The curse of the first-in-first-out queue discipline
We consider a congested facility where agents can line up at any time they wish after the facility opens (like airplane boarding, or drivers leaving stadium parking lots after a sports event). We show that in Nash equilibrium, within the general family of stochastic queue disciplines with no capacity waste, the focal first-in-first-out (FIFO) queue discipline is the worst while the last-in-first-out (LIFO) discipline is best.
|Date of creation:||23 May 2012|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Department of Business and Economics, University of Southern Denmark, Campusvej 55, DK-5230 Odense M, Denmark|
Phone: 65 50 32 33
Fax: 65 50 32 37
Web page: http://www.sdu.dk/ivoe
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- de Palma, André & Fosgerau, Mogens, 2013.
"Random queues and risk averse users,"
European Journal of Operational Research,
Elsevier, vol. 230(2), pages 313-320.
- De Palma, André & Fosgerau, Mogens, 2010. "Random queues and risk averse users," MPRA Paper 24215, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Glazer, Amihai & Hassin, Refael, 1983. "?/M/1: On the equilibrium distribution of customer arrivals," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 146-150, June.
- Vickrey, William S, 1969. "Congestion Theory and Transport Investment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(2), pages 251-260, May. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)