MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297769732 · doi:10.5267/j.dsl.2022.7.004

A multilayer feed-forward neural network (MLFNN) for the resource-constrained project scheduling problem (RCPSP)

2022· article· en· W4297769732 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Amir Golab, Ehsan Sedgh Gooya, Ayman Al Falou, M. Cabon

Bibliographic record

VenueDecision Science Letters · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicResource-Constrained Project Scheduling
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceScheduleScheduling (production processes)Project managementArtificial neural networkOperations researchHeuristicMetaheuristicMathematical optimizationArtificial intelligenceSystems engineeringEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Project management has a fundamental role in national development, industrial development, and economic growth. Schedule management is also one of the knowledge areas of project management, which includes the processes employed to manage the timely completion of the project. This paper deals with the Resource-Constrained Project Scheduling Problem (RCPSP), which is a part of schedule management. The objective of the problem is to optimize and minimize the project duration while constraining the resource quantities during project scheduling. There are two important constraints in this problem, namely resource constraints and precedence relationships of activities during project scheduling. Many methods such as exact, heuristic, and meta-heuristic have been developed by researchers to solve the problem, but there is a lack of investigation of the problem using methods such as neural networks and machine learning. In this article, we develop a multi-layer feed-forward neural network (MLFNN) to solve the standard single- mode RCPSP. The advantage of this method over evolutionary methods or metaheuristics is that it is not necessary to generate numerous solutions or populations. The developed MLFNN learns based on eight project parameters, namely network complexity, resource factor, resource strength, average work per activity, percentage of remaining work, etc., which are calculated at each step of project scheduling, and identified priority rules, which are the outputs of the developed neural network. Therefore, after the learning process, the network can automatically select an appropriate priority rule to filter out an unscheduled activity from the list of eligible activities and schedule all activities of the project according to the given project constraints. Finally, we investigate the performance of the presented approach using the standard benchmark problems from PSPLIB.

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)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.286 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDecision Science LettersSame topicResource-Constrained Project SchedulingFrench-language works237,207