Combining Constraint Programming and Local Search for Job-Shop Scheduling
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
Since their introduction, local search algorithms have consistently represented the state of the art in solution techniques for the classical job-shop scheduling problem. This dominance is despite the availability of powerful search and inference techniques for scheduling problems developed by the constraint programming community. In this paper, we introduce a simple hybrid algorithm for job-shop scheduling that leverages both the fast, broad search capabilities of modern tabu search algorithms and the scheduling-specific inference capabilities of constraint programming. The hybrid algorithm significantly improves the performance of a state-of-the-art tabu search algorithm for the job-shop problem and represents the first instance in which a constraint programming algorithm obtains performance competitive with the best local search algorithms. Furthermore, the variability in solution quality obtained by the hybrid is significantly lower than that of pure local search algorithms. Beyond performance demonstration, we perform a series of experiments that provide insights into the roles of the two component algorithms in the overall performance of the hybrid.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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