MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386526902 · doi:10.1080/00207543.2023.2252937

Distributed appointment assignment and scheduling under uncertainty

2023· article· en· W4386526902 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Xue Li, Yantong Li, Zheng Wang, Sai‐Ho Chung, Xin Wen

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Production Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Operations and Scheduling Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNatural Science Foundation of Shaanxi ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsTardinessMathematical optimizationScheduling (production processes)Computer scienceJob shop schedulingBenders' decompositionStochastic programmingOperations researchService (business)DecompositionEngineeringScheduleMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate a stochastic distributed appointment assignment and scheduling problem, which consists of assigning appointments to distributed service units and determining service sequences at each service unit. In particular, the service time duration and release time uncertainties are well-considered. The solution to this generic problem finds interesting applications in distributed production systems, healthcare systems, and post-disaster operations. We formulate the problem as a two-stage stochastic program to minimise the total transportation cost and expected makespan, idle time or overtime, and apply the sample average approximation method to make the problem tractable. We then develop a stochastic logic-based Benders decomposition method, decomposing the problem into a master problem and a subproblem. The master problem determines the appointment assignment variables, and the subproblem handles the sequence and service start time variables. Benders optimality cuts are generated from the subproblem's solution and added to the master problem. The developed stochastic logic-based method is advantageous since it can manage many scenarios in parallel. We further consider each appointment's due date, minimise the weighted earliness and tardiness, and adjust the developed method to solve this variant. Experiments on random instances demonstrate the excellent performance of the proposed model and methods.

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 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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.564
Threshold uncertainty score0.480

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.301
GPT teacher head0.566
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Production ResearchSame topicHealthcare Operations and Scheduling OptimizationFrench-language works237,207