Abstract

We consider two elementary (max-flow and uniform-flow) and two realistic (max-min fairness and proportional fairness) congestion control schemes, and analyse how the algorithms and network structure affect throughput, the fairness of flow allocation, and the location of bottleneck edges. The more realistic proportional fairness and max-min fairness algorithms have similar throughput, but path flow allocations are more unequal in scale-free than in random regular networks. Scale-free networks have lower throughput than their random regular counterparts in the uniform-flow algorithm, which is favoured in the complex networks literature. We show, however, that this relation is reversed on all other congestion control algorithms for a region of the parameter space given by the degree exponent γ and average degree 〈k〉. Moreover, the uniform-flow algorithm severely underestimates the network throughput of congested networks, and a rich phenomenology of path flow allocations is only present in the more realistic α-fair family of algorithms. Finally, we show that the number of paths passing through an edge characterises the location of a wide range of bottleneck edges in these algorithms. Such identification of bottlenecks could provide a bridge between the two fields of complex networks and congestion control.

Highlights

  • In other words: we expect that the price to pay for increasing equity is a decrease in throughput, such that the proportional fairness allocation is a trade-off between efficiency and fairness

  • The ring lattice illustrates the counter-intuitive phenomena of congestion collapse, as well as, in the presence of congestion control, the surprising converge of proportional fairness to max-flow as the ring size grows

  • We found that the proportional and max-min fairness algorithms generate similar throughput when results are averaged over the range of network parameters and benchmarked against the null model of random regular networks

Read more

Summary

Introduction

We show that the number of paths passing through an edge characterises the location of a wide range of bottleneck edges in these algorithms Such identification of bottlenecks could provide a bridge between the two fields of complex networks and congestion control. When transport becomes autonomous, we may need algorithms to ease traffic congestion[10, 11], and an understanding of the role of fairness, efficiency and network structure on such algorithms could improve the way society manages transportation These challenges revive the topic of congestion control and uncover a new range of problems of network design at the interface between physics, engineering and the social sciences[4, 8, 12,13,14,15]. While congestion control methods have been in operation in communication networks since the 1980s, the relative performance of these algorithms on large random networks remains elusive

Methods
Results
Conclusion

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.