Solving Lot-Sizing Problems on Parallel Identical Machines Using Symmetry-Breaking Constraints
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Production planning on multiple parallel machines is an interesting problem, both from a theoretical and practical point of view. The parallel machine lot-sizing problem consists of finding the optimal timing and level of production and the best allocation of products to machines. In this paper, we look at how to incorporate parallel machines in a mixed-integer programming model when using commercial optimization software. More specifically, we look at the issue of symmetry. When multiple identical machines are available, many alternative optimal solutions can be created by renumbering the machines. These alternative solutions lead to difficulties in the branch-and-bound algorithm. We propose new constraints to break this symmetry. We tested our approach on the parallel machine lot-sizing problem with setup costs and times, using a network reformulation for this problem. Computational tests indicate that several of the proposed symmetry-breaking constraints substantially improve the solution time, except when used for solving the very easy problems. The results highlight the importance of creative modeling in solving mixed-integer programming problems—specifically, the potential added value of symmetry-breaking constraints.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it