(IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications,

Vol. 13, No. 4, 2022

A New Combination Approach to CPU Scheduling

based on Priority and Round-Robin Algorithms for
Assigning a Priority to a Process and Eliminating
Starvation
Hussain Mohammad Abu-Dalbouh
Department of Computer Science, College of Science and Arts, Qassim University, Unaizah, Saudi Arabia

Abstract—The main purpose of an operating system is to In a multitasking context, CPU scheduling is a critical duty
control a group of processes, through a method known as CPU for an operating system. A ready queue is maintained when
scheduling. The performance and efficiency of multitasking more than one procedure needs to be executed. In a two-
operating systems are determined by the use of a CPU scheduling processor system, each processor has its own ready queue. The
algorithm. Round-robin scheduling is the best solution for time- operating system chooses a process from a list of those in the
shared systems, but it is not ideal for real-time systems as it ready queue, and assigns the CPU to it based on an algorithm
causes more context shifts, longer wait times, and slower [6], [7]. To ensure fairness and avoid hunger while allocating
turnaround times. Its performance is mostly determined by the CPU to processes, close attention is essential. When making
time quantum. Processes cannot have priorities set for them.
scheduling decisions, the aim is to keep the average waiting
Round-robin scheduling does not give more critical work greater
consideration, which may affect system performance in solving
time, average turnaround time, and number of context flips as
processes. On the other hand, a priority algorithm can resolve low as possible.
processes' priority levels. This means that each process has a The operating system is in charge of managing the
priority assigned to it, and processes with highest priority are computer's hardware and software resources, as well as
executed first. If which process should come first and the process performing many functions. Processor scheduling is regarded
waiting time in CPU are not considered, this can cause a as a fundamental task. All resources are scheduled before they
starvation problem. In this paper, a new CPU scheduling
are used, so they are available to processes when they are
algorithm called the mix PI-RR algorithm was developed. The
needed and at a new stage in the process life cycle [8], [9]. A
proposed algorithm is based on a combination of round-robin
(RR) and priority-based (PI) scheduling algorithms for
short-term scheduler (STS) [10] selects a process from the
determining which tasks run and which should be waiting. The ready queue for implementation, and scheduling is the essential
disadvantages of both round-robin and priority CPU scheduling function of the operating system in a computer system. These
algorithms are addressed by this novel algorithm. When using algorithms are used to schedule tasks in the CPU; each one
the proposed mix PI-RR algorithm, the performance measures outperforms the others in some performance metrics, and has
indicated improved CPU scheduling. Other processes should not its own set of benefits and drawbacks [11].
be affected by the CPU's requirements. This algorithm helps the
The job of a CPU scheduler is to select a process from a
CPU to overcome some of the problems of both algorithms.
memory list of ready-to-run processes. In the following
Keywords—Average turnaround time; average waiting time; situations, the CPU scheduling choice for a scheduler must be
utilization; performance measures; operating system; process made:

I. INTRODUCTION  Switch a process from running to ready state.

People can shop, learn, arrange appointments, play games,  Switch a process from waiting to ready state.
and more due to technological advancements such as mobile  Send a process to terminate state.
phones and computers. Because humans are typically unable to
utilize and maintain these devices due to their complexity, The success of the scheduler is decided by an algorithm.
operating systems have emerged to address these issues [1], High-quality CPU scheduling algorithms rely on maximize
[2]. They are best described as a link between the user and the usage rate, throughput, turnaround time, waiting time, and
computer hardware that makes managing and controlling the response time. In multi-processing systems, the user executes
computer system easier. Both the user and the system benefit multiple applications at the same time, each of which contains
from the services provided by operating systems [3]. On the multiple processes that require the CPU to complete its
user side, they provide user interfaces and assist in the responsibilities, but only one process can acquire the CPU at a
implementation of programs, file management, and time. As a result, CPU scheduling is required, which allows
information exchange with other computers, while on the one function to use the CPU while another waits for other
system side, they allow multiple users to share resources and resources, improving management reliability and efficiency
protect system resources [4], [5]. [12]. One of the most significant components of the device is

541 | P a g e
[Link]
 (IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications,
Vol. 13, No. 4, 2022

the CPU. Because most operations rely on it, we must The researchers presented the Enhanced Round-Robin
maximize its usage and throughput, while reducing turnaround (ERR) algorithm in [20], which aims to increase CPU
time, waiting time, and response time. CPU scheduling performance by reducing the average waiting time and
techniques, which control how processes enter the CPU, can turnaround time. In three separate scenarios, the suggested
meet all of these requirements [13]. There are numerous algorithm was compared to the RR and IRR algorithms. The
scheduling algorithms, each of which is implemented in a findings revealed that this approach performed better by
unique way. The FCFS algorithm, for example, assigns the reducing the average WT and average TAT.
CPU to the first person who arrives. The SJF algorithm
allocates the CPU to the shortest task. The round-robin The researchers suggested the Modified Priority
algorithm assigns a time quantum to each process, calculates Preemptive Scheduling Technique as a novel CPU scheduling
its working time in the CPU, then leaves the process and algorithm in [21]. Priority pre-scheduling is implemented in a
permits another to run. According to their priority, the priority cyclical manner by the algorithm. The results indicated that the
algorithm [8] determines which processes are allowed to access novel technique handled the starving problem, while also
the CPU. Many issues might arise during the execution of improving the speed of the standard preemptive algorithm.
scheduling algorithms [14]. In [22], the researchers proposed an approach for managing
This paper proposes a mix priority and round-robin loads and prioritizing selection of tasks.
algorithm (mix PI-RR algorithm) for assigning a priority to a The SJF algorithm must be used to rank jobs, followed by
process and eliminating starvation. This algorithm has the the RR algorithm for execution. The findings demonstrated that
optimal advantages of both priority and round-robin the ad hoc algorithm prioritizes higher priority jobs and
algorithms. The rest of this paper is organized as follows: executes them rapidly, while contextual switching is reduced
Section II presents the literature review. In Section III, the for low priority processes, reducing the options between RR
proposed algorithm is discussed and a flowchart is presented. and SJF.
In Section IV, present the discussion and conclusion in the
final section. In the Cyber-Physical System, the researcher presented a
scheduling strategy for high-priority random jobs [23]. A fog
II. LITERATURE REVIEW group is used in idle time to process the most recent available
time and execution time before assigning the system to a
To discover the best CPU algorithm for a given procedure,
random high-priority task. This method speeds up the dispatch
it is possible to compare the three CPU algorithms based on
of high-priority random jobs, allowing them to be performed
their waiting times. Each algorithm has been extensively tested
more quickly.
and the outcomes compared. In [15], the researchers developed
an improved round-robin scheduling approach based on the A number of CPU scheduling algorithms have been
clustering algorithm, which combined the advantages of developed in recent years to ensure predictable processor
prioritizing short operations with low round-robin scheduling allocation. Often, the best features of each algorithm have been
overheads to reduce the average waiting time and turnaround combined to create the ideal algorithm for a given situation.
time. Using the k means technique, similar processes were The upgraded round-robin (IRR) CPU scheduling algorithm,
clustered. These researchers employed the CPU scheduling invented by Mishra, is an improved round-robin scheduler. It is
approach in [16] to create a fast system with fewer resources. comparable to round-robin (RR), but is a little better [24]. IRR
They were able to improve the algorithm's efficiency and chooses the first process from the ready queue and gives it the
reduce its runtime. The various scheduling algorithms were CPU for up to one QT. When a process completes its QT, it
designed and implemented by them. In [17], the researchers checks the remaining CPU burst time of the presently
recommended scheduling techniques to increase the operating executing process.
system's real-time performance.
III. PROPOSED ALGORITHM
In [18], the round-robin scheduling algorithm's time
quantum concerns were addressed. The researchers developed The round-robin algorithm does not consider the
the smart job first dynamic round-robin technique. Using a importance and significance of processes; it simply solves the
dynamic time-quantum technique, the program required the queue, so the process order that the CPU performs causes a
CPU schedule to sort processes in ascending order based on decrease in the CPU efficiency. The priority algorithm has
burst time, assign system priority, and calculate a smart priority some disadvantages because it solves the process priority for
factor (SPF) for each process. The team created a simulator to which process come first, so it performs the process with the
evaluate the proposed algorithm. highest priority and does not consider the arrival time or size of
the process. It also ignores CPU bursts that can cause
In [19], the researchers released an enhanced version of the starvation. Therefore, this study created a mix of the two
Fittest Job First Dynamic Round-Robin algorithm (FJFDRR), previous algorithms to decrease the disadvantages for the
which incorporates the process arrival time as an algorithmic operating system environment. Mix PI-RR algorithm and
element that various queues handle. The suggested approach flowchart of the proposed Mix PI-RR algorithm is shown in
was compared against current scheduling algorithms in four “Fig. 1 and 2”.
test cases using the ATAT, AWT, AR, and CS metrics. Based
on the number of processes provided, the statistics
demonstrated that the suggested technique had the best
appropriate context switch rate.

542 | P a g e
[Link]
 (IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications,
Vol. 13, No. 4, 2022

NOTE 2: If they were equal in the redundancy column, the

Round Robin Priority arrival time to the central processing unit was taken. To break
Algorithm Algorithm ties, processes with equal priority were completed on a FCFS
basis.
NOTE 3: If a process was running and another process
arrived with the highest priority, it did not interrupt the work of
the process, but waited until the end of the quantum time.
IV. DISCUSSION
Proposed Mix Priority and
Round Robin Algorithm Preparing a successful proposal for a newly inspired
algorithm in such a pure field is not a simple undertaking.
(Mix PI-RR Algorithm) Given the difficulties of this research topic, it was necessary to
Fig. 1. Mix PI-RR Algorithm. propose a new optimization technique with novel aspects.
Apart from the innovation, the authors' findings were supported
Start by a dataset and a comparison of some criteria between
algorithms. As a result, the three samples from the literature
were utilized as examples in this study, and the average TAT
Add all processes in the
ready queue and average WT of both the proposed and presented algorithms
were compared. The average TAT and average WT are
Define a priority
examined and compared to the current round-robin scheduling
specifications of the
process
algorithm in different cases. Some scenarios were
demonstrated, the results of each iteration were studied, and the
No
final outputs were compared using the round-robin algorithm
Define a Time Quantum to verify the quality and efficiency of the suggested mix PI-RR
Change the process
priority to the lowest algorithm.
priority in the queue
Arrange the processes Sample 1: The first dataset, which contained seven
based on the priority
No processes, was used in this sample from the benchmark
datasets used in the studies. In addition to explaining how the
Is the
suggested algorithm works, this research developed a Gantt
process has the
highest
The redundancy
column < 3
chart for the method. For the following collection of processes,
priority Table I shows the length of the CPU-burst period in
Yes
milliseconds. We assigned the time quantum as 3 ms for each
process. Tables II and III show gantt chart of sample 1 and
turnaround time and waiting time of sample 1, respectively.

TABLE I. PROCESSES OF SAMPLE 1

Execute For Time Burst time < Time Execute till
No Yes Termination
Quantum Quantum completion
CPU Burst Arrival Number of times
Process Priority
time time repeat

End
P1 9 0 3 ///
P2 9 2 2 ///
Fig. 2. Flowchart of the Proposed Mix PI-RR Algorithm.
P3 12 4 4 ///=7
The proposed algorithm adds two more columns to the P4 8 5 1 ///
original columns in the round-robin as follows:
P5 7 6 5 ///
Priority column: The CPU gives some processes higher
P6 9 6 7 ///
priority than others. The number of times to repeat this is listed
in the second column. If the procedure is prioritized three times P7 12 6 6 ///=7
then, in the central processing unit, the original priority is
updated and the lowest priority is assigned. Following this, the TABLE II. GANTT CHART OF SAMPLE 1
processes will be carried out in accordance with the arrival
P1 P2 P4 P4 P4 P2 P2 P1 P1
time of the central processing unit (CPU). Finally, when the
0-3 3-6 6-9 9-12 12-14 14-17 17-20 20-23 23-26
CPU receives the lowest priority process, the priority will be
activated again. Then, it will be implemented three times P3 P3 P3 P5 P5 P5 P7
before being assigned the lowest priority in the central 26-29 29-32 32-35 35-38 38-41 41-42 42-45
processing unit (CPU).
P7 P7 P6 P6 P6 P3 P7
NOTE 1: If more than one process had the same priority
after a change, we looked at the redundancy column, and then 45-48 48-51 51-54 54-57 57-60 60-63 63-66
we implemented the process with the fewest repetitions.

543 | P a g e
[Link]
 (IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications,
Vol. 13, No. 4, 2022

TABLE III. TURNAROUND TIME AND WAITING TIME OF SAMPLE 1 TABLE VII. PROCESSES OF SAMPLE 3

Process Turnaround Time (ms) Waiting time CPU Burst Arrival Number of times
Process Priority
time time repeat
P1 26 17
P1 9 0 10 //
P2 18 9
P2 12 0 9 ///
P3 31 19
P3 15 0 6 ///
P4 9 1
P4 17 0 3 ///=10
P5 36 29
P5 12 0 2 ///
P6 54 45
P6 14 0 8 ///
P7 45 33
P7 16 0 7 ///,=10,/
Average 31.285 21.875
P8 13 0 4 ///
Sample 2: For the following collection of processes, P9 6 0 5 //
Table IV shows the length of the CPU-burst period in P10 15 0 1 ///
milliseconds. We assigned the time quantum as 5 ms for each
process, which contained eight processes. Tables V and VI
TABLE VIII. GANTT CHART OF SAMPLE 3
show gantt chart of sample 2 and turnaround time and waiting
time of sample 2, respectively. P10 P10 P10 P5 P5 P5 P4 P4
0-5 5-10 10-15 15-20 20-25 25-27 27-32 32-37
TABLE IV. PROCESSES OF SAMPLE 2
P4 P8 P8 P8 P9 P9 P3 P3
CPU Burst Arrival Number of times
Process Priority
time time repeat 37-42 42-47 47-52 52-55 55-60 60-61 61-66 66-71
P1 15 0 4 ///
P3 P7 P7 P7 P6 P6 P6 P2
P2 18 0 1, 8 /// , /
71-76 76-81 81-86 86-91 91-96 96-101 101-105 105-110
P3 15 0 2 ///
P2 P2 P1 P1 P4 P7
P4 14 0 3 ///
110-115 115-117 117-122 122-126 126-128 128-129
P5 12 0 7 ///
P6 20 0 8 TABLE IX. TURNAROUND TIME AND WAITING TIME OF SAMPLE 3
P7 7 0 5 //
Process Turnaround Time (ms) Waiting time
P8 8 0 6 //
P1 126 117

TABLE V. GANTT CHART OF SAMPLE 2 P2 117 105

P3 76 61
P2 P2 P2 P3 P3 P3 P4 P4
P4 128 111
0-5 5-10 10-15 15-20 20-25 25-30 30-35 35-40
P5 27 15
P4 P1 P1 P1 P7 P7 P8 P8
P6 105 91
40-44 44-49 49-54 54-59 59-64 64-66 66-71 71-74
P7 129 113
P5 P5 P5 P2 P6 P6 P6 P6 P8 55 42
74-79 79-84 84-86 86-89 89-94 94-99 99-104 104-109 P9 61 55
P10 15 0
TABLE VI. TURNAROUND TIME AND WAITING TIME OF SAMPLE 2
Average 83.9 71
Process Turnaround Time (ms) Waiting time
Sample 3: For the following collection of processes,
P1 59 46
Table VII shows the length of the CPU-burst period in
P2 89 71 milliseconds. We assigned the time quantum as 5 ms for each
P3 30 15 process, which contained ten processes. Tables VIII and IX
P4 44 30
show gantt chart of sample 3 and turnaround time and waiting
time of sample 3, respectively.
P5 86 74
P6 109 89
Scheduling is a fundamental operating system feature.
Almost all computer resources are pre-programmed before they
P7 66 59 are used. One of the most important computer resources is the
P8 74 64 central processing unit (CPU). Its scheduling is crucial to the
Average 69.625 56 architecture of an operating system. Which processes run and
which processes wait are determined by CPU scheduling. CPU

544 | P a g e
[Link]
 (IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications,
Vol. 13, No. 4, 2022

scheduling is critical because it has a significant impact on TABLE XI. COMPARING AVERAGE WAITING TIME
resource usage, system performance, and CPU efficiency.
Average Waiting Time (ms)
Process execution is made up of a cycle of CPU execution
(CPU burst) and I/O wait (I/O burst), with CPU burst coming Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3
first, then I/O burst, then another I/O burst, and so on. The Proposed Mix PI-RR Algorithm 21.875 56 71
most recent CPU explosion ends with a system request to stop
Round Robin 39.428 67.375 94
the process.
Due to their significant waiting time, long response time,
large turnaround time, and low throughput, existing round-
robin CPU scheduling algorithms cannot be used in real-time
operating systems. Furthermore, existing priority CPU
scheduling algorithms are inadequate for real-time operating
systems since they create starvation, and do not take into
consideration which processes come first and the time spent
waiting for them to run in the CPU.
The proposed mix priority and round-robin algorithm (mix
PI-RR algorithm) is an algorithm that obtains the optimal
advantages of both priority and round-robin algorithms. Fig. 3. Comparing Average Turnaround Time.
Round-robin scheduling does not give any process priority or
additional consideration based on other processes, and
processes cannot have priorities set for them. Therefore,
delayed execution of important processes may affect the
performance of the whole system. On the other hand, in the
priority algorithm, each process is assigned a priority.
Processes with highest priority are executed first. However,
this occurs without taking into account which process comes
first and the time the process has been waiting in CPU to run,
and this can cause starvation. Therefore, this paper introduced
the mix PI-RR algorithm to assign a priority to important
processes, without causing starvation.
Fig. 4. Comparing Waiting Time.
The average waiting and turnaround times depend on the
number of processes in the ready queue; as number of V. CONCLUSION
processes increases, time cost increases. In addition, long burst The algorithm presented here outperforms several other
times of the processes increase the time cost. To emphasize the algorithms; in general, it outperforms the RR and priority-
efficiency of the proposed algorithm, samples datasets varying based methods. No algorithm is ideal in every circumstance. It
in number and burst times of processes are used. The proposed is impossible to watch a precise scheduling algorithm in action,
mix PI-RR algorithm enhances CPU performance in general, yet precise performance can be viewed in real-time operating
the results revealed that wait time and turnaround time were system operations. Several elements, such as changeable
reduced. Furthermore, the CPU algorithms enabled the user to capacity, have a substantial impact on performance. This study
obtain good results without increasing the time. Tables X and introduced a real-time operating system and real-time tasks.
XI show the average turnaround time and average waiting time We highlighted RR and priority drawbacks like high average
of the proposed mix PI-RR algorithm and current round-robin turnaround, high context switching, high response time, high
algorithm. As observed from the average turnaround time and turnaround time, and low throughput, as well as the failure to
average waiting time, the performance of the proposed mix PI- take into account the process that should be first and how long
RR algorithm was better than the current round-robin processes have been waiting. After analyzing RR and priority
algorithm. It is clearly observed that average turnaround time algorithm’s performances and drawbacks, we proposed a new
and average waiting time of the processes are optimum for algorithm, named mix priority and round-robin (the mix PI-RR
proposed Mix PI-RR algorithm compared to round robin algorithm), which deals with the drawbacks of simple round-
fundamental algorithm. The comparison between the proposed robin and priority algorithms. This new approach performed
mix PI-RR algorithm and the current round-robin algorithm is better than a simple RR and priority, by taking the best features
shown in “Fig. 3 and 4”. of each algorithm and combining them to create the ideal
TABLE X. COMPARING AVERAGE TURNAROUND TIME
algorithm for a given situation in terms of average waiting time
and average turnaround time. This study justified the mix
Average Turnaround Time (ms) between priority and round-robin to help the CPU overcome
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3
indefinite blocking or starvation (leaving some lower priority
processes waiting in CPU) in priority algorithms, and using
Proposed Mix PI-RR Algorithm 31.285 69.625 83.9 queue up to solve the processes regardless of the importance
Round Robin 48.8571 90 106.9 and priority of the process for the CPU in the round-robin

545 | P a g e
[Link]
 (IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications,
Vol. 13, No. 4, 2022

algorithm. The results of this evaluation highlight ways in [9] S. Zouaoui, L. Boussaid and A. Mtibaa, Priority based round robin
which instructional material should be clarified. It will be (PBRR) CPU scheduling algorithm. International Journal of Electrical &
Computer Engineering (2088-8708), 9(1). 2019.
important for the proposed algorithm to be more efficient and
[10] A. Najim and Al-Tahhan, Hybrid Algorithm for CPU Scheduling by
effective than current CPU scheduling algorithms. Finally, Using Dynamic Time Quantum", Future Research Journal, Al-Hadba
further research is needed to compare it with other algorithms. university Collage, PP. 99-136, ISSN 1680-9300. Iraq . (April 2014),".
In future work, simulations of CPU scheduling strategies are [11] Neelakantagouda Patil (October 2015)," A Knapsack Based CPU Process
recommended. The most efficient way to evaluate a scheduling Scheduling Using Neelsack Algorithm", (IJSEAS) International Journal
algorithm is to code it and include it in an operating system; of Scientific Engineering and Applied Science,Volume-1, pp. 138-144,
then, the algorithm's correct working capabilities can be Issue-7, ISSN:2395-3470, India.
determined in real-time systems. Further research and studies [12] William Stallings, “Operating Systems Internal and Design Principles”,
5thEdition, ISBN-10: 0-13-230998, 2006.
in the future should be carried out to discover other scheduling
algorithms that are optimal in certain situations and, hence, [13] Silberschatz, A., Peterson, J. L., and Galvin, B., “Operating System
Concepts”, Addison Wesley, 7th Edition, ISBN-10: 0471694665, 2006.
deliver the highest level of user satisfaction.
[14] E.O. Oyetunji, A. E. Oluleye,” Performance Assessment of Some CPU
Scheduling Algorithms”, Research Journal of Information Technology,
ACKNOWLEDGMENT 1(1), pp. 22-26, 2009.
The researcher would like to thank Qassim University, [15] M Mostafa, S., & Amano, H. (2020). Dynamic Round Robin CPU
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. This study was supported in part by Scheduling Algorithm Based on K-Means Clustering Technique. Applied
a grant from Deanship of Scientific Research, Qassim Sciences, 10(15), 5134.
University. [16] Farooq, M. U., Shakoor, A., & Siddique, A. B. (2017, March). An
efficient dynamic round robin algorithm for cpu scheduling. In 2017
REFERENCES International Conference on Communication, Computing and Digital
[1] P. B. Galvin, [Link] and A. Silberschatz, Operating system concepts. Systems (CCODE) (pp. 244-248). IEEE.
John Wiley & Sons. 2003. [17] Zouaoui, S., Boussaid, L., & Mtibaa, A. (2019). Priority based round
[2] U. Shafi, M.A. Shah, A. Wahid, K. Abbasi, Q. Javaid, M. Asghar and M. robin (PBRR) CPU scheduling algorithm. International Journal of
Haider, A novel amended dynamic round robin scheduling algorithm for Electrical & Computer Engineering (2088-8708), 9(1).Technologies and
timeshared systems. Int. Arab J. Inf. Technol., 17(1), 90-98. 2020. Optimization (Trends and Future Directions)(ICRITO) (pp. 397-400).
IEEE.
[3] M. Aijaz, R. Tariq, M. Ghori, S.W. Rizvi and E.F. Qazi, Efficient Round
Robin Algorithm (ERRA) using the Average Burst Time. In 2019 [18] Gupta, A. K., Yadav, N. S., & Goyal, D. (2016). Design and Performance
International Conference on Information Science and Communication Evaluation of Smart Job First Dynamic Round Robin (SJFDRR)
Technology (ICISCT) (pp. 1-5). IEEE. 2019. Scheduling Algorithm with Smart Time Quantum. American Scientific
Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences (ASRJETS),
[4] S. Mody and S. Mirkar, Smart Round Robin CPU Scheduling Algorithm
26(4), 66-78.
For Operating Systems. In 2019 4th International Conference on
Electrical, Electronics, Communication, Computer Technologies and [19] Manuel, J. I., Baquirin, R. B., Guevara, K. S., & Tandingan, D. (2019,
Optimization Techniques (ICEECCOT) (pp. 309-316). IEEE. (2019, February). Fittest Job First Dynamic Round Robin (FJFDRR) scheduling
December). algorithm using dual queue and arrival time factor: a comparison. In IOP
Publishing Ltd, IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng (Vol. 482, p. 012046).
[5] H. B. Parekh and S. Chaudhari, Improved Round Robin CPU scheduling
algorithm: Round Robin, Shortest Job First and priority algorithm [20] Khatri, J. (2016). An enhanced Round Robin CPU scheduling algorithm.
coupled to increase throughput and decrease waiting time and turnaround IOSR Journal of Computer Engineering (IOSR-JCE), 18(4), 20-24.
time. In 2016 International Conference on Global Trends in Signal [21] Chandiramani, K., Verma, R., & Sivagami, M. (2019). A Modified
Processing, Information Computing and Communication (ICGTSPICC) Priority Preemptive Algorithm for CPU Scheduling. Procedia Computer
(pp. 184-187). IEEE. (2016, December). Science, 165, 363-369.
[6] Amit Kumar Sain, “Dynamical Modified R.R. CPU Scheduling [22] Tripathi, S., Prajapati, S., & Ansari, N. A. (2017, May). Modified optimal
Algorithm", International Journal of Computer Trend and Technology, algorithm: for load balancing in cloud computing. In 2017 International
Volume 4, Issue 2, PP. 90-93, ISSN:2231-2803. 2013. Conference on Computing, Communication and Automation (ICCCA)
[7] M.A. Alworafi, A. Dhari, A. Al-Hashmi and A.B. Darem, An improved (pp. 116-121). IEEE.
SJF scheduling algorithm in cloud computing environment. In 2016 [23] Zhang, J., Chen, C., Zheng, H. K., & Luo, Q. Y. (2019, June). A High
International Conference on Electrical, Electronics, Communication, Priority Random Task Fuzzy Scheduling Algorithm for CPS. In 2019
Computer and Optimization Techniques (ICEECCOT) (pp. 208-212). Chinese Control And Decision Conference (CCDC) (pp. 482-487). IEEE.
IEEE. (2016, December). [24] Y. Berhanu, A. Alemu and M.K. Mishra, Dynamic time quantum based
[8] A. Joshi and s. Gosswami, Modified Round Robin algorithm by using round robin CPU scheduling algorithm (Doctoral dissertation). 2017.
Priority Scheduling. Advances in Computational Sciences and
technology, 10(6), 1543-1549. 2017.

546 | P a g e
[Link]
 © 2022. This work is licensed under
[Link] (the “License”). Notwithstanding
the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance
with the terms of the License.