv∗Wz−1−θp,Nr2z=BzPz+M¯r∗λzzA¯∗λ1+λ2λ1+λ2Wz+θpXz,where P0 and Q0 are as shown in equations (37) and (38).Proof.
The probability generating function of the number of customers in the systemKs (z) and the probability generating function of the number of customers in the orbit Ko (z) are obtained by using the following equations:(41)Ksz=P0+Q0+H1z+z∑i=27Hiz,Koz=P0+Q0+H1z+∑i=27Hiz.
Substituting (29)–(38) in the above results, the equations (39) and (40) can be obtained by direct calculation.


## 4. Performance Indices

Some significant system characteristics of the priority M/G/1/G-q/BWV are described in this section.


### 4.1. Probabilities of Different States

Using L-Hospital’s rule and limit functions in (29)-(35); we obtain the following probabilities for various states,(i)
H1=H11=R¯∗λ1+λ2/ηλ1+λ21−Mv∗θ1+X.(ii)
H2=H21=δM¯p∗α/ηλ1+λ2A¯∗λ1+λ21−Mv∗θ1+X.(iii)
H3=H31=λ1+λ21−Mv∗θλ2M¯p∗αM¯b∗/ηA∗λ1+λ2−λ2A¯∗λ1+λ21−Mp∗αλ1/α+βr1+λ11−λ2A¯∗λ1+λ2/θ.(iv)
H4=H41=λ1+λ2M¯b∗/η1−Mv∗θA∗λ1+λ2+λ11−λ2A¯∗λ1+λ2/θ−λ2A¯∗λ1+λ21−Mp∗αλ1/α+βr1(v)
H5=H51=λ1+λ21−Mv∗θrM¯b∗Mb∗/ηA∗λ1+λ2−λ2A¯∗λ1+λ21−Mp∗αλ1/α+βr1+λ11−λ2A¯∗λ1+λ2/θ.(vi)
H6=H61=λ1+λ2Q01−Mv∗θ/θ.(vii)
H7=H71=λ2g1λ1+λ21−Mv∗θ/ηM¯p∗αA¯∗λ1+λ21+X+M¯b∗1+λ2M¯p∗α1+rMb∗BA∗λ1+λ2−λ2A¯∗λ1+λ21−Mp∗αλ1/α+βr1+λ11−δR¯∗λ1+λ2/θ


### 4.2. Computation ofLs and Lq

We can derive the mean number of units in the system (Ls) and Orbit (Lq) by differentiating the system size (39) and orbit size (40) and applying the limiting case,Ls=Ks′1=limz⟶1d/dzKsz and. Lq=Ko′1=limz⟶1d/dzKozThe system’s mean waiting time (Ws) and orbit (Wq) are calculated using Little’s formula.Ws=Ls/λ1 and. Wq=.Lq/λ1


### 4.3. Busy Cycle and Busy Period

The mean busy time and busy cycle are as follows, based on the idea of an alternate renewal process:(42)Q0=T0Tb+T0;T0=1λ1+λ2;Tb=T01Q0−1;Tc=T0+Tb=1λ1+λ2Q0.From the above results, we obtain as follows.Tb=1/θpη−A∗λ1+λ2+ρ/A∗λ1+λ2−ρ and(43)Tc=ηλ1+λ2A∗λ1+λ2−ρ,


### 4.4. Reliability Indices

The following methods are used to calculate system availability measures (Av) and failure frequency (Ff).(44)Av=1−limz⟶1H7z=1−H71,Ff=λ2×H2×H3×H4×H5.


## 4.1. Probabilities of Different States

Using L-Hospital’s rule and limit functions in (29)-(35); we obtain the following probabilities for various states,(i)
H1=H11=R¯∗λ1+λ2/ηλ1+λ21−Mv∗θ1+X.(ii)
H2=H21=δM¯p∗α/ηλ1+λ2A¯∗λ1+λ21−Mv∗θ1+X.(iii)
H3=H31=λ1+λ21−Mv∗θλ2M¯p∗αM¯b∗/ηA∗λ1+λ2−λ2A¯∗λ1+λ21−Mp∗αλ1/α+βr1+λ11−λ2A¯∗λ1+λ2/θ.(iv)
H4=H41=λ1+λ2M¯b∗/η1−Mv∗θA∗λ1+λ2+λ11−λ2A¯∗λ1+λ2/θ−λ2A¯∗λ1+λ21−Mp∗αλ1/α+βr1(v)
H5=H51=λ1+λ21−Mv∗θrM¯b∗Mb∗/ηA∗λ1+λ2−λ2A¯∗λ1+λ21−Mp∗αλ1/α+βr1+λ11−λ2A¯∗λ1+λ2/θ.(vi)
H6=H61=λ1+λ2Q01−Mv∗θ/θ.(vii)
H7=H71=λ2g1λ1+λ21−Mv∗θ/ηM¯p∗αA¯∗λ1+λ21+X+M¯b∗1+λ2M¯p∗α1+rMb∗BA∗λ1+λ2−λ2A¯∗λ1+λ21−Mp∗αλ1/α+βr1+λ11−δR¯∗λ1+λ2/θ


## 4.2. Computation ofLs and Lq

We can derive the mean number of units in the system (Ls) and Orbit (Lq) by differentiating the system size (39) and orbit size (40) and applying the limiting case,Ls=Ks′1=limz⟶1d/dzKsz and. Lq=Ko′1=limz⟶1d/dzKozThe system’s mean waiting time (Ws) and orbit (Wq) are calculated using Little’s formula.Ws=Ls/λ1 and. Wq=.Lq/λ1


## 4.3. Busy Cycle and Busy Period

The mean busy time and busy cycle are as follows, based on the idea of an alternate renewal process:(42)Q0=T0Tb+T0;T0=1λ1+λ2;Tb=T01Q0−1;Tc=T0+Tb=1λ1+λ2Q0.From the above results, we obtain as follows.Tb=1/θpη−A∗λ1+λ2+ρ/A∗λ1+λ2−ρ and(43)Tc=ηλ1+λ2A∗λ1+λ2−ρ,


## 4.4. Reliability Indices

The following methods are used to calculate system availability measures (Av) and failure frequency (Ff).(44)Av=1−limz⟶1H7z=1−H71,Ff=λ2×H2×H3×H4×H5.


## 5. Special Cases

Some important special cases of our model are as follows:Case (i): If (λ2, α, θ, r) ⟶ (0, 0, 0, 0), then the model reduces to a single WV retrial queue, and the findings match those of Arivudainambi et al. [13].Case (ii): Ifλ2 = r = α = 0, the model approaches a retrial queue system with WVs and agrees with Gao et al. [14] findings.Case (iii): If (α, r, θ) ⟶ (0, 0, 0), then the model can be reduced to a priority retrial queue with WVs and compared to Gao’s [3] results.


## 6. Reliability and Sensitivity Analysis

Using the MATLAB software, the effect of system parameters on different performance measures is presented numerically and graphically.


### 6.1. Cost Analysis

The impact of the cost function on the system parameters is discussed. The optimal design of the priority retrial on the M/G/1/G-q/BWV is addressed. Here, the cost structure and notation are followed by well-known results (Tadj and Choudary [30], Yang and Wu [31]), and the arbitrary values are chosen for the parameters such that the steady-state condition is satisfied.Let the assumes of cost analysis be as follows:Hc = the holding costsOc = the cost for the server is in operationsSc = the setup cost per busy cycleCa = the startup cost of the server before starting the service.From the above list, under the linear cost procedure, the expected cost function is given as follows:(45)TC=HcLs+OcTbTc+Sc1Tc+CaT0Tc=HcLs+Oc1−P0+Scλ1+CaP0.Consider the following values for the different parameters like:λ1 = λ2 = ν1 = ν5 = 2; ν2 = 5; ν3 = 3; ν4 = θ = 3; α = p = r = 0.5; Hc = 5, Oc = 60, Sc = 550 and Ca = 90. From the parameter values in estimated total cost per unit of time, we obtain TC = 355.94. The server’s steady-state availability is Av = 98.61% and failure frequency is Ff = 2.08%.The impact of system parameters on cost functions is presented numerically in Tables1–3 and Figures 2–5. Based on the findings, we conclude that the expected values of TC increase linearly with increasing cost parameters. The procedure for finding the Lq, Ff, Av, and TC are presented in Algorithm 1.Table 1
The impact of (Hc, Oc) on TC.
(Hc, Oc)(5, 60)(5, 100)(5, 150)(10, 60)(15, 60)TC355.9364370.3736388.4201357.7006359.4649Table 2
The impact of (Oc, Ca) on TC.
(Oc, Ca)(60, 90)(80, 90)(100, 90)(60, 120)(60, 150)TC355.9364363.1550370.3736375.1085394.2805Table 3
The impact of (Sc, Ca) on TC.
(Sc, Ca)(550, 90)(600, 90)(650, 90)(550, 100)(550, 110)TC355.9364380.9364405.9364362.3271368.7178Figure 2
TC vs. λ1.Figure 3
TC vs. λ2.Figure 4
TC vs. ν1.Figure 5
TC vs. (p).Algorithm 1: Computation of Lq,Ft,Avand TC
BeginInput:λ1, λ2, α, νi, θ, r and p. Compute: steady-state probabilities from 4.1.Compute:Lq from section 4.2.Compute:Av from section 4.4.Compute:Ff from section 4.4.Compute:TC from section 6.1EndOutput:Lq and TC


### 6.2. Sensitivity and Reliability Analysis

For numerical illustration, all the distribution functions are assumed to be exponentially, Erlang 2-stage, and hyperexponentially distributed. The parameter values are chosen arbitrarily to satisfy the stability condition. The impact of system performance measurements on the retry, priority, and failure rate parameters is shown in Tables4–6. We find that (i) as the retrial rate (ν1) rises, Ls, Lq, and H1 decrease; (ii) P0, H4, H6, and Ff rise as the retrial rate (a) rises in Table 4. As seen in Table 5, increasing the priority arrival rate (λ2) decreases the value of P0 while raising the other metrics Lq, H2, H5, and H6. As shown in Table 6, the failure rate (α) has an increasing tendency for P0, Ls, LqH6, and Ff, while the failure rate (α) has a decreasing trend for other measures such as H1 and H4.Table 4
The impact of retrial rate (ν1) for various values of λ1=2,λ2=1;ν4=4,ν1=3,ν6=2,θ=1,α=0.4,ν7=4.
Retrial rate (ν1)P0LqLsH1H4H6Ff2.500.18859.53668.11750.08980.48820.05230.18543.000.23456.26285.84220.07720.48840.06590.18563.500.26763.27192.85010.06810.48850.07570.18564.000.29272.17101.74840.06130.48860.08310.1857Table 5
The impact of priority rate (λ2) for various values of λ1=2,λ2=1;ν4=4,ν1=3,ν6=2,θ=1,α=0.4,ν7=4.
Priority arrival rate (λ2)P0LqH1H4H61.000.69710.10570.00290.09460.13071.500.62970.11730.00360.11420.15742.000.57130.12870.00400.13010.17852.500.52030.13990.00430.14280.1951Table 6
The impact of failure rate (α) for various values of λ1=2,λ2=1;ν4=4,ν1=3,ν6=2,θ=1,α=0.4,ν7=4.
Failure rate (α)P0LqLsH1H4H6Pf0.200.59742.42702.19630.00980.23290.08150.04660.400.61001.11560.89430.00950.22230.08320.08890.600.62160.69250.47990.00920.21260.08480.12760.800.63210.48910.28440.00890.20370.08620.1630The performances such as the mean orbit size (Lq) and idle probability (P0) are presented in increasing and decreasing trends against the parameters λ1, α, ν1, and θ in Figures 6–13. Figures 14–17 show the effect of different parameters on the system performance graphically. Figure 14 shows a rising trend in the value of the arrival rate of regular (λ1) and priority (λ2) arrivals concerning Lq. We used the nature of Ff which increases in Figure 15 to enhance the value of the failure rate (α) and vacation rate (θ). Figure 16 shows that Ff decreases as the failure rate (α) and priority rate (λ2) increase. Figure 17 shows the increased trends in idle probability (P0) for increasing the value of reservice probability (r) and vacation rate (θ).Figure 6
Lq vs. λ1.Figure 7
P0 vs. λ1.Figure 8
Lq vs. α.Figure 9
P0 vs. α.Figure 10
P0 vs. ν1.Figure 11
Lq vs. ν1.Figure 12
Lq vs. θ.Figure 13
P0 vs. θ.Figure 14
Lq vs. λ1 and λ2.Figure 15
Ff vs. α and θ.Figure 16
Ff vs. λ2 and α.Figure 17
P0 vs. (r) and θ.


## 6.1. Cost Analysis

The impact of the cost function on the system parameters is discussed. The optimal design of the priority retrial on the M/G/1/G-q/BWV is addressed. Here, the cost structure and notation are followed by well-known results (Tadj and Choudary [30], Yang and Wu [31]), and the arbitrary values are chosen for the parameters such that the steady-state condition is satisfied.Let the assumes of cost analysis be as follows:Hc = the holding costsOc = the cost for the server is in operationsSc = the setup cost per busy cycleCa = the startup cost of the server before starting the service.From the above list, under the linear cost procedure, the expected cost function is given as follows:(45)TC=HcLs+OcTbTc+Sc1Tc+CaT0Tc=HcLs+Oc1−P0+Scλ1+CaP0.Consider the following values for the different parameters like:λ1 = λ2 = ν1 = ν5 = 2; ν2 = 5; ν3 = 3; ν4 = θ = 3; α = p = r = 0.5; Hc = 5, Oc = 60, Sc = 550 and Ca = 90. From the parameter values in estimated total cost per unit of time, we obtain TC = 355.94. The server’s steady-state availability is Av = 98.61% and failure frequency is Ff = 2.08%.The impact of system parameters on cost functions is presented numerically in Tables1–3 and Figures 2–5. Based on the findings, we conclude that the expected values of TC increase linearly with increasing cost parameters. The procedure for finding the Lq, Ff, Av, and TC are presented in Algorithm 1.Table 1
The impact of (Hc, Oc) on TC.
(Hc, Oc)(5, 60)(5, 100)(5, 150)(10, 60)(15, 60)TC355.9364370.3736388.4201357.7006359.4649Table 2
The impact of (Oc, Ca) on TC.
(Oc, Ca)(60, 90)(80, 90)(100, 90)(60, 120)(60, 150)TC355.9364363.1550370.3736375.1085394.2805Table 3
The impact of (Sc, Ca) on TC.
(Sc, Ca)(550, 90)(600, 90)(650, 90)(550, 100)(550, 110)TC355.9364380.9364405.9364362.3271368.7178Figure 2
TC vs. λ1.Figure 3
TC vs. λ2.Figure 4
TC vs. ν1.Figure 5
TC vs. (p).Algorithm 1: Computation of Lq,Ft,Avand TC
BeginInput:λ1, λ2, α, νi, θ, r and p. Compute: steady-state probabilities from 4.1.Compute:Lq from section 4.2.Compute:Av from section 4.4.Compute:Ff from section 4.4.Compute:TC from section 6.1EndOutput:Lq and TC


## 6.2. Sensitivity and Reliability Analysis

For numerical illustration, all the distribution functions are assumed to be exponentially, Erlang 2-stage, and hyperexponentially distributed. The parameter values are chosen arbitrarily to satisfy the stability condition. The impact of system performance measurements on the retry, priority, and failure rate parameters is shown in Tables4–6. We find that (i) as the retrial rate (ν1) rises, Ls, Lq, and H1 decrease; (ii) P0, H4, H6, and Ff rise as the retrial rate (a) rises in Table 4. As seen in Table 5, increasing the priority arrival rate (λ2) decreases the value of P0 while raising the other metrics Lq, H2, H5, and H6. As shown in Table 6, the failure rate (α) has an increasing tendency for P0, Ls, LqH6, and Ff, while the failure rate (α) has a decreasing trend for other measures such as H1 and H4.Table 4
The impact of retrial rate (ν1) for various values of λ1=2,λ2=1;ν4=4,ν1=3,ν6=2,θ=1,α=0.4,ν7=4.
Retrial rate (ν1)P0LqLsH1H4H6Ff2.500.18859.53668.11750.08980.48820.05230.18543.000.23456.26285.84220.07720.48840.06590.18563.500.26763.27192.85010.06810.48850.07570.18564.000.29272.17101.74840.06130.48860.08310.1857Table 5
The impact of priority rate (λ2) for various values of λ1=2,λ2=1;ν4=4,ν1=3,ν6=2,θ=1,α=0.4,ν7=4.
Priority arrival rate (λ2)P0LqH1H4H61.000.69710.10570.00290.09460.13071.500.62970.11730.00360.11420.15742.000.57130.12870.00400.13010.17852.500.52030.13990.00430.14280.1951Table 6
The impact of failure rate (α) for various values of λ1=2,λ2=1;ν4=4,ν1=3,ν6=2,θ=1,α=0.4,ν7=4.
Failure rate (α)P0LqLsH1H4H6Pf0.200.59742.42702.19630.00980.23290.08150.04660.400.61001.11560.89430.00950.22230.08320.08890.600.62160.69250.47990.00920.21260.08480.12760.800.63210.48910.28440.00890.20370.08620.1630The performances such as the mean orbit size (Lq) and idle probability (P0) are presented in increasing and decreasing trends against the parameters λ1, α, ν1, and θ in Figures 6–13. Figures 14–17 show the effect of different parameters on the system performance graphically. Figure 14 shows a rising trend in the value of the arrival rate of regular (λ1) and priority (λ2) arrivals concerning Lq. We used the nature of Ff which increases in Figure 15 to enhance the value of the failure rate (α) and vacation rate (θ). Figure 16 shows that Ff decreases as the failure rate (α) and priority rate (λ2) increase. Figure 17 shows the increased trends in idle probability (P0) for increasing the value of reservice probability (r) and vacation rate (θ).Figure 6
Lq vs. λ1.Figure 7
P0 vs. λ1.Figure 8
Lq vs. α.Figure 9
P0 vs. α.Figure 10
P0 vs. ν1.Figure 11
Lq vs. ν1.Figure 12
Lq vs. θ.Figure 13
P0 vs. θ.Figure 14
Lq vs. λ1 and λ2.Figure 15
Ff vs. α and θ.Figure 16
Ff vs. λ2 and α.Figure 17
P0 vs. (r) and θ.


## 7. Conclusion

This work addresses a new model in priority retrial queues with the presence of re-service and Bernoulli WVs (priority retrial policy of M/G/1/G-q/BWV). The system size and orbit of PGFs are determined using the SVT and PGF approaches. The orbit and system average queue lengths have been determined. Various useful queueing and reliability measures, sensitivity analysis, system busy period, and mean waiting times are obtained. The analytical results are validated numerically and graphically using MATLAB software.The present investigation includes features simultaneously, such as the following:(i)
Retrial queues(ii)
Preemptive priority customers(iii)
Negative customers (G-queue)(iv)
Working vacations(v)
Vacation interruption(vi)
Re-service(vii)
Bernoulli schedule(viii)
Breakdowns and repairsThis model is used in wireless sensor networks (WSNs) in the PRIN MAC protocol, telecommunication systems, and phone counseling of medical service systems.This work can be further extended in many directions by incorporating the following concepts:(i)
Batch arrival(ii)
Optional type service(iii)
Working breakdowns(iv)
Immediate feedback and many othersThis study finds other applications in telephone systems, electronic mail services on the Internet, network, and software designs of various computer communications systems, production lines, and mail systems.



---

*Source: 6806104-2022-10-28.xml*