Performance analysis of queueing system model under priority scheduling algorithms within 5G networks slicing framework

Cover Page

Cite item


A new era is opening for the world of information and communication technologies with the 5G networks’ release. Indeed 5G networks appear in modern wireless systems as solutions to “traditional” networks’ inflexibility and lack of radio resources problems. Using these networks the operators can expand their services’ range at will and, therefore, manage daily operations by monitoring ‘key performance indicators’ (KPIs) - helping meet the quality of service (QoS) requirements much easily. To meet the QoS requirements 5G networks can be implemented alongside priority scheduling algorithms. This paper considers the operation of a wireless network slicing model under two scheduling algorithms. A comparative analysis of main performance measures is provided.

Full Text

Introduction The advent of new generation 5G networks with their flagship slicing technology have highly influenced the telecommunications sector in the best way. Network operators have now the latitude to manage their assets and therefore, are able to propose new types of services to customers [1]-[3]. Businesses and enterprises can now access network connectivity that fits their specific needs [4]-[6]. 3GPP defines slicing as a technology that offers on shared infrastructures the advantageous option to build fully dedicated logical networks, known as ‘network slices’, with very diverse quality of service (QoS) capabilities and requirements [7], [8]. Normally, meeting QoS requirements and extending capabilities are difficult tasks for network operators who can be helped by monitoring the ‘key performance indicators’ (KPIs) [9]-[12]. Essentially, monitoring the KPIs can allow network operators to significantly reduce service interruptions or even prevent them in the best cases [13], [14]. Since the first release of slicing technology few years ago, the vast majority of researchers, scientists and organizations in the telecommunications industry is focused on developing methods and techniques to flexibly and efficiently share available radio resources within its framework [15]-[19]. In modern wireless networks, one of the possible solutions to meet the QoS requirements is the implementation of priority scheduling algorithms [20]-[23]. Models implementing such algorithms within slicing framework could be described using the mathematical apparatus of retrial queueing theory [24]-[26], where retrial queues, also known as ‘orbits’, can be used to address service’s interruptions problem. In this paper we consider one of the possible models for implementing slicing with priority scheduling algorithms. More precisely, we provide a comparative analysis of model’s performance measures under preemptive and non-preemptive scheduling algorithms. For that we use the mathe- matical apparatus of queueing theory and describe the model as a retrial queueing system coupled with a buffer [27]-[29]. The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 provides the system’s general description and proposes a mathematical model for its construction. Sec- tion 3 suggests formulas to compute the stationary probability distributions under preemptive and non-preemptive scheduling algorithms respectively. Section 4 proposes formulas to calculate the main performance measures un- der each priority scheduling algorithm. Section 5 provides a numerical example of system’s model operation. Section 6 concludes the paper. Mathematical model Let us consider a single server retrial queueing system [25] coupled with a buffer. We assume two types of requests arrival in system according to Poisson process with rates


About the authors

Kpangny Yves Berenger Adou

Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University)

Author for correspondence.
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4669-0898

PhD Student at the Department of Applied Probability and Informatics, Faculty of Science

6, Miklukho-Maklaya St., Moscow, 117198, Russian Federation

Ekaterina V. Markova

Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University)

ORCID iD: 0000-0002-7876-2801

Candidate of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Associate Professor at the Department of Applied Probability and Informatics, Faculty of Science

6, Miklukho-Maklaya St., Moscow, 117198, Russian Federation

Elena A. Zhbankova

Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University)

ORCID iD: 0000-0003-2482-4488

MSc student at the Department of Applied Probability and Informatics, Faculty of Science

6, Miklukho-Maklaya St., Moscow, 117198, Russian Federation


  1. W. Lehr, F. Queder, and J. Haucap, “5G: A new future for Mobile Network Operators, or not?” Telecommunications Policy, vol. 45, no. 3, p. 102086, Jan. 2021. doi: 10.1016/j.telpol.2020.102086.
  2. Z. Ofir. “What will be the impact of 5g on network operators?” (Nov. 2021), [Online]. Available:
  3. “Cloud computing services drive companies’ digital transformation.” (Jan. 2022), [Online]. Available:
  4. K. Budka. “AI + Augmented: Pushing the Limits of What Machines Can Do.” (Sep. 2021), [Online]. Available: 21174112/ai-augmented-pushes-the-limits-of-what-machinescan-do.
  5. C. Johnson. “What Companies And Governments Really Want From Industry 4.0.” (Nov. 2021), [Online]. Available:
  6. Nokia. “How Supply Chain 4.0 delivers the goods other approaches can’t.” (Dec. 2021), [Online]. Available:
  7. A. Sultan and M. Pope, “Feasibility study on new services and markets technology enablers for network operation; Stage 1,” 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), Technical report (TR) 22.864, Sep. 2016, Version 15.0.0.
  8. J. M. Meredith, F. Firmin, and M. Pope, “Release 16 Description; Summary of Rel-16 Work Items,” 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), Technical report (TR) 21.916, Jan. 2022, Version 16.1.0.
  9. J. M. Meredith, M. C. Soveri, and M. Pope, “Management and orchestration; 5G end to end Key Performance Indicators (KPI),” 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), Technical specification (TS) 28.554, Dec. 2021, Version 17.5.0.
  10. “5G industry campus network deployment guideline,” GSM Association (GSMA), Official Document NG.123, Oct. 2021, Version 2.0.
  11. I. Markopoulos et al., “Service performance measurement methods over 5G experimental networks,” 5G PPP, white paper ICT-19, Mar. 2021, Version 1.0. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.4748482.
  12. L. Nielsen et al., “Basic Testing Guide - A Starter Kit for Basic 5G KPIs Verification,” 5G PPP, white paper, Nov. 2021, Version 1.0. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.5704519.
  13. O. Ohlsson, P. Wallentin, and C.-G. Persson. “Reducing mobility interruption time in 5G networks.” (Apr. 2020), [Online]. Available:
  14. G. Sevilla. “2022 predictions: Internet and network outages will continue to get worse before they get better.” (Dec. 2021), [Online]. Available:
  15. H. Zhu, G. Zhang, D. Hong, S. Zhang, and S. Huang, “Data Access Control Method of Power Terminal Based on 5G Technology,” in Advanced Hybrid Information Processing, S. Liu and X. Ma, Eds., Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2022, pp. 26-39. doi: 10.1007/978-3-03094554-1_3.
  16. D. Alotaibi, V. Thayananthan, and J. Yazdani, “The 5G network slicing using SDN based technology for managing network traffic,” Procedia Computer Science, vol. 194, pp. 114-121, Dec. 2021, 18th International Learning & Technology Conference 2021. doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2021.10.064.
  17. R. Moreira, P. F. Rosa, R. L. A. Aguiar, and F. de Oliveira Silva, “NASOR: A network slicing approach for multiple Autonomous Systems,” Computer Communications, vol. 179, pp. 131-144, Jul. 2021. DOI: 10. 1016/j.comcom.2021.07.028.
  18. P. Zhu, J. Zhang, Y. Xiao, J. Cui, L. Bai, and Y. Ji, “Deep reinforcement learning-based radio function deployment for secure and resource-efficient NG-RAN slicing,” Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, vol. 106, p. 104490, 2021. doi: 10.1016/j.engappai.2021.104490.
  19. H. Yang, T. So, and Y. Xu, “Chapter 12 - 5G network slicing,” in 5G NR and Enhancements, J. Shen, Z. Du, Z. Zhang, N. Yang, and H. Tang, Eds., Elsevier, 2022, pp. 621-639. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-323-910606.00012-X.
  20. N. Suganthi and S. Meenakshi, “An efficient scheduling algorithm using queuing system to minimize starvation of non-real-time secondary users in Cognitive Radio Network,” Cluster Computing, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 1-11, Jan. 2022. doi: 10.1007/s10586-017-1595-8.
  21. A. Fathalla, K. Li, and A. Salah, “Best-KFF: a multi-objective preemptive resource allocation policy for cloud computing systems,” Cluster Computing, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 321-336, Feb. 2022. doi: 10.1007/s10586021-03407-z.
  22. S. J. Ahmad et al., “A Dynamic Priority Based Scheduling Scheme for Multimedia Streaming Over MANETs to Improve QoS,” in Distributed Computing and Internet Technology, Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2016, pp. 122-126. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-28034-9_15.
  23. A. Belgacem and K. Beghdad-Bey, “Multi-objective workflow scheduling in cloud computing: trade-off between makespan and cost,” Cluster Computing, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 579-595, Feb. 2022. doi: 10.1007/s10586021-03432-y.
  24. J. R. Artalejo and A. Gómez-Corral, Retrial Queueing Systems. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, Jan. 2008. doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-78725-9.
  25. P. P. Bocharov, C. D’Apice, and A. V. Pechinkin, Queueing Theory. De Gruyter, 2011. doi: 10.1515/9783110936025.
  26. G. P. Basharin, Y. V. Gaidamaka, and K. E. Samouylov, “Mathematical Theory of Teletraffic and its Application to the Analysis of Multiservice Communication of Next Generation Networks,” Automatic Control and Computer Sciences, vol. 47, no. 2, pp. 62-69, 2013. DOI: 10.3103/ S0146411613020028.
  27. K. Y. Adou and E. V. Markova, “Methods for Analyzing Slicing Technology in 5G Wireless Network Described as Queueing System with Unlimited Buffer and Retrial Group,” in Information Technologies and Mathematical Modelling. Queueing Theory and Applications, Cham: Springer International Publishing, Mar. 2021, pp. 264-278. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-72247-0_20.
  28. E. Markova, Y. Adou, D. Ivanova, A. Golskaia, and K. Samouylov, “Queue with Retrial Group for Modeling Best Effort Traffic with Minimum Bit Rate Guarantee Transmission Under Network Slicing,” in Distributed Computer and Communication Networks, Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2019, pp. 432-442. DOI: 978-3-030-366148_33.
  29. M. Korenevskaya, O. Zayats, A. Ilyashenko, and V. Muliukha, “Retrial Queuing System with Randomized Push-Out Mechanism and NonPreemptive Priority,” Procedia Computer Science, vol. 150, pp. 716-725, 2019, Proceedings of the 13th International Symposium “Intelligent Systems 2018” (INTELS’18), 22-24 October, 2018, St. Petersburg, Russia. doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2019.02.016.
  30. A. M. Yadav, K. N. Tripathi, and S. C. Sharma, “An enhanced multiobjective fireworks algorithm for task scheduling in fog computing environment,” Cluster Computing, Nov. 2021. doi: 10.1007/s10586021-03481-3.
  31. S. N. Stepanov, Fundamentals of Multiservice Networks [Osnovy teletraffika multiservisnykh setei]. Moscow: Eqo-Trends, 2010, p. 392, in Russian.
  32. S. N. Stepanov, Theory of Teletraffic: Concepts, Models, Applications [Teoriya teletraffika: kontseptsii, modeli, prilozheniya]. Moscow: Goryachaya Liniya-Telekom, 2015, p. 868, in Russian.

Copyright (c) 2022 Adou K.Y., Markova E.V., Zhbankova E.A.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies