Parallel machine scheduling with eligibility constraints: A composite dispatching rule to minimize total weighted tardiness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study a parallel machine scheduling problem, where a job j can only be processed on a specific subset of machines Mj, and the Mj subsets of the n jobs are nested. We develop a two-phase heuristic for minimizing the total weighted tardiness subject to the machine eligibility constraints. In the first phase, we compute the factors and statistics that characterize a problem instance. In the second phase, we propose a new composite dispatching rule, the Apparent Tardiness Cost with Flexibility considerations (ATCF) rule, which is governed by several scaling parameters of which the values are determined by the factors obtained in the first phase. The ATCF rule is a generalization of the well-known ATC rule which is very widely used in practice. We further discuss how to improve the dispatching rule using some simple but powerful properties without requiring additional computation time, and the improvement is quite satisfactory. We apply the Sequential Uniform Design Method to design our experiments and conduct an extensive computational study, and we perform tests on the performance of the ATCF rule using a real data set from a large hospital in China. We further compare its performance with that of the classical ATC rule. We also compare the schedules improved by the ATCF rule with what we believe are Near Optimal schedules generated by a general search procedure. The computational results show that especially with a low due date tightness, the ATCF rule performs significantly better than the well-known ATC rule generating much improved schedules that are close to the Near Optimal schedules. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Naval Research Logistics 64: 249–267, 2017
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".