MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022719899 · doi:10.1504/ijor.2012.046225

A unique hybrid particle swarm optimisation algorithm for simulation and improvement of crew scheduling problem

2012· article· en· W2022719899 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Operational Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicScheduling and Timetabling Solutions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrew schedulingCrewComputer scienceParticle swarm optimizationMathematical optimizationScheduling (production processes)Job shop schedulingComputationAlgorithmMathematicsEngineeringSchedule

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The crew scheduling problem is a set covering or set partitioning problem. It schedules the crew members so that all flights are covered, while the cost is minimised. The crew scheduling is an non-deterministic polynomialtime hard constrained combinatorial optimisation problem, so it cannot be exactly solved in a reasonable computation time. This paper presents a particle swarm optimisation (PSO) algorithm for simulating and solving the crew scheduling problem. The proposed algorithm is extended from the discrete version of PSO. By applying PSO to the crew scheduling problem, the cost is improved when compared with other well-known algorithms. This is the first study that introduces PSO for simulation and optimisation of the crew scheduling problem.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.347
Threshold uncertainty score0.743

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.280
GPT teacher head0.522
Teacher spread0.243 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it