More effective heuristics for a two-machine no-wait flowshop to minimize maximum lateness
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We address a manufacturing environment with the no-wait constraint which is common in industries such as metal, plastic, and semiconductor. Setup times are modelled as uncertain with the objective of minimizing maximum lateness which is an important performance measure for customer satisfaction. This problem has been addressed in scheduling literature for the two-machine no-wait flowshop where dominance relations were presented. Recently, another dominance relation was presented and shown to be about 90% more efficient than the earlier ones. In the current paper, we propose two new dominance relations, which are less restrictive than the earlier ones in the literature. The new dominance relations are shown to be 140% more efficient than the most recent one in the literature. As the level of uncertainty increases, the newly proposed dominance relation performs better, which is another strength of the newly proposed dominance relation. Moreover, we also propose constructive heuristics and show that the best of the newly proposed heuristics is 95% more efficient than the existing one in the literature under the same CPU time.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it