IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2601.15103.html

Economic feasibility of virtual operators in 5G via network slicing

Author

Listed:
  • Erwin J. Sacoto-Cabrera
  • Luis Guijarro
  • Jose R. Vidal
  • Vicent Pla

Abstract

The provision of services by more than one operator over a common network infrastructure, as enabled by 5G network slicing, is analyzed. Two business models to be implemented by a network operator, who owns the network, and a virtual operator, who does not, are proposed. In one business model, named \emph{strategic}, the network operator provides service to its user base and the virtual operator provides service to its user base and pays a per-subscriber fee to the network operator. In the other business model, named \emph{monopolistic}, the network operator provides service to both user bases. The two proposals are analyzed by means of a model that captures both system and economic features. As regards the systems features, the slicing of the network is modeled by means of a Discriminatory Processor Sharing queue. As regards the economic features, the incentives are modeled by means of the user utilities and the operators' revenues; and game theory is used to model the strategic interaction between the users' subscription decision and the operators' pricing decision. In both business models, it is shown that the network operator can be provided with the appropriate economic incentives so that it acquiesces in serving the virtual operator's user base (monopolistic model) and in allowing the virtual operator to provide service over the network operator's infrastructure (strategic model). From the point of view of the users, the strategic model results in a higher subscription rate than the monopolistic model.

Suggested Citation

  • Erwin J. Sacoto-Cabrera & Luis Guijarro & Jose R. Vidal & Vicent Pla, 2026. "Economic feasibility of virtual operators in 5G via network slicing," Papers 2601.15103, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2601.15103
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2601.15103
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Naor, P, 1969. "The Regulation of Queue Size by Levying Tolls," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 37(1), pages 15-24, January.
    2. Gad Allon & Awi Federgruen, 2008. "Service Competition with General Queueing Facilities," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 56(4), pages 827-849, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Delgado-Alvarez, Carlos A. & van Ackere, Ann & Larsen, Erik R & Arango-Aramburo, Santiago, 2017. "Managing capacity at a service facility: An experimental approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 259(1), pages 216-228.
    2. Tianhu Deng & Ying‐Ju Chen & Zuo‐Jun Max Shen, 2015. "Optimal pricing and scheduling control of product shipping," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 62(3), pages 215-227, April.
    3. Nicos Savva & Tolga Tezcan & Özlem Yıldız, 2019. "Can Yardstick Competition Reduce Waiting Times?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(7), pages 3196-3215, July.
    4. Wang, Haiyan & Olsen, Tava Lennon & Liu, Guiqing, 2018. "Service capacity competition with peak arrivals and delay sensitive customers," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 80-95.
    5. De Munck, Thomas & Chevalier, Philippe & Tancrez, Jean-Sébastien, 2023. "Managing priorities on on-demand service platforms with waiting time differentiation," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 266(C).
    6. Sheng Zhu & Jinting Wang & Bin Liu, 2020. "Equilibrium joining strategies in the Mn/G/1 queue with server breakdowns and repairs," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 2163-2187, December.
    7. L D Smith & D C Sweeney & J F Campbell, 2009. "Simulation of alternative approaches to relieving congestion at locks in a river transportion system," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(4), pages 519-533, April.
    8. Refael Hassin, 2022. "Profit maximization and cost balancing in queueing systems," Queueing Systems: Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 100(3), pages 429-431, April.
    9. Balachandran, Kashi R. & Radhakrishnan, Suresh, 1996. "Cost of congestion, operational efficiency and management accounting," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 89(2), pages 237-245, March.
    10. Jalili Marand, Ata & Hoseinpour, Pooya, 2024. "A congested facility location problem with strategic customers," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 318(2), pages 442-456.
    11. Kyle Y. Lin, 2003. "Decentralized admission control of a queueing system: A game‐theoretic model," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(7), pages 702-718, October.
    12. Kyle Y. Lin & Sheldon M. Ross, 2003. "Admission Control with Incomplete Information of a Queueing System," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 51(4), pages 645-654, August.
    13. Fajardo, Val Andrei & Drekic, Steve, 2015. "Controlling the workload of M/G/1 queues via the q-policy," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 243(2), pages 607-617.
    14. Platz, Trine Tornøe & Østerdal, Lars Peter, 2017. "The curse of the first-in–first-out queue discipline," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 165-176.
    15. Eyster, Erik & Galeotti, Andrea & Kartik, Navin & Rabin, Matthew, 2014. "Congested observational learning," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 519-538.
    16. Vasiliki Kostami & Sampath Rajagopalan, 2014. "Speed–Quality Trade-Offs in a Dynamic Model," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 16(1), pages 104-118, February.
    17. Thomas Kittsteiner & Benny Moldovanu, 2005. "Priority Auctions and Queue Disciplines That Depend on Processing Time," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(2), pages 236-248, February.
    18. Qiuping Yu & Gad Allon & Achal Bassamboo & Seyed Iravani, 2018. "Managing Customer Expectations and Priorities in Service Systems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(8), pages 3942-3970, August.
    19. Parlakturk, Ali & Kumar, Sunil, 2004. "Self-Interested Routing in Queueing Networks," Research Papers 1782r, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    20. Youngsub Chun & Manipushpak Mitra & Suresh Mutuswami, 2017. "Reordering an existing queue," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 49(1), pages 65-87, June.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2601.15103. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.