Scheduling a hybrid flowshop with parallel machines for aircraft assembly production
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The new P2/HFS|Prec|Cmaxscheduling problem is found within an aerospace fuselage manufacturing environment and is a combinatorial problem addressed using dispatching rules. A newly proposed dispatching rule, named ‘batch and match’, was created by exploiting the combined elements of a) product assembly characteristics and b) processing time on a shared resource, is used to find solutions for minimizing makespan and waiting time for ten fuselage sets. A new manufacturing tool incorporates models for calculation of makespan and waiting time in the system. The best schedule, found using the new dispatching rule and a weighting system for ranking makespan and waiting time, was DCAB (LI), this schedule gives a reduced makespan of 2.61% against the benchmark longest imminent operation rule. The DCAB (LI) schedule also shows a reduction in waiting time of 53.5% per fuselage set created. This ‘batch and match’ dispatching method performs better than other rules and offers a solution to shared resources that limit processing in hybrid flowshops with precedence constraints.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".