MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3097072875 · doi:10.5267/j.jpm.2020.10.001

Solving a flow shop scheduling problem with missing operations in an Industry 4.0 production environment

2020· article· en· W3097072875 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Project Management · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicScheduling and Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlow shop schedulingTardinessJob shop schedulingComputer scienceScheduling (production processes)Mathematical optimizationPermutation (music)Simulated annealingIndustrial engineeringAlgorithmMathematicsEngineeringRouting (electronic design automation)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Industry 4.0 is a modern approach that aims at enhancing the connectivity between the different stages of the production process and the requirements of consumers. This paper addresses a relevant problem for both Industry 4.0 and flow shop literature: the missing operations flow shop scheduling problem. In general, in order to reduce the computational effort required to solve flow shop scheduling problems only permutation schedules (PFS) are considered, i.e., the same job sequence is used for all the machines involved. However, considering only PFS is not a constraint that is based on the real-world conditions of the industrial environments, and it is only a simplification strategy used frequently in the literature. Moreover, non-permutation (NPFS) orderings may be used for most of the real flow shop systems, i.e., different job schedules can be used for different machines in the production line, since NPFS solutions usually outperform the PFS ones. In this work, a novel mathematical formulation to minimize total tardiness and a resolution method, which considers both PFS and (the more computationally expensive) NPFS solutions, are presented to solve the flow shop scheduling problem with missing operations. The solution approach has two stages. First, a Genetic Algorithm, which only considers PFS solutions, is applied to solve the scheduling problem. The resulting solution is then improved in the second stage by means of a Simulated Annealing algorithm that expands the search space by considering NPFS solutions. The experimental tests were performed on a set of instances considering varying proportions of missing operations, as it is usual in the Industry 4.0 production environment. The results show that NPFS solutions clearly outperform PFS solutions for this problem.

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)0.000
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.446

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.215 · 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