MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225606115 · doi:10.5267/j.jpm.2021.12.001

Earliness/tardiness minimization in a no-wait flow shop with sequence-dependent setup times

2022· article· en· W4225606115 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Project Management · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicScheduling and Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTardinessSequence (biology)Mathematical optimizationFlow shop schedulingMinificationComputer scienceScheduling (production processes)Job shop schedulingGenetic algorithmRetardDue dateFunction (biology)ProductivityOperations researchAlgorithmMathematicsEconomicsScheduleChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The no-wait flow shop scheduling problem (NWFSP) plays a crucial role in the allocation of resources in multitudinous industries, including the steel, pharmaceutical, chemical, plastic, electronic, and food processing industries. The NWFSP consists of n jobs that must be processed in m machines in series, and no job is allowed to wait between consecutive operations. This project deals with NWFSP with sequence-dependent setup times for minimizing earliness and tardiness. From the literature review of the last five years in NWFSP, it is noticeable that only around 1.92% of the researchers have studied that multi-objective function, which could help to improve the productivity of industries where methods such as just in time are considered. Besides, there is no information about previous researchers that have solved this problem with sequence-dependent setup times. Firstly, a MILP model is proposed to solve small instances, and secondly, a genetic algorithm (GA) is developed as a solution method for medium and large instances. Compared with the mathematical model for small instances, the GA obtained the optimal solution in 100% of the cases. For medium and large instances, the GA improves in an average of 31.54%, 38.09%, 44.58%, 47.72%, and 37.33% the MDD, EDDP, ATC, SPT, and LPT dispatching rules, respectively.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.362
Threshold uncertainty score0.477

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.221 · 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