MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

MULTI-AGENT SYSTEM MODEL FOR DYNAMIC SCHEDULING IN FLEXIBILE JOB SHOP SUBJECT TO RANDOM MACHINE BREAKDOWN

2022· article· en· W4317815167 on OpenAlexaff
Akposeiyifa Ebufegha, Simon Li

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicScheduling and Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceScheduling (production processes)Job shop schedulingDynamic priority schedulingSubject (documents)Mathematical optimizationEmbedded systemMathematicsWorld Wide WebOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a model for dynamic scheduling in a smart manufacturing system that can be used in a manufacturing environment subject to random machine breakdown. We employ a multi-agent system (MAS) to schedule work on a system of machines in real-time. We propose that such a system should be less sensitive to unforeseen disruptions to the system whilst yielding good results with respect to the total flowtime for parts requested of the system. The approach employed is a completely reactive approach, and as such has the benefit of not requiring the determination of a nominal schedule. Rather, we take advantage of self-organizing nature of the MAS to guide work scheduling. To evaluate the efficacy of our proposed model, we compare its performance to that of a system using predictive-reactive scheduling to solve a furniture manufacturing problem.

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)0.001
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC)Same topicScheduling and Optimization AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207