MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3197789086

Trade-off Balancing Between Maximum and Total Completion Times for No-Wait Flow Shop Production

2020· article· en· W3197789086 on OpenAlex
Honghan Ye, Wei Li, Barrie R. Nault

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicScheduling and Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeuristicsMathematical optimizationHeuristicBenchmark (surveying)MinificationComputer scienceScheduling (production processes)Flow shop schedulingMathematicsParameterized complexityJob shop schedulingAlgorithmRouting (electronic design automation)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a trade-off balancing (TOB) heuristic in a no-wait flow shop to minimize the weighted sum of maximum completion time (Cmax) and total completion time (TCT) based on machine idle times. We introduce a factorization scheme to construct the initial sequence based on current and future idle times at the operational level. In addition, we propose a novel estimation method to establish the mathematical relationship between the objectives min(Cmax) and min(TCT) at the production line level. To evaluate the performance of the TOB heuristic, computational experiments are conducted on the classic Taillard's benchmark and one-year historical data from University of Kentucky HealthCare (UKHC). The computational results show that minimization of Cmax and TCT yield inconsistent scheduling sequences, and these two sequences are relatively uncorrelated. We also show that our TOB heuristic performs better than the best existing heuristics with the same computational complexity and generates stable performances in balancing trade-offs.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.835
Threshold uncertainty score0.530

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.199 · 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