Optimal Due Date Assignment and Resource Allocation to Minimize the Weighted Number of Tardy Jobs on a Single Machine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the increased emphasis on the effective management of operational issues in supply chains, the timely delivery of products has become even more important. Companies have to quote attainable delivery dates and then meet these, or face large tardiness penalties. We study systems that can be modeled by single-machine scheduling problems with due date assignment and controllable job-processing times, which are either linear or convex functions of the amount of a continuously divisible and nonrenewable resource that is allocated to the task. The due date assignment methods studied include the common due date, the slack due date, which reflects equal waiting time allowance for the jobs, and the most general method of unrestricted due dates, when each job may be assigned a different due date. For each combination of due date assignment method and processing-time function, we provide a polynomial-time algorithm to find the optimal job sequence, due date values, and resource allocations that minimize an integrated objective function, which includes the weighted number of tardy jobs, and due date assignment, makespan, and total resource consumption costs.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".