MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4317725390 · doi:10.5267/j.jpm.2022.12.001

Bounded dynamic programming approach to minimize makespan in the blocking flowshop problem with sequence dependent setup times

2023· article· en· W4317725390 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Edson Antônio Gonçalves de Souza, Marcelo Seido Nagano, Hugo Hissashi Miyata, Levi R. Abreu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Project Management · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicScheduling and Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsJob shop schedulingBounded functionMathematical optimizationComputer scienceMinificationDynamic programmingSequence (biology)Scheduling (production processes)Limit (mathematics)Blocking (statistics)Flow shop schedulingLinear programmingAlgorithmMathematicsSchedule

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper aims at presenting an algorithm for solving the blocking flow shop problem with sequence dependent setup times (BFSP-SDST) with minimization of the makespan. In order to do so, we propose an adapted Bounded Dynamic Programming (BDP-SN) algorithm as solution method, since the problem itself does not present a significant number of sources in the state-of-art references and also because Dynamic Programming and its variants have been resurfacing in the flowshop literature. Therefore, we apply the modified method to two sets of problems and compare the results computationally and statistically for instances with a MILP and a B&B method for at most 20 jobs and 20 machines. The results show that BDP-SN is promising and outperforms both MILP and B&B within the established time limit. In addition, some suggestions are made in order to improve the method and employ it in parallel research regarding other branches of machine scheduling.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Project ManagementSame topicScheduling and Optimization AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207