MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285157368 · doi:10.5267/j.ijiec.2022.2.002

Integrated scheduling of machines and automated guided vehicles (AGVs) in flexible job shop environment using genetic algorithms

2022· article· en· W4285157368 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Imran Ali Chaudhry, Amer Farhan Rafique, Isam A-Q Elbadawi, Mohamed Aichouni, Muhammad Usman, Mohamed Boujelbene, Attia Boudjemline

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Industrial Engineering Computations · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Manufacturing and Logistics Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJob shopAutomated guided vehicleJob shop schedulingScheduling (production processes)Computer scienceGenetic algorithmBenchmark (surveying)Flow shop schedulingMachine shopIndustrial engineeringAlgorithmMathematical optimizationEngineeringArtificial intelligenceManufacturing engineeringMachine learningOperating systemSchedule

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this research integrated scheduling of machines and automated guided vehicles (AGVs) in a flexible job shop environment is addressed. The scheduling literature generally ignores the transportation of jobs between the machines and when considered typically assumes an unlimited number of AGVs. In order to comply with Industry 4.0 requirements, today’s manufacturing systems make use of AGVs to transport jobs between the machines. The addressed problem involves simultaneous assignment of operations to one of the alternative machines, determining the sequence of operations on each machine and assignment of transportation operations between machines to an available AGV. We present a Microsoft Excel® spreadsheet-based solution for the problem. Evolver®, a proprietary GA is used for the optimization. The GA routine works as an add-in to the spreadsheet environment. The flexible job shop model is developed in Microsoft Excel® spreadsheet. The assignment of AGV is independent of the GA routine and is done by the spreadsheet model while the GA finds the assignment of operations to the machines and then finds the best sequence of operations on each machine. Computational analysis demonstrates that the proposed method can effectively and efficiently solve a wide range of problems with reasonable accuracy. Benchmark problems from the literature are used to highlight the effectiveness and efficiency of the proposed implementation. In most of the cases the proposed implementation can find the best-known solution found by previous studies.

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)0.001
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 score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations46
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Industrial Engineering ComputationsSame topicAdvanced Manufacturing and Logistics OptimizationFrench-language works237,207