MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2606942538 · doi:10.23977/jemm.2016.11005

Approximation Algorithm for Scheduling Parallel Machines with Machine Eligibility Restrictions and special jobs

2016· article· en· W2606942538 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yong Zhan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Engineering Mechanics and Machinery · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicScheduling and Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSpecialized Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceJob shop schedulingMathematical optimizationScheduling (production processes)AlgorithmPath (computing)Vertex (graph theory)Greedy algorithmMathematicsGraphTheoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper addresses the scheduling problem of parallel machines with machine eligibility restrictions and special jobs with the objective of minimizing the makespan. Each job can only be assigned to a specific subset of the machines. And the processing times of jobs are restricted to one of two values, 1 andε. A semi-matching model G=[J∪M,E,W] is presented to formulate this scheduling problem. We propose an approximation algorithm, which is composed of two steps, that is, initial solution construction and initial solution improvement. The initial solution construction algorithm is developed to build a feasible solution by performing a simple greedy heuristic method. The initial solution is used as a starting point by the improvement algorithm. The main idea of the improvement algorithm is to construct alternating tree, then to find the optimal alternating path for each vertex in M iteratively. In order to improve efficiency, the length of each path in alternating tree is limited to 4 at most.

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 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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.195
Threshold uncertainty score0.510

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Engineering Mechanics and MachinerySame topicScheduling and Optimization AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207