Decomposition Methods for the Parallel Machine Scheduling Problem with Setups
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study the unrelated parallel machine scheduling problem with sequence and machine-dependent setup times and the objective of makespan minimization. Two exact decomposition-based methods are proposed based on logic-based Benders decomposition and branch and check. These approaches are hybrid models that make use of a mixed-integer programming (MIP) master problem and a specialized solver for travelling salesman subproblems. The master problem is used to assign jobs to machines, whereas the subproblems find optimal schedules on each machine given the master problem assignments. Computational results show that the decomposition models are able to find optimal solutions up to four orders of magnitude faster than the existing state of the art as well as solve problems six times larger than an existing MIP model. We further investigate the solution quality versus runtime trade-off for large problem instances for which the optimal solutions cannot be found and proved in a reasonable time. We demonstrate that the branch-and-check hybrid algorithm is able to produce better schedules in less time than the state-of-the-art metaheuristic, while also providing an optimality gap.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".