Continuous-time algorithms for scheduling a single machine with sequence-dependent setup times and time window constraints in coordinated chains
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper we address the problem of selecting and scheduling several jobs on a single machine with sequence-dependent setup times and strictly enforced time window constraints on the start time of each job. We use short-term production targets to coordinate decentralised local schedulers and to make the objectives of specific areas in line with the chain objectives by maintaining a desired work in process profile in manufacturing environments. The existing literature in this domain is based on discrete-time approaches. We depart from prior approaches by considering continuous time. We introduce a two-step mathematical programming model based on disjunctive constraints to solve small problems to optimality, and propose an insertion-based heuristic to solve large-scale instances. We provide several variations of the insertion heuristic based on different score functions. The primary objective of these approaches is to maximise the total defined score for jobs while satisfying production targets for families of jobs in each shift. Further, our models minimise the maximum completion time of all selected jobs. The effectiveness, efficiency, and robustness of the proposed algorithms are analysed and compared with the existing literature.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".