Applied Probability Trust (18 August 2005)
EOQ ANALYSIS UNDER STOCHASTIC PRODUCTION AND DEMAND RATES
VIDYADHAR KULKARNI, ^{∗} UNCChapel Hill
KEQI YAN, ^{∗}^{∗} UNCChapel Hill
Abstract
In this paper we study a type of productioninventory system in which the
production and demand rates are modulated by a background state process
modeled as a ﬁnite state Continuous Time Markov Chain (CTMC). When the
production rate exceeds the demand rate, the inventory level increases, and
when the demand rate exceeds the production rate, it decreases. When the
inventory level reaches zero, an order is placed from an external supplier, and
it arrives instantaneously. We model this system as a bivariate Markovian
stochastic process and derive the limiting distribution of the inventory level.
Assuming linear holding costs and ﬁxed ordering costs, we show that the
classical deterministic Economic Order Quantity (EOQ) policy minimizes the
longrun average cost if one replaces the deterministic demand rate by the
expected demand  production rate in steady state. Finally, we extend the
model to allow backlogging. Keywords: inventory theory, CTMC, uniform distribution, optimal ordering
policy, EOQ AMS 2000 Subject Classiﬁcation: Primary 90B05
Secondary 60J25
1. Introduction
In this paper we study a productioninventory model operating in a stochastic environment that is modulated by a ﬁnite state CTMC. A production rate and a demand rate are associated with each state of the CTMC. The inventory on hand thus ﬂuctuates according to the state of the CTMC. Once the inventory level drops to 0 a
^{∗} Postal address: Department of Statistics and Operations Research, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA
1
2
V. Kulkarni and K. Yan
replenishment order of size q is placed. We assume that the lead time is zero, i.e., the replenishment order is delivered instantaneously, thus the inventory level jumps from 0 to q instantaneously. Figure 1 illustrates a sample path of the inventory level.
Figure 1: A sample path of the inventory level.
This model reﬂects situations in which the production and demand rates undergo recurring changes in a stochastic fashion. For instance, the demand rates can change seasonally; or, in a machine shop the production rate can change according to the number of working machines, etc. We assume the order size is q regardless of the state of the CTMC in which the inventory level hits zero. This is an appropriate model when we can base our inventory replenishment decisions only on the inventory level and not on the state of the CTMC. This may be because knowledge of the state of the background CTMC is unavailable, or to simplify the ordering policies. We shall study the ordering policies based on the state of the CTMC in a subsequent paper. The objective is to ﬁnd the replenishment order size q that minimizes the longrun average cost. The total cost includes costs to hold products in inventory, to purchase and to produce. There is also a ﬁxed setup cost every time an order is placed with an external supplier. To begin with, we assume backlogging is not allowed. (We treat the backlogging case in Section 6.) Since we assume zero lead time, it is optimal to place an order only when the inventory reaches zero. In this paper, we establish the stochastic EOQ theorem that shows the standard deterministic EOQ formula remains optimal if we replace deterministic demand rate by the expected net demand rate in steady state. In the literature, a large variety of inventory models is studied, although many of them are deterministic [13]. For stochastic models, ﬂuid models are widely used as one type of approximations [9]. There are several papers concerning ﬂuid models when
EOQ Analysis under Stochastic Production and Demand Rates
3
the production and demand rates depend on the inventory level [1]. As for the cases when the production and demand rates are determined by the system environmental state, Berman, Stadje, and Perry recently studied an EOQ model with a twostate random environment [2]. They consider order sizes that depend on the state of the environmental state and derived the EOQ policy to optimize the system revenue/cost. In the general nstate systems, Browne and Zipkin studied a model with continuous demand driven by a Markov process [3], which can be regarded as a special case of the model in this paper. Similarly, the clearing processes [11] can be regarded as the reverse of the inventory level process in a special case when the production rate is always less than or equal to the demand rate. In that case we show that the inventory level in steady state is uniformly distributed. However, the stationary distribution of the content in a clearing system has been proved to be uniform in [4] only under certain conditions. These conditions are too restrictive and are not satisﬁed by our model. In [11] and [12] the authors show that the limiting distribution of the content in a clearing system is almost never uniform. In this context our result about asymptotically uniform distribution is even more unexpected. The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In section 2, we describe the model mathematically. In Section 3 we derive a system of diﬀerential equations for the joint distribution function of the inventory level and environmental state in steady state and then solve the equations. We give explicit expressions for two special examples: one is when the production rate is always less than or equal to the demand rate for every state. The other is a twostate model and we consider two cases: when the production rate is less than or equal to the demand rate, or not. In section 4 we compute the longrun average cost. In section 5, we present the optimal order size q ^{∗} that minimizes this cost. We show the optimality of a stochastic version of the classical EOQ policy. Furthermore, in section 6 we extend the results to a more general case that allows backorders. We show that all the results for the limiting behaviors and expected costs hold in this new model, and the optimal policy is equivalent to the classical backlogging EOQ in deterministic models under certain conditions.
4
V. Kulkarni and K. Yan
2. The model
Consider a productioninventory system that is modulated by a stochastic process
We assume that {Z (t), t ≥ 0} is an
, n} with rate matrix Q = [q _{i}_{j} ]. When Z(t) is in state i,
the production occurs continuously at rate r _{i} , and there is a demand at rate d _{i} . The
irreducible CTMC on {1, 2,
{Z (t), t ≥ 0} on state space S = {1, 2,
, n}.
net production rate is thus R _{i} = r _{i} −d _{i} . Note that R _{i} may be negative or positive. Let
X(t) be the inventory level at time t. Then as long as Z(t) = i, {X(t), t ≥ 0} changes
at rate R _{i} . When X (t) reaches zero we place an order of size q > 0 from an external
supplier who delivers it instantaneously.
Let
π = [π _{1} , π _{2} , ··· , π _{n} ]
(2.1)
be the limiting distribution of the CTMC, i.e., it is the unique solution to
πQ = 0,
π · e = 1,
where e = [1,
the expected net input rate i=0 π _{i} R _{i} < 0. Let R = diag(R _{1} ,
n
, 1] ^{t} is an ndimensional column vector of ones. The system is stable if
, R _{n} ). Then the stability
condition can be written in matrix form as follows
πRe < 0.
(2.2)
We assume that this stability condition holds for the rest of this paper.
Next we consider costs to operate the system. The total cost consists of three parts:
holding cost, ordering cost, and production cost. We need the following notation to
describe the costs in subsequent sections:
h: cost to hold one item in inventory for one unit of time;
k: ﬁxed setup cost whenever an order is placed;
p _{1} : cost to purchase one item from the external supplier;
p _{2} : cost to produce one item.
We are interested in computing the optimal order size q ^{∗} that minimizes the longrun
total cost per unit of time. We ﬁrst need to compute the complementary cumulative
distribution function of the inventory level in steady state. We do this in the next
section.
EOQ Analysis under Stochastic Production and Demand Rates
5
3. Limiting behavior of the inventory level process
In this section we analyze the limiting distribution of the inventory level by a system
of diﬀerential equations and solve it with a group of boundary conditions.
3.1. Diﬀerential equations
Denote
G _{j} (t, x) := P {X(t) > x, Z(t) = j},
x ≥ 0, t ≥ 0, j ∈ S.
Assume the stability condition (2.2) thus the following limit exists:
G _{j} (x) := lim
_{t}_{→}_{∞} P {X(t) > x, Z(t) = j},
x ≥ 0, t ≥ 0, j ∈ S.
In this section we show how to compute G _{j} (x). The following theorem gives the
diﬀerential equations satisﬁed by
We use the notation
G(x) := (G _{1} (x),
G ^{} (x) := ^{d}^{G} _{d}_{x} ^{1} ^{(}^{x}^{)}
^{,}
,
,
G _{n} (x)) .
dG _{n} (x)
dx
.
Theorem 3.1. The limiting distribution G(x) satisﬁes
G ^{} (x)R = G(x)Q + β, 
x ≤ q, 
(3.1a) 
G ^{} (x)R = G(x)Q, 
x > q, 
(3.1b) 
where the row vector β is given by β := G ^{} (0)R. The boundary conditions are given by
G _{j} (q ^{+} ) = G _{j} (q ^{−} ),
G _{j} (0) = 0,
G(0)e = 1.
∀j : R _{j} = 0 
(3.2a) 
∀j : R _{j} > 0, 
(3.2b) 
(3.2c) 
Proof. The diﬀerential equations follow from the standard derivation of Chapman
Kolmogorov equations for Markov processes, and hence we omit the details. See [6].
The boundary condition (3.2b) holds because 1/G _{j} (0) can be seen to be the expected
time between two consecutive visits by the {(X (t), Z(t)), t ≥ 0} process to the state
(0, j). If R _{j} > 0, this mean time is inﬁnity. Hence G _{j} (0) = 0 when R _{j} > 0.
6
V. Kulkarni and K. Yan
The boundary condition G _{j} (q ^{+} ) = G _{j} (q ^{−} ) for all state j with R _{j}
= 0 is obvious
from the fact that there is no probability mass at (q, j) unless R _{j} = 0. If R _{j} = 0, it is
easy to show that the probability mass P {X = q, Z = j} satisﬁes
P {X = q, Z = j} ^{}
k
=j
q jk =
i:R _{i} <0
G _{i} (0)R _{i} .
Thus the boundary condition (3.2a) does not hold for state j if R _{j} = 0.
3.2. Solution to the diﬀerential equations
In this section we derive the solution to the diﬀerential equations given in Theorem
3.1. First consider the homogeneous equations G ^{} (x)R = G(x)Q. Let (λ, φ) be an
(eigenvalue, eigenvector) pair that solves
Let
φQ = λφR.
m = {i : R _{i} = 0}.
(3.3)
Then it is known that there are exactly m pairs (λ _{i} , φ _{i} ), 1 ≤ i ≤ m, that satisfy
Equation (3.3). Assume that they are distinct. Exactly one of the eigenvalues is zero,
and the eigenvector corresponding to this eigenvalue is π, the stationary vector of Q
[7]. Assume that λ _{1} = 0 and φ _{1} = π.
We need the following matrix notation
and
Λ
:= diag(λ _{1} , λ _{2} ,
Φ := ^{} φ ^{T} , φ ^{T} ,
1
2
, 
λ _{m} ), 
(3.4) 

, φ _{m} ^{T} ^{} ^{T} . 
(3.5) 
Lemma 3.1. The general solution to the homogeneous equations G ^{} (x)R = G(x)Q
is given by G(x) = ce ^{Λ}^{x} Φ, where c = (c _{1} , c _{2} ,
determined by boundary conditions.
, c _{m} ) is a constant row vector to be
Proof. See [7].
Now take into consideration the nonhomogeneous equations G ^{} (x)R = G(x)Q + β.
We have the following theorem.
EOQ Analysis under Stochastic Production and Demand Rates
7
Theorem 3.2. The solution to the diﬀerential equations in Theorem 3.1 is given by
G(x) = ce ^{Λ}^{x} Φ + sxπ + d, 
if x ≤ q, 
G(x) = ae ^{Λ}^{x} Φ, 
if x > q, 
where the m dimensional row vectors a, c, the n dimensional row vectors d and the
scalar s are the unique solution to the following system of linear equations:
cΛΦR + sπR + dQ
(ae ^{Λ}^{q} Φ − ce ^{Λ}^{q} Φ − sqπ − d)I _{R} _{=}_{0}
_{}
= 0,
= 0,
m
i=0
a _{i} = 0,
c _{i} λ _{i} φ _{i}_{j} + sπ _{j} = 0,
(cΦ + d)e = 1,
(3.6a) 

(3.6b) 

∀i : λ _{i} ≥ 0, 
(3.6c) 
∀j : R _{j} > 0, 
(3.6d) 
(3.6e) 
where a _{i} (c _{i} ) is the ith entry of the vector a (c), and I _{R} _{=}_{0} _{} is the modiﬁed identity
matrix that has 1 as its jth diagonal entry if R _{j} = 0, and 0 otherwise.
Proof. According to Lemma 3.1, the homogenous equations (3.1b) have solutions of
form G(x) = ce ^{Λ}^{x} Φ. It can be shown that the nonhomogeneous equations (3.1a) have
solutions of form
(3.7)
G(x) = ce ^{Λ}^{x} Φ + sxπ + d
if and only if sxπ + d is a particular solution to (3.1a). Thus, using sxπ + d into (3.1a),
we get
sπR 
= 
sxπQ + dQ + β 
= 
dQ + β. 
The last equation holds because πQ = 0.
Since
β 
= 
G ^{} (0)R 
= 
(cΛΦ + sπ)R, 
using β into (3.8) we obtain
sπR = dQ + (cΛΦ + sπ)R,
(3.8)
which can be rearranged to get Equation (3.6a).
8
V. Kulkarni and K. Yan
Suppose when x > q, G(x) has a solution of the form G(x) = ae ^{Λ}^{x} Φ, where a is
another constant vector.
The boundary condition in Equation (3.2a) reduces to
(ae ^{Λ}^{q} Φ)I _{R} _{} _{=}_{0} = (ce ^{Λ}^{q} Φ + sqπ + d)I _{R} _{=}_{0}
_{}
.
(3.9)
Rearranging (3.9) we get (3.6b).
Furthermore, boundedness of G(x) as x → ∞ implies Equation (3.6c). Equation
(3.6d) and (3.6e) follow directly from boundary conditions (3.2b) and (3.2c).
The total number of unknown coeﬃcients (a, c, s, d) is 2m + n + 1. Notice that
number of nontrivial equations in (3.6b) is m, and the sum of the number of nontrivial
equations in (3.6c) and (3.6d) is m [7]. Hence we have 2m + n + 1 nontrivial equations
to determine a unique solution for the unknown coeﬃcients.
3.3. Examples
Next we study some special cases in which the limiting distributions are interesting.
3.3.1. R ≤ 0 We consider a special case when the production rate never exceeds
the demand rate, and hence the inventory never increases between replenishments.
Without loss of generality assume that X(0) = q. Then it is clear that X(t) ∈ [0, q]
for all t ≥ 0. The next theorem gives the steadystate distribution of X(t).
Theorem 3.3. When R ≤ 0,
G(x) = (1 − ^{x} )π,
q
0 ≤ x ≤ q.
(3.10)
Proof. This is a special case of the model in section 3. The inventory level is always
in [0, q] thus the diﬀerential equations reduce to
G ^{} (x)R = G(x)Q + β, 
(3.11) 

where 

β 
= G ^{} (0)R, 

with boundary conditions: 

G(q) = 0 
(3.12a) 
G(0)e = 1.
(3.12b)
EOQ Analysis under Stochastic Production and Demand Rates
9
It is easy to verify that (3.10) is the solution to the diﬀerential equation system (3.11)
with boundary conditions (3.12a) and (3.12b).
Remark 1. Theorem 3.3 implies that in steady state, the inventory level is uniformly
distributed on [0, q], and is independent of Z. This is indeed an unusual and interesting
result. The fact that X is U (0, q) is consistent with the results in [3].
3.3.2. A twostate example Consider a machine shop with only one machine. The
production rate is r when the machine is up, and it fails after an exp(µ) amount of
time. When it is down, there is no production, and it takes exp(λ) amount of time to
ﬁx it. The demand occurs at a constant rate d
is up or down. When the inventory reaches zero, an external supply of amount q is
ordered and arrives instantaneously.
= r no matter whether the machine
This is a special case with the following parameters:
Q = _{}
−λ
µ
λ
−µ
,
R = _{}
−d
0
0
r − d
.
The matrices Λ (Equation 3.4), Φ (Equation 3.5) and π (Equation 2.1) are given by
where
Λ = _{} 0
0
0
θ
,
Φ =
µ
r − d
λ
d
,
_{θ} _{=} λ(d − r) + dµ d − r
is the only nonzero eigenvalue.
π
=
=
(π _{1} , π _{2} )
µ
λ+µ ^{,}
λ+µ ^{,}
λ
The stability condition of Equation (2.2) reduces to
λ(r − d) − µd < 0.
Note that θ < 0 if the system is stable. We consider two cases.
Case 1: r > d. In this case, when the machine is up the production rate is greater
than the demand rate. Thus the inventory level hits zero only when the machine is
10
V. Kulkarni and K. Yan
down. We give explicit expressions for the limiting distributions.
π _{1} (e ^{θ}^{x} − ^{1} _{q} e ^{θ}^{(}^{x}^{−}^{q}^{)} )
1
G _{d}_{o}_{w}_{n} (x) =
π _{1} (r−d)
_{θ}
qθd
e
^{θ}^{x}
− π _{1} x + ^{π} ^{1} (1 −
q
r−d
λ+µ ^{−} rπ ^{2}
θd
)
x > q,
0 ≤ x ≤ q,
G _{u}_{p} (x)
=
π _{1} (e ^{θ}^{x}
_{q}_{θ} e ^{θ}^{x} − π _{2} x + ^{π} ^{1}
r−d
θd
π
1
^{1} _{q} _{e} ^{θ}^{(}^{x}^{−}^{q}^{)} _{)}
q
(
π
π
1 2 ^{+}
_{−}
r−d
λ+µ ^{−} rπ ^{1}
θd
x > q, 

) 
0 ≤ x ≤ q. 
Case 2: r < d. In this case the inventory level can hit zero when the machine is either
up or down. This is a special case of the model in section 3.3.1. The solution is given
by
G _{d}_{o}_{w}_{n} (x) =
G _{u}_{p} (x)
=
1
^{−}
^{1}
_{q} ^{x}
1 − ^{1} _{q} x
µ
_{λ} _{+} _{µ} ^{,}
λ
_{λ} _{+} _{µ} ,
0 ≤ x ≤ q,
0 ≤ x ≤ q.
4. Cost rate calculations
In this section we consider the costs to operate the above system and calculate the
longrun average cost per unit of time.
Let c _{h} (q), c _{o} (q) and c _{p} (q) be the steadystate holding, ordering and production cost
rates respectively as functions of the order quantity q. The total cost rate c(q) is hence
given by
c(q) = c _{h} (q) + c _{o} (q) + c _{p} (q).
(4.1)
The next theorem shows how to compute these cost rates in terms of the limiting
distribution G(x). Let
and
˜
R
:= diag(r _{1} , r _{2} ,
,
˜
1
Λ = diag(0, _{λ} 2 , ··· ,
r _{n} ),
1
λ
n
).
Theorem 4.1. The steadystate cost rates are given by
s
c _{h} (q) = h (c − a) Λe ^{Λ}^{q} Φ + _{2} πq ^{2} + (d + c _{1} π)q − c ΛΦ e,
˜
˜
c _{o} (q) = (k + p _{1} q)(cΛΦ + sπ)Re,
˜
c _{p} (q) = p _{2} (cΦ + d) Re.
EOQ Analysis under Stochastic Production and Demand Rates
Proof. (1) Holding cost rate.
c _{h} (q) =h ^{}
i
∞
x=0 G _{i} (x)dx
=h x=0 (ce ^{Λ}^{x} Φ + sπx + d)dx + x=q ae ^{Λ}^{x} Φdx e
q
∞
=h (c − a) Λe ^{Λ}^{q} Φ + _{2} πq ^{2} + (d + c _{1} π)q − c ΛΦ e.
˜
s
˜
11
(2) Ordering cost. First consider the number of jumps of the inventory level from 0 to
q during a small time interval (t, t + δ). Notice that when the {Z(t), t ≥ 0} process is
in a state i with negative R _{i} and X(t) < −R _{i} δ, the number of jumps is 1; otherwise,
it is zero. Thus we have
Hence
E( number of jumps in[t, t + δ])
=
^{} P{X(t) ≤ −R _{i} δ, Z(t) = i}
i
= ^{} (G _{i} (0) − G _{i} (−R _{i} δ)).
i
lim _{δ}_{→}_{0} ^{1} _{δ} E( number of jumps in[t, t + δ])
t→∞
lim
=
=
^{} lim
i
δ→0
G _{i} (0)−G _{i} (−R _{i} δ)
δ
^{} R _{i} G _{i} (0)
i
= G ^{} (0)Re.
Thus the ordering cost rate is
c _{o} (q)
=
=
= (k + p _{1} q)(cΛΦ + sπ)Re.
(k + p _{1} q) lim _{δ}_{→}_{0} ^{1} _{δ} E( number of jumps in[t, t + δ])
(k + p _{1} q)G ^{} (0)Re
t→∞ ^{l}^{i}^{m}
(3) Production cost rate. In steady state, the probability that the environmental
process is in state i is given by G _{i} (0). The production cost rate is p _{2} r _{i} when the
environmental process is in state i. Thus the production cost rate is given by
c _{p} (q)
=
i∈S p _{2} r _{i} G _{i} (0)
˜
= p _{2} G(0) Re
= p _{2} (cΦ + d) Re.
˜
5. Optimal order size
In this section, we demonstrate the primary result of this paper. We use sample
path method to show that the total cost rate c(q) is a convex function of q and that the
12
V. Kulkarni and K. Yan
equivalent of the classical deterministic EOQ formula remains optimal in this stochastic
environment. In order to prove this, we decompose the {X (t), t ≥ 0} process into two
components. Let S _{0} = 0, X(0) = q and S _{i} be the ith order point (i ≥ 1). Deﬁne
and
X _{1} (t) =
_{≤}_{u}_{≤}_{t} {X(u)}, S _{n} ≤ t < S _{n}_{+}_{1}
min
S n
X _{2} (t) = X(t) − X _{1} (t).
Figure 2 illustrates the sample paths of the original {X(t), t ≥ 0} process and the
resulting two processes {X _{1} (t), t ≥ 0} and {X _{2} (t), t ≥ 0}.
Figure 2: Decomposition of the X(t) process.
The following two lemmas state some important properties of these component
processes {X _{1} (t), t ≥ 0} and {X _{2} (t), t ≥ 0}. They are proved in appendices.
EOQ Analysis under Stochastic Production and Demand Rates
13
Lemma 5.1. The process {X _{2} (t), t ≥ 0} is independent of q.
Lemma 5.2. The limiting distribution of the process {X _{1} (t), t ≥ 0} is uniform over
[0, q].
Now with these two lammas, we are ready to give the main result of this section.
Theorem 5.1. Let ∆ be the expected net demand rate (i.e., demand rate production
rate) in steady state, given by
∆
= − ^{} π _{i} R _{i} .
i
(5.1)
Suppose ∆ > 0. Then the optimal order size q ^{∗} that minimizes the total cost rate c(q)
is given by
(5.2)
_{q} _{∗} _{=} ^{} 2k∆
h
.
Proof. From Equation 4.1 the total cost rate is given by
c(q) = c _{h} (q) + c _{o} (q) + c _{p} (q)
^{k} ^{+} ^{p} ^{1} ^{q}
= hE(X) +
E(S _{i} −
_{S} i−1 _{)} + c _{p} (q).
First we calculate c _{h} (q).
c _{h} (q) = hE(X)
= h(E(X _{1} ) + E(X _{2} )).
According to Lemma 5.2, {X _{1} (t), t ≥ 0} is uniformly distributed on [0, q] in steady
state. Thus E(X _{1} ) = ^{q} . Also, according to Lemma 5.1, we know that {X _{2} (t), t ≥ 0} is
2
independent of q. Since we have assumed the stability of {X (t), t ≥ 0}, it is clear that
{X _{2} (t), t ≥ 0} has a limiting distribution and it is independent of q. Hence E(X _{2} ) is
independent of q.
Next we calculate c _{o} (q). From the results on renewal reward processes we get
c _{o} (q) =
^{k} ^{+} ^{p} ^{1} ^{q}
E _{i} (S _{i} − S _{i}_{−}_{1} ) ^{.}
In steady state, the average net demand during a cycle time (S _{i} , S _{i}_{−}_{1} ) has to be equal
to the amount of the external supply. Hence we have
E _{i} (S _{i} − S _{i}_{−}_{1} )∆ = q.
14
Thus
_{c} o _{(}_{q}_{)} _{=} (k + p _{1} q)∆
q
_{=} k∆
q
+ p _{1} ∆.
Since c _{p} (q) = p _{i} ^{} π _{i} r _{i} , it is independent of q.
Thus the total cost rate is
c(q) = ^{h}^{q}
2
_{+} k∆
q
+ C,
V. Kulkarni and K. Yan
where C = hE(X _{2} )+p _{1} ∆+c _{p} (q) is independent of q. Clearly, C(q) is a convex function
of q, and it is minimized at q ^{∗} given by 5.2.
Remark 2. The optimal order quantity q ^{∗} of Equation (5.2) is the classical EOQ
formula with the deterministic demand rate replaced by the steadystate expected net
demand rate.
A machine shop example. Consider a machine shop that has n independent and
identical machines, each behaving as described in section 3.3.2. Each machine has its
own repair person. Let Z(t) be the number of working machines at time t. Thus the
, n}. Suppose the demand rate is
directly proportional to the number of machines. Thus we have d _{i} = n and r _{i} = i · r for
all i ∈ S, where r is the production rate of one working machine. Next we investigate
the eﬀect of the production rate increases on the optimal order size q ^{∗} . Consider a
system with λ = 1, µ = 2, h = 10, k = 2, p _{1} = 8 and p _{2} = 5. We plot the optimal
CTMC {Z(t), t ≥ 0} has n+1 states, i.e., S = {0, 1,
values of q ^{∗} in Figure 3 for 1 ≤ n ≤ 5 and r varying in (0, 3).
EOQ Analysis under Stochastic Production and Demand Rates
15
Figure 3: The optimal order size against production rate.
Note that for a ﬁxed n, q ^{∗} decreases with r. This makes intuitive sense because as the production increases the net demand rate decreases. Note that q ^{∗} reaches zero when
r increases to 3. This is because the system is unstable for r ≥ 3 and hence we do not
need to order from the external supplier. Finally, for a ﬁxed r, q ^{∗} increases with n,
but sublinearly. This is a consequence of the pooling eﬀect of the production from the
n machines.
6. Backlogging systems
In the previous sections we considered a model where we place an order as soon as the inventory level hits zero. In reality, many businesses do operate with substantial backlogs. In this section we consider the same system as in section 2, but allow backlogging. Let X(t) be the net inventory level at time t. (i.e., the inventory on hand at time t  backorders at time t). We always use any inventory on hand to ﬁll demands; backorders accumulate only when we run of of stock entirely. Thus if X (t) is positive, it represents the amount of inventory on hand. If it is negative, it represents the negative of the amount of backorders at time t. We consider a policy under which we place an order of size q when the amount of backorders accumulates to a predetermined level l > 0. Clearly an optimal policy should have q > l and hence the net inventory level is in
16
V. Kulkarni and K. Yan
(−l, ∞). Figure 4 illustrates a typical sample path of the {X(t), t ≥ 0} process.
Figure 4: The inventory level process when allowing backlogging.
Note that under this policy, the stability condition is the same as in (2.2).
Let
H _{j} (x) = lim
_{t}_{→}_{∞} P (X(t) > x, Z(t) = j).
The next theorem shows how to compute H(x) = [H _{1} (x), H _{2} (x),
, H _{n} (x)].
Theorem 6.1. Let G(x)(x ≥ 0) be as in Theorem 3.2. Thus
H(x) = G(x + l),
x ≥ −l.
Proof. Follows from the fact that the sample path of the inventory level process
with backorder level l is identical to that without the backorder shifted down by l.
Now suppose it costs b to backlog one unit of demand for one unit of time. Let
c _{b} (q, l), c _{h} (q, l), c _{o} (q, l) and c _{p} (q, l) be the steady state backlogging, holding, ordering
and producing cost rates respectively as functions of the order quantity q and reorder
level l. The total cost rate c(q, l) is thus given by
c(q, l) = c _{b} (q, l) + c _{h} (q, l) + c _{o} (q, l) + c _{p} (q, l).
The next theorem shows how to compute the cost rates.
Theorem 6.2. The steadystate cost rates are given by
c _{b} (q, l) = b c Λ(I − e ^{Λ}^{(}^{−}^{l}^{)} )Φ −
˜
s
_{2} πl ^{2} + (d + c _{1} π)l e,
c _{h} (q, l) = h (c Λ − a
˜
_{Λ}_{)}_{e} Λ(q−l) _{Φ} _{−} ^{s}
˜
_{2} π(q − l) ^{2} + (d + c _{1} π)(q − l) − c ΛΦ e,
˜
c _{o} (q, 
l) = (k + p _{1} q)(cΛΦ + sπ)Re, 
c _{p} (q, 
l) = p _{2} (cΦ + d)Re, 
EOQ Analysis under Stochastic Production and Demand Rates
17
where a, c, s and d are the coeﬃcients in the expression of H(x) corresponding to
Theorem 3.2.
Proof. Follow the same steps in the proof of Theorem 4.1.
The next theorem gives the stochastic version of the EOQ formula with backloggings.
Theorem 6.3. Let ∆ be as in Equation (5.1), ∆ > 0. Then the optimal order size q ^{∗}
and reorder position l ^{∗} are given by
_{q} _{∗} _{=} ^{} 2k(b + h)∆ hb
l ^{∗} = _{b} _{+} _{h} q ^{∗} .
h
(6.1)
(6.2)
Proof. Follow the same analysis as in Theorem 5.1.
In particular, when R ≤ 0, {X(t), t ≥ 0} has uniform distribution on (−l, q − l) in
steady state, and is independent of Z, thus
H(x) = ^{q} ^{−} ^{l} ^{−} ^{x} π,
q
−l ≤ x ≤ q − l,
and the longrun average cost is
c(q, l)
= ^{(}^{b} ^{+} ^{h}^{)}^{l} ^{2}
_{+} hq
2q
2
− hl π − ^{k} πR − p _{1} πR + p _{2} π R e.
q
˜
This is consistent with the results in deterministic models [13].
7. Conclusion and future work
We have studied a type of inventory models with or without backlogging having
production and demand rates modulated by a background stochastic process. External
replenishment orders are placed at appropriate times and arrive instantaneously. In
this paper we have modeled this system as a bivariate Markovian stochastic process
and derived the limiting distribution of the inventory level. We have established a
stochastic EOQ theorem that shows the optimality of the classical EOQ policy in this
stochastic environment.
We can study three extensions of this system. In the current analysis, the order size
is not allowed to depend on the state of the CTMC when the inventory level hits zero.
18
V. Kulkarni and K. Yan
Clearly, if that information is available, it would lower the costs if the order size can be made dependent on that information. Berman, Stadje, and Perry have studied such a two state system [2]. However, more work on deriving the optimal scenario in more general systems is needed. Secondly, in this paper we have assumed zero lead times. This assumption is reasonable when lead times are short enough to be neglected. It would be interesting to study this system with nonzero lead times. We feel that iid exponential lead times may lead to tractable analysis. Clearly, the results of this paper remain valid if the background process is a semi Markov process with Phasetype distributions [10]. This can be shown by constructing an appropriate larger CTMC. Since Phasetype distributions are dense in the set of all continuous distributions on [0, ∞), it follows that the results hold for a semiMarkov background process with continuous sojourn times. We believe that the results hold for more general semiMarkov processes as long as the sample paths of the {X(t), t ≥ 0} process are not periodic with probability one. Rigorous proof of this remains to be shown.
Appendix A. Proof of lemma 5.1
Proof.
Let S _{+} and S _{−} be two subsets of S deﬁned as S _{+} = {i ∈ S : R _{i} ≥ 0}, and
S _{−} = {i ∈ S : R _{i} < 0}. Assume that Z(0) ∈ S _{−} and deﬁne
T _{1} = min{t ≥ 0 : Z(t) ∈ S _{+} }.
Regardless of the value of q, X(t) always decreases over (0, T _{1} ), except for possible
jumps of size q when it hits zero. Thus X _{2} (t) is zero over (0, T _{1} ). T _{1} is independent of
q and hence {X _{2} (t), t ∈ [0, T _{1} )} is independent of q. Now deﬁne
T _{2} = min{t > T _{1} : X(t) = X(T _{1} )}.
Note that T _{2} is also independent of q, X _{2} (T _{1} ) = X _{2} (T _{2} ) = 0 and X _{2} (t) > 0 for
t ∈ (T _{1} , T _{2} ). The sample path of {X(t), t ∈ (T _{1} , T _{2} )} is independent of q, since X(t)
never reaches 0 for any t ∈ (T _{1} , T _{2} ). Thus the sample path of {X _{2} (t), t ∈ (T _{1} , T _{2} )} is independent of q.
EOQ Analysis under Stochastic Production and Demand Rates
Deﬁne
19
T _{2}_{n}_{+}_{1} = min{t ≥ T _{2}_{n} : Z(t) ∈ S _{+} },
and
T _{2}_{n}_{+}_{2} = min{t ≥ T _{2}_{n}_{+}_{1} : X(t) = X(T _{2}_{n}_{+}_{1} )}.
Since {X _{2} (t), t ≥ 0} goes through these two cycles alternately over (T _{2}_{n} , T _{2}_{n}_{+}_{1} ) and
(T _{2}_{n}_{+}_{1} , T _{2}_{n}_{+}_{2} ) independently, it is clear that {X _{2} (t), t ≥ 0} is independent of q.
Appendix B. Proof of lemma 5.2
Proof. First note that the sample paths of {X _{1} (t), t ≥ 0} have right derivative
everywhere. Deﬁne I(t) = 0 if the right derivative of X _{1} (t) is strictly negative at t,
and I(t) = 1 if the right derivative of X _{1} (t) is zero at t. Now
_{t}_{→}_{∞} P(X _{1} (t) ≤ x)
lim
_{t}_{→}_{∞} P(X _{1} (t) ≤ x)I(t) = 0)P (I(t) = 0) + lim
= lim
_{t}_{→}_{∞} P(X _{1} (t) ≤ x)I(t) = 1)P (I(t) = 1).
(B.1)
Next we will show that
_{t}_{→}_{∞} P(X _{1} (t) ≤ xI(t) = ζ) = x/q,
lim
ζ ∈ {0, 1}.
(B.2)
First we construct two new processes {Y _{0} (t), t ≥ 0} and {Z _{0} (t), t ≥ 0} by eliminating
the segments of the sample paths of {X _{1} (t), t ≥ 0} and {Z(t), t ≥ 0} over the time
intervals (T _{2}_{n}_{+}_{1} , T _{2}_{n}_{+}_{2} ] for all n ≥ 0. The sample paths of the {Y _{0} (t), t ≥ 0} and
{Z _{0} (t), t ≥ 0} processes corresponding to the sample paths of {X _{1} (t), t ≥ 0} and
{Z(t), t ≥ 0} are shown in Figure 5. From Figure 5 we can see that {Y _{0} , t ≥ 0} can be
thought of as a ﬂuid model modulated by the stochastic process {Z _{0} (t), t ≥ 0} with
state space S _{−} . It can be seen that {Z _{0} (t), t ≥ 0} is a CTMC with generator matrix
ˆ
Q = [ˆq _{i}_{j} ], (i, j ∈ S _{−} ) given by
where
qˆ _{i}_{j} = q _{i}_{j} + ^{} q _{i}_{k} η _{k}_{j} ,
k∈S _{+}
η _{k}_{j} = P(Z(T _{2}_{n}_{+}_{2} ) = jZ(T _{2}_{n}_{+}_{1} ) = k),
i, j ∈ S _{−} ,
k
∈ S _{+} , j ∈ S _{−} .
20
V. Kulkarni and K. Yan
Figure 5: Correspondence of the processes X(t), Z(t), X _{1} (t), Y _{0} (t) and Z _{0} (t).
EOQ Analysis under Stochastic Production and Demand Rates
21
Thus the {(Y _{0} (t), Z _{0} (t)), t ≥ 0} process satisﬁes the hypothesis of Theorem 3.3. Hence
it follows that
(B.3)
_{t}_{→}_{∞} P(Y _{0} (t) ≤ x, Z _{0} (t) = i) = ^{x} πˆ _{i} ,
lim
q
ˆ
where πˆ _{i} is the limiting distribution of the CTMC with generator matrix Q. However,
our construction of the Y _{0} process implies that
_{t}_{→}_{∞} P(Y _{0} (t) ≤ x, Z _{0} (t) = i) =
lim
t
_{→}_{∞} P(X _{1} (t) ≤ xI(t) = 0).
lim
This proves Equation (B.2) for ζ = 0.
Now for ζ = 1, we deﬁne Y _{1}_{,}_{n} = X _{1} (T _{2}_{n}_{+}_{1} ) and Z _{1}_{,}_{n} = Z(T _{2}_{n}_{+}_{1} ), for n ≥ 0.
Now construct a semiMarkov process (SMP) {(Z _{1} (t), Y _{1} (t)), t ≥ 0} with embedded
DTMC {(Z _{1}_{,}_{n} , Y _{1}_{,}_{n} ), n ≥ 0}, so that the nth sojourn time of this SMP is given by
T _{2}_{n}_{+}_{2} −T _{2}_{n}_{+}_{1} . Clearly the sample path of {Y _{1} (t), t ≥ 0} is identical to the one obtained
by eliminating the segments of the sample path of {X _{1} (t), t ≥ 0} over the intervals
(T _{2}_{n} , T _{2}_{n}_{+}_{1} ] for all n ≥ 0. Figure 6 illustrates the sample paths of the {Y _{1} (t), t ≥ 0}
and {Z _{1} (t), t ≥ 0} processes corresponding to the sample paths of {X _{1} (
Bien plus que des documents.
Découvrez tout ce que Scribd a à offrir, dont les livres et les livres audio des principaux éditeurs.
Annulez à tout moment.