MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389832523 · doi:10.5267/j.jpm.2023.11.002

Scheduling parallel extrusion lines

2023· article· en· W4389832523 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Project Management · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicScheduling and Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalTransport Canada
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTabu searchMetaheuristicJob shop schedulingComputer scienceMathematical optimizationSimulated annealingNurse scheduling problemScheduling (production processes)AlgorithmFlow shop schedulingMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper introduces the problem of scheduling jobs on parallel plastic extrusion lines where each line is composed of one or more than one extruder. Although there are some similarities between the introduced problem and the non-identical parallel machines scheduling problems with sequence-dependent setup times, limited additional resources and machine eligibility restrictions, the problem considered in this paper is a generalization of the parallel machine scheduling problem. This is because in parallel machines scheduling each job requires only one machine but in our case some jobs require more than one machine. Thus, our problem reduces to the parallel machine scheduling problem if all jobs require only one machine. This paper describes the problem of scheduling parallel extrusion lines, its industrial context, and develops a mixed-linear formulation to model the problem. This formulation allowed solving instances of up to 15 jobs. In addition, we developed four metaheuristics: a simulated annealing algorithm, a tabu search heuristic, a genetic algorithm, and a greedy randomized adaptive search procedure. These metaheuristics can be used to solve real-life instances of the problem. A numerical experiment shows that the proposed metaheuristics produce excellent solutions. Some of the proposed simulated annealing adaptations and of the tabu search heuristics obtained solutions with less than 2% deviation from the optimum.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.313

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.247 · 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