The Annals of Applied Probability

A stochastic analysis of resource sharing with logarithmic weights

Philippe Robert and Amandine Véber

Full-text: Open access


The paper investigates the properties of a class of resource allocation algorithms for communication networks: if a node of this network has $x$ requests to transmit, then it receives a fraction of the capacity proportional to $\log(1+x)$, the logarithm of its current load. A detailed fluid scaling analysis of such a network with two nodes is presented. It is shown that the interaction of several time scales plays an important role in the evolution of such a system, in particular its coordinates may live on very different time and space scales. As a consequence, the associated stochastic processes turn out to have unusual scaling behaviors. A heavy traffic limit theorem for the invariant distribution is also proved. Finally, we present a generalization to the resource sharing algorithm for which the $\log$ function is replaced by an increasing function. Possible generalizations of these results with $J>2$ nodes or with the function $\log$ replaced by another slowly increasing function are discussed.

Article information

Ann. Appl. Probab., Volume 25, Number 5 (2015), 2626-2670.

Received: October 2013
Revised: July 2014
First available in Project Euclid: 30 July 2015

Permanent link to this document

Digital Object Identifier

Mathematical Reviews number (MathSciNet)

Zentralblatt MATH identifier

Primary: 60K25: Queueing theory [See also 68M20, 90B22] 60K30: Applications (congestion, allocation, storage, traffic, etc.) [See also 90Bxx] 60F05: Central limit and other weak theorems
Secondary: 68M20: Performance evaluation; queueing; scheduling [See also 60K25, 90Bxx] 90B22: Queues and service [See also 60K25, 68M20]

Stochastic networks fluid limits time scales


Robert, Philippe; Véber, Amandine. A stochastic analysis of resource sharing with logarithmic weights. Ann. Appl. Probab. 25 (2015), no. 5, 2626--2670. doi:10.1214/14-AAP1057.

Export citation


  • [1] Abramson, N. (1970). The Aloha system. In FJCC AFIPS Conf. Proc. (Montvale, NJ) 37 281–285. AFIPS Press, Houston, Texas.
  • [2] Altman, E., Avrachenkov, K. and Ayesta, U. (2006). A survey on discriminatory processor sharing. Queueing Syst. 53 53–63.
  • [3] Ben Tahar, A. and Jean-Marie, A. (2012). The fluid limit of the multiclass processor sharing queue. Queueing Syst. 71 347–404.
  • [4] Billingsley, P. (1999). Convergence of Probability Measures, 2nd ed. Wiley, New York.
  • [5] Bonald, T. and Massoulié, L. (2001). Impact of fairness on Internet performance. In Proceedings of the 2001 ACM SIGMETRICS International Conference on Measurement and Modeling of Computer Systems (New York, NY, USA) 82–91. ACM, New York.
  • [6] Bonald, T., Massoulié, L., Proutière, A. and Virtamo, J. (2006). A queueing analysis of max-min fairness, proportional fairness and balanced fairness. Queueing Syst. 53 65–84.
  • [7] Bouman, N., Borst, S., van Leeuwaarden, J. and Proutière, A. (2011). Backlog-based random access in wireless networks: Fluid limits and delay issues. In 23rd International Teletraffic Congress (ITC), September 2011 39–46. IEEE Computer Society, San Francisco, CA.
  • [8] Bramson, M. (1996). Convergence to equilibria for fluid models of head-of-the-line proportional processor sharing queueing networks. Queueing Syst. 23 1–26.
  • [9] Bramson, M. (2008). Stability of queueing networks. Probab. Surv. 5 169–345.
  • [10] Dai, J. G. (1996). A fluid limit model criterion for instability of multiclass queueing networks. Ann. Appl. Probab. 6 751–757.
  • [11] Ethier, S. N. and Kurtz, T. G. (1986). Markov Processes: Characterization and Convergence. Wiley, New York.
  • [12] Freidlin, M. I. and Wentzell, A. D. (1984). Random Perturbations of Dynamical Systems, 2nd ed. Springer, New York. Translated from the Russian by Joseph Szücs.
  • [13] Ghaderi, J., Borst, S. and Whiting, P. (2012). Backlog-based random access in wireless networks: Fluid limits and instability issues. In 46th Annual Conference on Information Sciences and Systems (CISS), March 2012 1–6. IEEE Computer Society, Princeton, NC.
  • [14] Graham, C. and Robert, P. (2009). Interacting multi-class transmissions in large stochastic networks. Ann. Appl. Probab. 19 2334–2361.
  • [15] Has’minskiĭ, R. Z. (1980). Stochastic Stability of Differential Equations. Sijthoff & Noordhoff, Alphen aan den Rijn—Germantown, MD. Translated from the Russian by D. Louvish.
  • [16] Jeonghoon, M. and Walrand, J. (2000). Fair end-to-end window-based congestion control. IEEE Trans. Netw. 8 556–567.
  • [17] Kelly, F., Maulloo, A. and Tan, D. (1998). Rate control in communication networks: Shadow prices, proportional fairness and stability. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 49, 237–252.
  • [18] Kingman, J. F. C. (1965). The heavy traffic approximation in the theory of queues. (With discussion.) In Proc. Sympos. Congestion Theory (Chapel Hill, NC, 1964) 137–169. Univ. North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC.
  • [19] Kingman, J. F. C. (1970). Inequalities in the theory of queues. J. Roy. Statist. Soc. Ser. B 32 102–110.
  • [20] Malyshev, V. A. (1993). Networks and dynamical systems. Adv. in Appl. Probab. 25 140–175.
  • [21] Massoulié, L. and Roberts, J. (1999). Bandwidth sharing: Objectives and algorithms. In INFOCOM’99. Eighteenth Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies 1395–1403. IEEE Computer Society, New York.
  • [22] Metcalf, R. and Boggs, D. (1976). Ethernet: Distributed packet switching for local computer networks. Communications of the ACM 19 395–403.
  • [23] Papanicolaou, G. C., Stroock, D. and Varadhan, S. R. S. (1977). Martingale approach to some limit theorems. In Papers from the Duke Turbulence Conference (Duke Univ., Durham, NC, 1976), Paper No. 6, Duke Univ. Math. Ser., Vol. III ii+120 pp. Duke Univ., Durham, NC.
  • [24] Ramanan, K. and Reiman, M. I. (2003). Fluid and heavy traffic diffusion limits for a generalized processor sharing model. Ann. Appl. Probab. 13 100–139.
  • [25] Robert, P. (2003). Stochastic Networks and Queues, French ed. Stochastic Modelling and Applied Probability 52. Springer, Berlin.
  • [26] Rudin, W. (1987). Real and Complex Analysis, 3rd ed. McGraw-Hill, New York.
  • [27] Rybko, A. N. and Stolyar, A. L. (1992). On the ergodicity of random processes that describe the functioning of open queueing networks. Probl. Inf. Transm. 28 3–26.
  • [28] Shah, D. and Shin, J. (2012). Randomized scheduling algorithm for queueing networks. Ann. Appl. Probab. 22 128–171.
  • [29] Shah, D. and Wischik, D. (2012). Log-weight scheduling in switched networks. Queueing Syst. 71 97–136.
  • [30] Tassiulas, L. and Ephremides, A. (1992). Stability properties of constrained queueing systems and scheduling policies for maximum throughput in multihop radio networks. IEEE Trans. Automat. Control 37 1936–1948.
  • [31] Wischik, D. (2010). Queueing theory for switched networks. In ICMS Workshop on Stochastic Processes in Communication Networks for Young Researchers (Edinburgh), June 2010. Available at