See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: [Link]

net/publication/351330519

A Review on the CPU Scheduling Algorithms: Comparative Study

Article in International Journal of Network Security · January 2021

DOI: 10.22937/IJCSNS.2021.21.1.4

CITATIONS READS

9 8,977

1 author:

Enas E. El-Sharawy
Imam Abdul Rahman bin Faisal University
66 PUBLICATIONS 32 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Enas E. El-Sharawy on 04 May 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

IJCSNS International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, VOL.21 No.1, January 2021 19

A Review on the CPU Scheduling Algorithms: Comparative Study

Shahad M. Ali, Razan F. Alshahrani, Amjad H. Hadadi, Tahany A. Alghamdi, Fatimah H. Almuhsin,
Enas E. El-Sharawy
Computer Science Department, College of Science and Humanities, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, [Link]
31961, Jubail, Saudi Arabia

the CPU while another is on hold because it is waiting for

Abstract other resources [1].
CPU is considered the main and most important resource in the
computer system. The CPU scheduling is defined as a procedure The CPU is one of the most important parts of the device.
that determines which process will enter the CPU to be executed, Most processes require it to be executed, so we need to
and another process will be waiting for its turn to be performed. maximize its utilization and throughput and minimize
CPU management scheduling algorithms are the major service in
the operating systems that fulfill the maximum utilization of the
turnaround time, waiting time, and response time. All these
CPU. This article aims to review the studies on the CPU criteria can be achieved using CPU scheduling algorithms
scheduling algorithms towards comparing which is the best that manage how processes enter the CPU [2].
algorithm. After we conducted a review of the Round Robin, There are many scheduling algorithms, and they are
Shortest Job First, First Come First Served, and Priority implemented in a different method. An example of these
algorithms, we found that several researchers have suggested algorithms is the First Come First Served (FCFS) algorithm,
various ways to improve CPU optimization criteria through which gives the CPU to the first arrived. Also, the Shortest
different algorithms to improve the waiting time, response time, Job First (SJF) algorithm, that gives the CPU to the short
and turnaround time but there is no algorithm is better in all process. The Round Robin (RR) algorithm, which gives
criteria.
each process a time quantum, determines its working time
Key words:
CPU Scheduling Algorithms; RR; FCFS; SJF; Priority.
in the CPU, and after the time expires, it exits the process
and allows another to execute. The priority algorithm
determines the entry of the process to the CPU based on
1. Introduction their priority [1].

Technological development covered all aspects of human Many problems may occur during the scheduling
life, such as mobile phones and computers, people can shop, algorithms' performance, and they may make it difficult to
study, book appointments, games, and more. Humans will achieve the required criteria [3]. To the best of our
not be able to use these devices and manage them easily due knowledge, this paper reviewed the literature on the RR,
to the hardware's complexity, so the operating systems FCFS, SJF, and Priority algorithms. To illustrate the
appeared to solve these problems. It can be defined as an methodology used to improve the performance of these
intermediary between the user and the computer hardware algorithms, the results that were reached, several
to facilitate the computer system's management and control. researchers have suggested various ways to improve CPU
Operating systems provide many services to the user and optimization criteria through different algorithms to
the system on the user side it provides user interfaces and improve the waiting time, response time, and turnaround
helps to implement programs, manage files, and exchange time but there is no algorithm is better in all criteria.
information with other computers, and on the system side, This paper is structured as follows: Section 2 presents the
it provides the ability to allocate resources to multiple users literature selection methodology. Section 3 reviews the
and protect system resources [1]. CPU scheduling algorithms. The RR scheduling algorithm
is presented in section 4. SJF scheduling algorithm is
In multi-processing systems, there are many programs mentioned in section 5. Section 6 reviews the FCFS
that the user executes simultaneously which contains many scheduling algorithm. The priority algorithm is presented in
processes that need the CPU to complete its task, but only section 7. Discussion and Conclusion are discussed in
one process can obtain the CPU at a certain time. Therefore, section 8 and section 9, respectively.
we need CPU scheduling, which helps to make the system
more efficient and faster because it allows a process to use

Manuscript received January 5, 2021

Manuscript revised January 20, 2021
[Link]
20 IJCSNS International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, VOL.21 No.1, January 2021

2. Literature selection methodology PS, RR, and DRR. Finally, they compared these algorithms,
and DRR was the best among them. In [7], the researchers
Literature selection methodology is the methodology proposed scheduling algorithms to improve the operating
that was followed in literature selection as follow: system's real-time performance, and the CPU has been
proposed. The proposed CPU is based on combining round
2.1 A keyword Filter phase scheduling (RR) and priority-based (PB) scheduling
algorithms. Experimental results showed that the new
The research articles were searched in the Google algorithm improves all the round-robin scheduling
Scholar database using the following keywords: (1) algorithm CPU flaws.
Operating System (2) CPU management (3) CPU
scheduling algorithms (4) RR scheduling algorithm (5) SJF
scheduling algorithm (6) FCFS scheduling algorithm (7) 4. RR scheduling algorithm
Priority scheduling algorithm. The result of the research at
this stage is 65 articles. In this section, 18 articles on RR scheduling algorithms,
are reviewed and classified according to algorithms. In [8],
2.2 Abstract Filter phase the researchers proposed a smart job first dynamic round-
robin(SJFDRR) algorithm to solve the Round Robin
At this stage, the abstract is read to determine the research scheduling algorithm problems related to time quantum.
articles relevant to the research. The selection resulted in 40 The algorithm is based on a dynamic-time-quantum
articles from CPU scheduling algorithms, RR scheduling approach used to make the CPU scheduler sort the process
algorithm, SJF scheduling algorithm, FCFS scheduling in ascending order on the burst time and assign the system
algorithm, and Priority scheduling algorithm. priority and calculate a smart priority factor (SPF) for each
Due to the diversity of the CPU scheduling algorithm, many process. The researchers designed a simulator to compare
studies and research have improved and developed this the proposed algorithm with the FJFDRR algorithm. The
algorithm to increase system performance. The following results showed that the proposed algorithm reduces the
sections review several papers related to CPU scheduling number of context switches, average waiting time, and
algorithms where the studies have been categorized into average turnaround time when the arrival time of all process
four CPU scheduling algorithm types: RR, SJF, FCFS, and is zero. In [9], the researchers proposed an improved version
Priority Algorithms. of the Fittest Job First Dynamic Round Robin algorithm
(FJFDRR) through added the process arrival time as an
algorithmic factor implemented by multiple queues. The
proposed algorithm was compared with FCFS, SJF, RR,
3. CPU scheduling algorithms and BJF algorithms in four test cases by used the ATAT,
AWT, AR, and CS as metrics. The results showed that the
In this section, 4 articles on CPU scheduling algorithms, proposed algorithm has the most balanced context switch
are reviewed and classified according to algorithms. degree based on the number of processes submitted. In [10],
In [4], the researchers suggested comparing the three CPU the researchers proposed Enhanced Round Robin (ERR)
algorithms based on each algorithm's waiting time to find algorithm to improve CPU performance by minimizing the
the most appropriate algorithm for a particular process. average waiting time and turnaround time. The proposed
They tested each algorithm individually and tested their algorithm was compared with RR and IRR algorithms in
results. In[5], the researchers proposed an improved version three different cases. The results showed that the proposed
of the round-robin CPU scheduling algorithm based on the algorithm has a better performance by reducing the average
k-means clustering technique to combine the advantages of waiting time and average turnaround time compared with
favor short process and low scheduling overhead of round- other algorithms.
robin to reduce average waiting time, turnaround time. The
k means algorithm is used to group similar processes in In [11], the researchers are interested in time quantum
clusters. The proposed algorithm was compared with problems in the round-robin algorithm. The Manhattan
PWRR, TRR, PRR, SRR, and ADRR algorithms. The distance was used for the CPU burst times of processes to
results showed that the proposed algorithm has a better obtain the optimal time quantum value. ORRSM and SRR
performance by minimizing time cost compared with other algorithms performance was compared in three cases with
algorithms. five processes that differed in burst times. The results
showed that the ORRSM gives better performance of the
In [6], these researchers created a fast system with fewer RR algorithm with a reduction in context switches,
resources through the CPU scheduling algorithm. They turnaround times, and waiting times.
reduced the algorithm's runtime and efficiency constraints.
They implemented and developed algorithms FCFS, SJF,
IJCSNS International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, VOL.21 No.1, January 2021 21

In [12], the researchers proposed a hybrid round-robin In [19], The researchers proposed a new algorithm, a set of
scheduling mechanism for process management (HYRR) to algorithms that have been combined to produce an
improve the RR algorithm. The HYRR algorithm inherits algorithm. Aiming to reduce the time spent by the process
properties from the SJF and FCFS algorithms and dynamic while it is waiting. It also reduces the number of switches to
time quantum was used instead of static time quantum. The provide a good, fair, and effective algorithm. The results
HYRR algorithm was compared with the RR algorithm. showed that the new algorithm increased productivity.
The results showed that the HYRR algorithm has more In[20], The researchers proposed an improved algorithm
effectiveness by maximizing CPU utilization, throughput from RR called DABRR (Dynamic Average Burst Round
and minimizing AWT, ATT, ART, and NOC. Robin). This algorithm uses the dynamic amount of time
In [13], the researchers proposed a load balancing policy rather than the time used in the RR. The experimental
between data centers and various load balancing solutions. results showed that DABRR better than RR. In [21], have
In this paper, the researchers discussed the concept of been suggested a new CPU scheduling algorithm has been
pregnancy dispersion and then compared FCFS , SJF and proposed to incorporate a round-robin and priority
RR on Cloudsim . The simulation results showed that RR scheduling algorithm. That provided a solution to the
task scheduling is much better than FCFS and SJF whether problem of aging by prioritizing operations and working to
using time-sharing policy or shared space policy for reduce famine. The experimental results showed that the
cloudlet implementation. proposed algorithm overcomes all the drawbacks of the
In[14], The researchers applied the combined product existing round-robin algorithm.
between the SJF and RR algorithms to overcome the RR In [22], have been suggested a new CPU scheduling
algorithm's flaws and reduce the response time and wait algorithm has been proposed, which is an improved version
time in processes where the process is given a certain of the Round Robin algorithm that relies on intelligently
amount of time to execute. The results showed that the rated calculating quantitative time and prioritizing operations
RR is good to use as it reduced latency and wait time and based on it. The experimental results showed that the
reduced starvation by implementing the least burst time proposed algorithm outperformed from where less average
first. waiting time, a small number of context switches, and less
In [15], the researchers proposed scheduling a round-robin turnaround time than the simple Round Robin algorithm. In
algorithm to obtain results and perform better from the [23], The researchers proposed a dynamic time quantum-
round-robin (RR) algorithm. The proposed algorithm based Round Robin (DTQRR) algorithm to improve the
depends on determining the time quantum, which increases CPU performance by using features of IRR and IRRVQ to
the round-robin (RR)scheduling algorithm's performance. reduce the waiting time, turnaround time, and the number
The Experimental results The proposed algorithm more of context switches. The proposed algorithm was compared
efficient through the identification of optimum time. with RR, IRR, and IRRVQ algorithms on waiting time,
In [16], the researchers proposed a new CPU scheduling turnaround time, and context switch. The results show that
algorithm called Amended Dynamic Round Robin (ADRR) the performance of proposed algorithms is better than the
based on CPU burst time. It aims to improve the traditional RR, IRR, and IRRVQ as it reduces all three scheduling
RR scheduling algorithm using the concept of active criteria.
quantitative time. The experimental results demonstrated In [24], the researchers developed a simplified dynamic
that the proposed ADRR algorithm outperformed the other improved round-robin (STARR) CPU scheduling algorithm
algorithms with less average waiting time, a small number to enhance the round-robin algorithm. The proposed
of context switches, and less turnaround time. algorithm depends on the numeric outlier detection
In [17], The researchers proposed a new scheduling technique and geometric mean to determine an optimal time
algorithm for the central processing unit called Efficient quantum when the burst times of processes arriving in the
Round Robin Algorithm (ERRA) that differs from RR in ready queue include outliers. The performance of the
that the time instead of being constant will be dynamic proposed algorithm was compared with selected improved
according to each process's needs to improve efficiency. versions of RR. The result showed that the proposed
The experimental results showed that the proposed algorithm performed better in reducing the average waiting
algorithm gave better results in terms of average waiting time and average turnaround time. In [25], the researchers
time, average time spent, and changing the context. In [18], proposed a new algorithm to improve the CPU's
The researchers proposed a new approach for the RR performance, derived from the features provided by the
algorithm, called the smart RR algorithm, which changes Round Robin algorithm. The results showed that the
the time each time based on the remaining time of the proposed algorithm offers better than the Round Robin in
process. The experimental results showed that this new terms of average waiting time, average turnaround time, and
approach from the RR algorithm improved lower average several context switches.
wait time and lower average response time than the
traditional Round Robin scheduling method.
22 IJCSNS International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, VOL.21 No.1, January 2021

5. SJF scheduling algorithm compatible with scheduling goals. The Experimental results
have shown that the Shortest Job First Scheduling (SJF)
In this section, 13 articles on SJF scheduling algorithms, are tends to increase wait time, making presenting long
reviewed and classified according to algorithms. In [26], the processes impossible. In [34], have discussed the
researchers introduced a comparison between FCFS and scheduling algorithms used to schedule operations in the
SJF to show which algorithm is the process that is more CPU multi-programming system, first come first served
suitable and how their scheduling is being implemented. (FCFS), round-robin (RR), shortest job first (SJF), made a
They Performed through the use of exemplary job processes comparison was based on scheduling criteria eight (8)
to determine the best among the algorithms. The result Important parameters in process scheduling. The
showed the SJF gives better performance for scheduling experimental results showed that the ideal proposed
processes than the FCFS. algorithm should reduce response time and overheads in
In [27], the researchers suggested a comparison between terms of CPU, disk, and memory usage and increase
FCFS and SJF for scheduling a multimedia operation and productivity.
analyzing the variance in their performance through In [35], have discussed the importance of CPU scheduling
different sets of data and a variety of operations. The results by switching between different processes to make the most
showed that SJF for multimedia task scheduling performs of the CPU and clarify the best algorithm for a special case
better than FCFS after applying it to three different data in terms of waiting time and response. The Experimental
groups. In [28], the researchers proposed a comparison results have shown that the SJF scheduling algorithm gives
between the Round Robin scheduling algorithm and the the minimum average standby time. In[36], Researchers
shortest job first scheduling algorithm and the proposed have proposed improving the algorithm SJF in cloud
algorithm. There were different scheduler levels applied at computing. By releasing a new algorithm, a modified
different levels of the process, from the ready queue to Shortest Task First (MSJF) algorithm to reduce Makespan
terminate. The results showed that the proposed scheduling and reduce average response time while maximizing
had less waiting time, response time, context switching, and resource usage. The experimental results showed that MSJF
less preventive than the RR scheduling algorithm and less is better than SJF and FCFS.
wait time than the SJF scheduling algorithm. In [29], In [37], The researcher suggested an ideal algorithm for SJF
researchers analyzed an FCFS and SJF-based priority in which adjustments in the shortest time would be chosen.
scheduling algorithm for similar priority jobs to decide In this algorithm, processes with the shortest time to
which processes in the ready queue will be assigned to the complete are placed in front of the ready queue. Results
CPU. The experimental result shows that the average showed that SJF is suitable for batch jobs where the runtime
waiting time and average turnaround time are reduced. In is predefined, and each process can be executed based on
[30] the researcher proposed a system that works on the SJF minimum burst time. In [38], the researchers presented a
algorithm. The operation is carried out according to the time new algorithm SJF approach to improve CPU efficiency. A
of the explosion. Initially, processes are assigned to the comparative analysis of the proposed algorithm was
ready-made queue according to priority. The results showed performed using Round-robin algorithms and SJF
that the algorithm running on SJF is better than FCFS and protective algorithms. The results showed that the proposed
has a better average wait time. algorithm improved the system's performance by reducing
In [31], The researchers applied the Least Slack Time First the context switching to the required extent.
and SJF algorithm for the Realtime system to determine the
dynamic priority according to the slack time. The task that
has a minimum slack time has the highest priority. The 6. FCFS scheduling algorithm
results showed that the LST algorithm works fine at low
load and bad in an overload condition. As for SJF, it cannot In this section, 2 articles on FCFS scheduling algorithms,
schedule a job at a low load while it performs relatively well are reviewed and classified according to algorithms. In [39],
in case of overload. In [32], Researchers have proposed K the researchers proposed comparing SJF and FCFS for best
FACTOR algorithm to reduce SJF's limitations and utilization of memory. The results showed SJF best in less
overcome its shortcomings (starvation and polarization average waiting time between multiple scheduling
towards shorter operations). A parameter called K is used, algorithms and FCFS best in a simple application, which
which is initialized with values and increases with each does not involve any complex logic.
node. The results showed that the proposed algorithm is not In[40], the researchers designed the MapReduce Analysis
better than SJF, but it eliminates starvation for long Process Management System to perform the MapReduce
operations to become fair for all operations. function in a process management application to use the
In [33], have discussed the scheduling algorithms of the BPM (BigData Process Management) engine by discussing
different CPUs and clarified the best algorithms for the a tool that fits the functionality by analyzing the
special case in terms of waiting time and response time characteristics and performance of the models. FCFS is the
IJCSNS International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, VOL.21 No.1, January 2021 23

most suitable data analysis algorithm, being the effective

implementation of data set and data. After reviewing studies from [8] to [25] based on RR. The
results showed that the RR algorithm improved the average
waiting time, throughput time, turnaround time, and
7. Priority scheduling algorithm response time. It is also maximizing CPU utilization. The
percentages of results are shown in Figure2. The largest
In this section, 3 articles on Priority scheduling percentage of 68% is reached in the RR algorithm only.
algorithms, are reviewed and classified according to Then with 16% in SJF with RR. Then with 4% in Priority
algorithms. In [41], the researchers proposed a new CPU with RR. Finally, a percentage of 12% in FCFS with RR.
scheduling algorithm called the Modified Priority
Preemptive Scheduling Algorithm. The algorithm circularly
implements priority pre-scheduling. The results showed
that the new solution solved the starvation problem and
enhanced the normal Preemptive algorithm performance.
In [42], researchers proposed an algorithm for load
balancing and prioritizing applications of prime
importance. The SJF algorithm has to be used for ranking
jobs and then the RR algorithm must be used for processing.
The results showed that the ad hoc algorithm pays attention
to higher priority tasks and executes them quickly and for
low priority operations, reduces contextual switching and
hence the choice between RR and SJF.
In [43], The researcher proposed a scheduling algorithm
for high priority Cyber-Physical System random tasks. A
fog group is used to process the last available time and
execution time and then give the system to the random task
with high priority in idle time. The algorithm improves the
Fig. 2. The percentage of studies on the RR scheduling
sending rate of random tasks that have high priority and can
algorithm
be executed more efficiently.
After reviewing studies from [26] to [38] based on the
SJF scheduling algorithm. The results showed that the SJF
8. Discussion algorithm reduced the average waiting time, turnaround
time, and response time. The percentages of results are
CPU scheduling algorithms have helped to manage and shown in Figure3. The largest percentage of 56% is reached
schedule the process in the operating systems. After in the SJF algorithm. Then with 26% in merging FCFS with
reviewing studies from [4] to [7], based on this generally. SJF. Finally, a percentage of 9% in merging RR and FCFS
The results showed each algorithm has the characteristics with SJF.
that distinguish it based on a certain criterion. The
percentages of results are shown in Figure1. The largest
percentage of 50% is reached in the RR algorithm. Then
with 25% in SJF. Finally, a percentage of 25% in FCFS.

Fig. 3. The percentage of studies on SJF scheduling

algorithm

Fig. 1. The percentage of studies on the CPU scheduling

algorithm
24 IJCSNS International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, VOL.21 No.1, January 2021

After reviewing studies from [39] to [40] based on the FCFS algorithms for different CPUs could reduce response time,
scheduling algorithm. It is best to reduce the average wait time, and overheads in CPU, disk, and memory usage
waiting time. The FCFS algorithm is most suitable for data and increase productivity. In general, we believe that
analysis operations and the best simple to apply. The optimized CPU algorithm scheduling improves CPU
percentages of results are shown in Figure4. The largest performance, just as the results showed that CPU algorithm
percentage of 67% is reached in the FCFS algorithm. scheduling helps reduce wait time and response time for
Finally, a percentage of 33% in SJF with FCFS. processes. Also, the CPU algorithms allow the user to get
good results without wasting valuable time. In the future,
other researchers can conduct more research and
investigations to explore other scheduling algorithms that
will be optimal and thus provide optimum user satisfaction.

References
[1] Galvin, P. B., Gagne, G., & Silberschatz, A. (2003).
Operating system concepts. John Wiley & Sons.
[2] Abbas, A. (2015). Multiprocessor and Real-Time
Scheduling Shortest-Job-First (SJF) Scheduling
Algorithm. European Journal of Computer Science and
Information Technology, 3(5), 8–20.
[3] Kamalam, G. K., & Bhaskaran, D. V. M. (2014).
Resource Fitness Task Scheduling Algorithm for
Fig. 4. The percentage of studies on the FCFS scheduling Scheduling Tasks on Heterogeneous Grid Environment.
algorithm Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 8(18),
128-135.
[4] Siahaan, A. P. U. (2016). Comparison analysis of CPU
After reviewing studies from [41] to [43] based on the scheduling: FCFS, SJF and Round Robin. International
priority algorithm. The results showed that the Priority Journal of Engineering Development and Research, 4(3),
124-132.
algorithm is concerned with the highest priority operations
[5] M Mostafa, S., & Amano, H. (2020). Dynamic Round
and rapid implementation, solving the starvation problem. Robin CPU Scheduling Algorithm Based on K-Means
The percentages of results are shown in Figure5. The largest Clustering Technique. Applied Sciences, 10(15), 5134.
percentage of 60% is reached in the Priority algorithm. [6] Farooq, M. U., Shakoor, A., & Siddique, A. B. (2017,
Finally, a percentage of 20% in RR and SJF merged with March). An efficient dynamic round robin algorithm for
cpu scheduling. In 2017 International Conference on
the priority algorithm. Communication, Computing and Digital Systems (C-
CODE) (pp. 244-248). IEEE.
[7] Zouaoui, S., Boussaid, L., & Mtibaa, A. (2019). Priority
based round robin (PBRR) CPU scheduling
algorithm. International Journal of Electrical &
Computer Engineering (2088-8708), 9(1).Technologies
and Optimization (Trends and Future
Directions)(ICRITO) (pp. 397-400). IEEE.
[8] Gupta, A. K., Yadav, N. S., & Goyal, D. (2016). Design
and Performance Evaluation of Smart Job First Dynamic
Round Robin (SJFDRR) Scheduling Algorithm with
Smart Time Quantum. American Scientific Research
Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences
(ASRJETS), 26(4), 66-78.
[9] Manuel, J. I., Baquirin, R. B., Guevara, K. S., &
Tandingan, D. (2019, February). Fittest Job First
Dynamic Round Robin (FJFDRR) scheduling algorithm
using dual queue and arrival time factor: a comparison.
Fig. 5. The percentage of studies on the Priority In IOP Publishing Ltd, IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng
scheduling algorithm (Vol. 482, p. 012046).
[10] Khatri, J. (2016). An enhanced Round Robin CPU
scheduling algorithm. IOSR Journal of Computer
Engineering (IOSR-JCE), 18(4), 20-24.
[11] Srilatha, N., Sravani, M., & Divya, Y. (2017). Optimal
9. Conclusion Round Robin CPU Scheduling Algorithm Using
Manhattan Distance. International Journal of Electrical
This paper presented studies related to CPU scheduling and Computer Engineering, 7(6), 3664
algorithms. This study showed that optimized scheduling [12] Ali, K. F., Marikal, A., & Kumar, K. A. A Hybrid Round
Robin Scheduling Mechanism for Process Management.
IJCSNS International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, VOL.21 No.1, January 2021 25

International Journal of Computer Applications, 975, Algorithm for Asymmetrically Distributed Burst
8887. Times.
[13] Pratap, R., & Zaidi, T. (2018, August). Comparative [25] Berhanu, Y., Alemu, A., & Mishra, M. K.
study of task scheduling algorithms through Cloudsim.
In 2018 7th International Conference on Reliability, (2017). Dynamic time quantum based round robin CPU
Infocom scheduling algorithm (Doctoral dissertation).
[26] Bibu, G. D., & Nwankwo, G. C. (2019).
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS BETWEEN FIRST-
[14] Srujana, R., Roopa, Y. M., & Mohan, M. D. S. K. (2019, COME-FIRST-SERVE (FCFS) AND SHORTEST-
April). Sorted Round Robin Algorithm. In 2019 3rd JOB-FIRST (SJF) SCHEDULING ALGORITHMS.
International Conference on Trends in Electronics and [27] Magdalene, R., & Sridharan, D. (2020). Comparative
Informatics (ICOEI) (pp. 968-971). IEEE. Analysis of FCFS and SJF for Multimedia Process
[15] Biswas, D., & Samsuddoha, M. (2019). Determining Scheduling. In Advances in Communication Systems
Proficient Time Quantum to Improve the Performance and Networks (pp. 639-646). Springer, Singapore.
of Round Robin Scheduling Algorithm. International [28] Kumar, S., Kumar, G., Jain, K., & Jain, A. (2018). An
Journal of Modern Education and Computer approach to reduce turn around time and waiting time by
Science, 11(10), 33. the selection of round robin and shortest job first
[16] Shafi, U., Shah, M. A., Wahid, A., Abbasi, K., Javaid, algorithm. International Journal of Engineering &
Q., Asghar, M., & Haider, M. (2020). A novel amended Technology, 7(2.8), 667-672.
dynamic round robin scheduling algorithm for [29] Chandra Shekar, N., & Karthik, V. (2017). Analysis of
timeshared systems. Int. Arab J. Inf. Technol., 17(1), Priority Scheduling Algorithm on the Basis of FCFS &
90-98. SJF for Similar Priority Jobs. International Journal of
[17] Aijaz, M., Tariq, R., Ghori, M., Rizvi, S. W., & Qazi, E. Engineering Research in Computer Science and
F. (2019, March). Efficient Round Robin Algorithm Engineering (IJERCSE), 4(3).
(ERRA) using the Average Burst Time. In 2019 [30] Chauhan, H., & Inani, A. (2019, June). Modified
International Conference on Information Science and Concept to Achieve Maximum Efficiency of CPU
Communication Technology (ICISCT) (pp. 1-5). IEEE. Scheduling Algorithm. In 2019 3rd International
[18] Mody, S., & Mirkar, S. (2019, December). Smart Round conference on Electronics, Communication and
Robin CPU Scheduling Algorithm For Operating Aerospace Technology (ICECA) (pp. 660-663). IEEE.
Systems. In 2019 4th International Conference on [31] Teraiya, J., & Shah, A. (2018, September). Comparative
Electrical, Electronics, Communication, Computer Study of LST and SJF Scheduling Algorithm in Soft
Technologies and Optimization Techniques Real-Time System with its Implementation and
(ICEECCOT) (pp. 309-316). IEEE. Analysis. In 2018 International Conference on
[19] Parekh, H. B., & Chaudhari, S. (2016, December). Advances in Computing, Communications and
Improved Round Robin CPU scheduling algorithm: Informatics (ICACCI) (pp. 706-711). IEEE.
Round Robin, Shortest Job First and priority algorithm [32] Garg, S., & Kumar, D. (2018, July). A k-Factor CPU
coupled to increase throughput and decrease waiting Scheduling Algorithm. In 2018 9th International
time and turnaround time. In 2016 International Conference on Computing, Communication and
Conference on Global Trends in Signal Processing, Networking Technologies (ICCCNT) (pp. 1-6). IEEE.
Information Computing and Communication
(ICGTSPICC) (pp. 184-187). IEEE. [33] Goel, N., & Garg, R. B. (2013). A comparative study of
cpu scheduling algorithms. arXiv preprint
[20] Alworafi, M. A., Dhari, A., Al-Hashmi, A. A., & arXiv:1307.4165.
Darem, A. B. (2016, December). An improved SJF [34] Adekunle, Y. A., Ogunwobi, Z. O., Jerry, A. S.,
scheduling algorithm in cloud computing environment. Efuwape, B. T., Ebiesuwa, S., & Ainam, J. P. (2014).
In 2016 International Conference on Electrical, A comparative study of scheduling algorithms for
Electronics, Communication, Computer and multiprogramming in real-time systems. International
Optimization Techniques (ICEECCOT) (pp. 208-212). Journal of Innovation and Scientific Research, 12(1),
IEEE. 180-185.
[21] Joshi, A., & Gosswami, S. (2017). Modified Round [35] Pushpraj, S., Vinod, S., & Anjani, P. (2014). Analysis
Robin algorithm by using Priority and Comparison of CPU Scheduling
Scheduling. Advances in Computational Sciences and Algorithms. International Journal of Research in
technology, 10(6), 1543-1549. Engineering & Technology (IJRET) Vol, 4(1).
[22] Zouaoui, S., Boussaid, L., & Mtibaa, A. (2019). [36] Dash, A. R., & Samantra, S. K. (2016). An optimized
Priority based round robin (PBRR) CPU scheduling round Robin CPU scheduling algorithm with dynamic
algorithm. International Journal of Electrical & time quantum. arXiv preprint arXiv:1605.00362.
Computer Engineering (2088-8708), 9(1). [37] Putra, T. D. Analysis of Preemptive Shortest Job First
[23] Berhanu, Y., Alemu, A., & Mishra, M. K. (2017). (SJF) Algorithm in CPU Scheduling.
Dynamic time quantum based round robin CPU [38] Hamayun, M., & Khurshid, H. (2015). An optimized
scheduling algorithm (Doctoral dissertation). shortest job first scheduling algorithm for CPU
[24] Omotehinwa, T. O., Azeez, I., & Oyekanmi, E. O. scheduling. J. Appl. Environ. Biol. Sci, 5(12), 42-46.
(2019). An Improved Round Robin CPU Scheduling [39] Sowmya, G., ChinaAppalaNaidu, R., Meghana, K., &
Bandi, R. (2018). A COMPARISON OF
 26 IJCSNS International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, VOL.21 No.1, January 2021

SCHEDULING ALGORITHM FOR BEST

UTILIZATION OF MEMORY. International Journal
of Pure and Applied Mathematics, 120(6), 3563-3570.
[40] Krishna, M. V. (2018). BigData Processing using First
Come First Served (FCFS) Algorithm. International
Journal of Computer Science and Mobile
Computing, 7(7), 83-87.
[41] Chandiramani, K., Verma, R., & Sivagami, M. (2019).
A Modified Priority Preemptive Algorithm for CPU
Scheduling. Procedia Computer Science, 165, 363-369.
[42] Tripathi, S., Prajapati, S., & Ansari, N. A. (2017, May).
Modified optimal algorithm: for load balancing in
cloud computing. In 2017 International Conference on
Computing, Communication and Automation
(ICCCA) (pp. 116-121). IEEE.
[43] Zhang, J., Chen, C., Zheng, H. K., & Luo, Q. Y. (2019,
June). A High Priority Random Task Fuzzy Scheduling
Algorithm for CPS. In 2019 Chinese Control And
Decision Conference (CCDC) (pp. 482-487). IEEE.

View publication stats