MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2056411353 · doi:10.1080/00207543.2014.980452

Rescheduling with controllable processing times for number of disrupted jobs and manufacturing cost objectives

2014· article· en· W2056411353 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Si̇nan Gürel, D. Cincioğlu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Production Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicScheduling and Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsUnavailabilityScheduleMathematical optimizationComputer scienceHeuristicSet (abstract data type)Integer programmingOperations researchAlgorithmReliability engineeringEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider a machine rescheduling problem that arises when a disruption such as machine breakdown occurs to a given schedule. Machine unavailability due to a breakdown requires repairing the schedule as the original schedule becomes infeasible. When repairing a disrupted schedule a desirable goal is to complete each disrupted job on time, i.e. not later than the planned completion time in the original schedule. We consider the case where processing times of jobs are controllable and compressing the processing time of a job requires extra processing cost. Usually, there exists a nonlinear relation between the processing time and manufacturing cost. We solve a bicriteria rescheduling problem that trades off the number of on-time jobs and manufacturing cost objectives. We give a mixed-integer second-order cone programming formulation for the problem. We develop a heuristic search algorithm to generate efficient solutions for the problem. Heuristic algorithm searches solution space by moving and swapping jobs among machines. We develop cost change estimates for job moves and swaps so that the heuristic implements only promising moves and hence generates a set of efficient solutions in reasonably short CPU times.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.321 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Production ResearchSame topicScheduling and Optimization AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207