MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3116777151 · doi:10.4230/lipics.isaac.2020.10

Approximation Algorithms for Generalized Path Scheduling

2020· article· en· W3116777151 on OpenAlexaff
Haozhou Pang, Mohammad R. Salavatipour

Bibliographic record

VenueDROPS (Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Center for Informatics) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptimization and Search Problems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJob shop schedulingScheduling (production processes)QueuePath (computing)AlgorithmComputer scienceFlow shop schedulingLongest path problemMathematicsMathematical optimizationTheoretical computer scienceShortest path problemGraph

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Scheduling problems where the machines can be represented as the edges of a network and each job needs to be processed by a sequence of machines that form a path in this network have been the subject of many research articles (e.g. flow shop is the special case where the network as well as the sequence of machines for each job is a simple path). In this paper we consider one such problem, called Generalized Path Scheduling (GPS) problem, which can be defined as follows. Given a set of non-preemptive jobs J and identical machines M ( |J| = n and |M| = m ). The machines are ordered on a path. Each job j = {P_j = {l_j, r_j}, p_j} is defined by its processing time p_j and a sub-path P_j from machine with index l_j to r_j (l_j, r_j ∈ M, and l_j ≤ r_j) specifying the order of machines it must go through. We assume each machine has a queue of infinite size where jobs can sit in the queue to resolve conflicts. Two objective functions, makespan and total completion time, are considered. Machines can be identical or unrelated. In the latter case, this problem generalizes the classical Flow shop problem (in which all jobs have to go through all machines from 1 to m in that order).
\nGeneralized Path Scheduling has been studied (e.g. see [Ronald Koch et al., 2009; Zachary Friggstad et al., 2019]). In this paper, we present several improved approximation algorithms for both objectives. For the case of number of machines being sub-logarithmic in the number of jobs we present a PTAS for both makespan and total completion time. The PTAS holds even on unrelated machines setting and therefore, generalizes the result of Hall [Leslie A. Hall, 1998] for the classic problem of Flow shop. For the case of identical machines, we present an O((log m)/(log log m))-approximation algorithms for both objectives, which improve the previous best result of [Zachary Friggstad et al., 2019]. We also show that the GPS problem is NP-complete for both makespan and total completion time objectives.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.855
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.237 · 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.

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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDROPS (Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Center for Informatics)Same topicOptimization and Search ProblemsFrench-language works237,207