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 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.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.366
Threshold uncertainty score0.414

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.027
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