Two-objective optimization of preventive maintenance orders scheduling as a multi-skilled resource-constrained flow shop problem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, the application of the Multi-Skilled Resource-Constrained Flow Shop Scheduling Problem (MSRC-FSSP) in preventive maintenance as a case study has been investigated. In other words, to complete each maintenance order at each stage, in addition to the machine, a set of required human resources with different skills must be available. According to human resources skills, each of them can perform at least one order or at most N orders, and each maintenance order must be done by a set of human resources with different skills. To carry out a maintenance order, different human resources must be in communication and cooperation so that a preventive maintenance order can be completed. In this article, these resources are considered as technical supervisors, repairmen and maintenance managers who complete all maintenance orders in a flow shop environment as a job. For this problem, a new Mixed Integer Linear Programming (MILP) model has been formulated with the two-objective functions, minimizing total orders completion time and the human resources idle time. To solve the model on a small scale, CPLEX is used, and to solve it on a large scale, due to the fact that this problem is NP-Hard, a meta-heuristic algorithm named Genetic Algorithm (GA) is presented. Finally, the computational results have been done to validate the model, along with the analysis of the human resources idle 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.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".