Minimizing total tardiness for the order scheduling problem with sequence-dependent setup times using hybrid matheuristics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper aims at presenting a customer order scheduling environment in which the setup times are explicit and depend on the production sequence. The considered objective function is the total tardiness minimization. Since the variant under study is NP-hard, we propose a mixed-integer linear programming (MILP) model, an adaptation of the Order-Scheduling Modified Due-Date heuristic (OMDD) (referred to as Order-Scheduling Modified Due-Date Setup (OMMD-S)), an adaptation of the Framinan and Perez-Gonzalez heuristic (FP) (hereinafter referred to as Framinan and Perez-Gonzalez Setup (FP-S)), a matheuristic with Same Permutation in All Machines (SPAM), and the hybrid matheuristic SPAM-SJPO based on Job-Position Oscillation (JPO). The algorithms under comparison have been compared on an extensive benchmark of randomly generated test instances, considering two performance measures: Relative Deviation Index (RDI) and Success Rate (SR). For the small-size evaluated instances, the SPAM is the most efficient algorithm, presenting the better values of RDI and SR. For the large-size evaluated instances, the hybrid matheuristic SPAM-JPO and MILP model are the most efficient methods.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".