MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2220822187 · doi:10.1609/icaps.v22i1.13524

Long-Run Stability in Dynamic Scheduling

2012· article· en· W2220822187 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

VenueProceedings of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicScheduling and Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPollingComputer scienceQueueing theoryDynamic priority schedulingScheduling (production processes)Mathematical optimizationStability (learning theory)Flow shop schedulingScheduleDistributed computingMathematicsComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stability analysis consists of identifying conditions under which the number of jobs in a system is guaranteed to remain bounded over time. To date, such long-run performance guarantees have not been available for periodic approaches to dynamic scheduling problems. However, stability has been extensively studied in queueing theory. In this paper, we introduce stability to the dynamic scheduling literature and demonstrate that stability guarantees can be obtained for methods that build the schedule for a dynamic problem by periodically solving static deterministic sub-problems. Specifically, we analyze the stability of two dynamic environments: a two-machine flow shop, which has received significant attention in scheduling research, and a polling system with a flow-shop server, an extension of systems typically considered in queueing. We demonstrate that, among stable policies, methods based on periodic optimization of static schedules may achieve better mean flow times than traditional queueing approaches.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.552
Threshold uncertainty score0.625

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.246 · 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