MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312371765 · doi:10.1016/j.ifacol.2022.10.100

A Didactic Review On Genetic Algorithms For Industrial Planning And Scheduling Problems*

2022· review· en· W4312371765 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIFAC-PapersOnLine · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicScheduling and Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceScheduling (production processes)ComputationVariety (cybernetics)Adaptation (eye)Genetic algorithmHeuristicDistributed computingMathematical optimizationArtificial intelligenceMachine learningAlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most industrial planning and scheduling problems are NP-hard, stochastic, and subject to multi-objective. A wide variety of heuristic methods have been designed or adapted to solve them. However, the Genetic Algorithms (GA) family is both the most used and one of the most efficient for several well-known problems. This paper reviews GAs proposed in the literature, focusing on the techniques to overcome scheduling challenges (cycle avoidance and feasibility). This paper also has a didactic purpose and details modern approaches to reach high-quality solutions: self-adaptation, learning process, diversity-maintenance, parallel computation, multi-objective, and hybridization. These mechanisms are also essential to integrate the method in current IT systems.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.945
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.207 · 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