Optimized resource-constrained method for project schedule compression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This paper aims to present an integrated method for optimized project duration and costs, considering the size and cost of crews assigned to project activities' execution modes. Design/methodology/approach The proposed method utilizes fuzzy set theory (FSs) for modeling uncertainties associated with activities' duration and cost and genetic algorithm (GA) for optimizing project schedule. The method has four main modules that support two optimization methods: modeling uncertainty and defuzzification module; scheduling module; cost calculations module; and decision-support module. The first optimization method uses the elitist non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm (NSGA-II), while the second uses a dynamic weighted optimization genetic algorithm. The developed scheduling and optimization methods are coded in python as a stand-alone automated computerized tool to facilitate the developed method's application. Findings The developed method is applied to a numerical example to demonstrate its use and illustrate its capabilities. The method was validated using a multi-layered comparative analysis that involves performance evaluation, statistical comparisons and stability evaluation. Results indicated that NSGA-II outperformed the weighted optimization method, resulting in a better global optimum solution, which avoided local minima entrapment. Moreover, the developed method was constructed under a deterministic scenario to evaluate its performance in finding optimal solutions against the previously developed literature methods. Results showed the developed method's superiority in finding a better optimal set of solutions in a reasonable processing time. Originality/value The novelty of the proposed method lies in its capacity to consider resource planning and project scheduling under uncertainty simultaneously while accounting for activity splitting.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".