Solution-Guided Multi-Point Constructive Search for Job Shop Scheduling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Solution-Guided Multi-Point Constructive Search (SGMPCS) is a novel constructive search technique that performs a series of resource-limited tree searches where each search begins either from an empty solution (as in randomized restart) or from a solution that has been encountered during the search. A small number of these "elite'' solutions is maintained during the search. We introduce the technique and perform three sets of experiments on the job shop scheduling problem. First, a systematic, fully crossed study of SGMPCS is carried out to evaluate the performance impact of various parameter settings. Second, we inquire into the diversity of the elite solution set, showing, contrary to expectations, that a less diverse set leads to stronger performance. Finally, we compare the best parameter setting of SGMPCS from the first two experiments to chronological backtracking, limited discrepancy search, randomized restart, and a sophisticated tabu search algorithm on a set of well-known benchmark problems. Results demonstrate that SGMPCS is significantly better than the other constructive techniques tested, though lags behind the tabu search.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".