MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3155015670 · doi:10.5267/j.ijiec.2021.3.002

Two meta-heuristic algorithms for optimizing a multi-objective supply chain scheduling problem in an identical parallel machines environment

2021· article· en· W3155015670 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nima Farmand, Hamid Zarei, Morteza Rasti−Barzoki

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Industrial Engineering Computations · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicScheduling and Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematical optimizationTardinessCrossoverComputer scienceSortingParticle swarm optimizationGenetic algorithmScheduling (production processes)Total costMulti-objective optimizationAlgorithmJob shop schedulingMathematicsScheduleArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Optimizing the trade-off between crucial decisions has been a prominent issue to help decision-makers for synchronizing the production scheduling and distribution planning in supply chain management. In this article, a bi-objective integrated scheduling problem of production and distribution is addressed in a production environment with identical parallel machines. Besides, two objective functions are considered as measures for customer satisfaction and reduction of the manufacturer’s costs. The first objective is considered aiming at minimizing the total weighted tardiness and total operation time. The second objective is considered aiming at minimizing the total cost of the company’s reputational damage due to the number of tardy orders, total earliness penalty, and total batch delivery costs. First, a mathematical programming model is developed for the problem. Then, two well-known meta-heuristic algorithms are designed to spot near-optimal solutions since the problem is strongly NP-hard. A multi-objective particle swarm optimization (MOPSO) is designed using a mutation function, followed by a non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm (NSGA-II) with a one-point crossover operator and a heuristic mutation operator. The experiments on MOPSO and NSGA-II are carried out on small, medium, and large scale problems. Moreover, the performance of the two algorithms is compared according to some comparing criteria. The computational results reveal that the NSGA-II performs highly better than the MOPSO algorithm in small scale problems. In the case of medium and large scale problems, the efficiency of the MOPSO algorithm was significantly improved. Nevertheless, the NSGA-II performs robustly in the most important criteria.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations19
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Industrial Engineering ComputationsSame topicScheduling and Optimization AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207