MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391880577 · doi:10.1080/00207543.2024.2312209

Bi-objective carbon-efficient distributed flow-shop scheduling with multistep electricity pricing

2024· article· en· W4391880577 on OpenAlexaff
Xianyu Yu, Hengte Du, Dequn Zhou, Qunwei Wang, Guohui Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Production Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicScheduling and Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsElectricityMathematical optimizationElectricity pricingScheduling (production processes)Computer sciencePareto principleElectricity generationInteger programmingElectricity priceFlow shop schedulingJob shop schedulingOperations researchElectricity marketEngineeringMathematicsPower (physics)Schedule

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A bi-objective distributed flow-shop scheduling problem with multistep electricity pricing and carbon emissions is studied. One objective is to minimise the completion time of production, and the other is to minimise the total cost of multistep electricity pricing and carbon emissions. A mixed integer programming model and a two-stage knowledge based cooperative algorithm with a local reinforcement strategy are proposed for the problem. The extensive numerical experiments show that the two-stage algorithm was effective statistical significantly in generating non-dominated solution sets and Pareto frontiers. Simulations on Electricity Prices are applied to examine different multistep electricity pricing schemes, and management implications were drawn for both government and companies.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.298 · 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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Production ResearchSame topicScheduling and Optimization AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207