### Table 1: Admission Control Algorithms

### Table 1. Admission control algorithms for multiprocessors

1998

"... In PAGE 6: ... This is because when the number of processors is large, the bin packing algorithm has more freedom to assign compatible tasks to the same processor. The algorithms compared are shown in Table1 . For high loads, the best processor utilization is obtained by EXACT- MP with a FirstFit bin-packing (97%), closely followed by R-BOUND-MP (96%).... In PAGE 6: ...Table 1. Admission control algorithms for multiprocessors Table1 also shows the complexity of the algorithms from the previous section, where m is the number of tasks, p the number of processors and N = Pm i=1bTm Ti c. R-BOUND- MP has a complexity of O(m(p + log m)) explained as fol- lows.... ..."

Cited by 19

### Table 1. Admission control algorithms for multiprocessors

"... In PAGE 6: ... This is because when the number of processors is large, the bin packing algorithm has more freedom to assign compatible tasks to the same processor. The algorithms compared are shown in Table1 . For high loads, the best processor utilization is obtained by EXACT- MP with a FirstFit bin-packing (97%), closely followed by R-BOUND-MP (96%).... In PAGE 6: ...Table 1. Admission control algorithms for multiprocessors Table1 also shows the complexity of the algorithms from the previous section, where m is the number of tasks, p the number of processors and N = P m i=1 b T m T i c. R-BOUND- MP has a complexity of O#28m#28p + log m#29#29 explained as fol- lows.... ..."

### Table 1: Comparison of related admission control algorithms.

### Table 2 Mean of job waiting times for all experiments in Problem 1 Scheduling No admission control No admission control Admission control

"... In PAGE 9: ... Tables 2 and 3 give the mean and variance values of the job waiting times. Table2 shows the mean job waiting times under all scheduling methods for each of the systems and arrival conditions, while Table 3 shows the variance of the job waiting times.... ..."

### Table 1. RMS admission control algorithms used in this paper

"... In PAGE 6: ...It is worth noting that all the RMS feasibility tests discussed above, except for TDA, are inexact in the sense that they provide a sufficient but not necessary condition for feasibility. Table1 summarizes the task set parameters used by each feasibility test as well as its computational complexity on one processor, as a function of the number of tasks n. 4.... In PAGE 8: ... To investigate the effect of admission control and speed assignment schemes, we adopted the following methodology. Since it is not reasonable to compare techniques resulting from all possible combinations, we matched each of the admission control schemes presented in Table1 with one speed assignment technique. Specifically, all utilization-based approaches of Table 1 (namely, ELL, HYP, BURC, and R- BOUND) are matched with the uniform-slowdown technique.... In PAGE 8: ... Since it is not reasonable to compare techniques resulting from all possible combinations, we matched each of the admission control schemes presented in Table 1 with one speed assignment technique. Specifically, all utilization-based approaches of Table1 (namely, ELL, HYP, BURC, and R- BOUND) are matched with the uniform-slowdown technique. Pillai-Shin slow-down technique uses its own polynomial-time feasibility test (PS) as proposed in [31].... ..."

### Table 1: The time-dependent admission control algorithm.

### Table 1 Admissibility Region Test

"... In PAGE 8: ... We can see that, for the throughput guarantee of R = 100Kbps, the maximum number of stations that our admission control algorithm can accept is nmax = 16. Simulation results conflrm that the throughput received by each station, simu TH, for this value of n is greater than 100Kbps (see also in Table1 ). We obtain similar results for R = 200Kbps; in this case, the maximum number of stations that can be accepted is nmax = 8.... In PAGE 8: ... Otherwise, it means that our goal of maximizing the admissibility region is achieved. Table1 shows the results corresponding to R = 100Kbps and R = 200Kbps (simu TH refers to the simulated throughput obtained with the CW values given by our algorithm, simu THmax to the maximum simulated throughput obtained from simulating all possible CW values, and anal TH to the analytical throughput calculated according to Eq. (12) with the CW values given by our algorithm).... ..."

### Table 1. Host Based vs. Network Based Endpoint Admission Control

"... In PAGE 2: ... The ingress router then keeps track of the resources available downstream up to the destination. For a quick reference, Table1 compares the host-based and network-based end- point admission control systems. The rest of the paper is organized as follows.... ..."

### Table 1. Host Based vs. Network Based Endpoint Admission Control

"... In PAGE 2: ... The ingress router then keeps track of the resources available downstream up to the destination. For a quick reference, Table1 compares the host-based and network-based end- point admission control systems. The rest of the paper is organized as follows.... ..."