MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104638302 · doi:10.1287/mnsc.1100.1264

Grammar-Based Integer Programming Models for Multiactivity Shift Scheduling

2010· article· en· W2104638302 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

VenueManagement Science · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicScheduling and Timetabling Solutions
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceInteger programmingSolverLinear programming relaxationMathematical optimizationRule-based machine translationScheduling (production processes)Relaxation (psychology)Theoretical computer scienceMathematicsAlgorithmProgramming languageArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a new implicit formulation for shift scheduling problems, using context-free grammars to model the rules for the composition of shifts. From the grammar, we generate an integer programming (IP) model having a linear programming relaxation equivalent to that of the classical set covering model. When solved by a state-of-the-art IP solver on problem instances with a small number of shifts, our model, the set covering formulation, and a typical implicit model from the literature yield comparable solution times. On instances with a large number of shifts, our formulation shows superior performance and can model a wider variety of constraints. In particular, multiactivity cases, which cannot be modeled by existing implicit formulations, can easily be handled with grammars. We present comparative experimental results on a large set of instances involving one work activity, as well as on problems dealing with up to 10 work activities. This paper was accepted by Dimitris Bertsimas, optimization.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.715
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.279 · 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