MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393121421 · doi:10.5267/j.ijiec.2023.12.007

An improved iterated greedy algorithm for distributed mixed no-wait permutation flowshop problems with makespan criterion

2024· article· en· W4393121421 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chuan-Chong Li, Yuanzhen Li, Leilei Meng

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Industrial Engineering Computations · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicScheduling and Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLiaocheng UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNatural Science Foundation of Shandong ProvinceStrong
KeywordsGreedy algorithmPermutation (music)Iterated functionJob shop schedulingMathematical optimizationAlgorithmMathematicsComputer scienceRouting (electronic design automation)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The distributed permutation flowshop scheduling is a critical issue in various industries, involving jobs allocation and scheduling among multiple flowshops. This paper extends the research to explore the Distributed Mixed No-Wait Permutation Flowshop Scheduling Problems (DMNWPFSP) with minimizing makespan. The innovation lies in an optimized mathematical model, hybrid heuristic algorithms, an improved iterated greedy algorithm (IIG), and high-quality solutions. Extensive experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness and superiority of the proposed IIG in terms of scheduling quality, computational efficiency, and robustness compared to existing approaches. The outcomes of this work contribute to the field of distributed flowshop scheduling, providing valuable insights for practitioners seeking to enhance production efficiency and competitiveness.

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)0.002
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 score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Industrial Engineering ComputationsSame topicScheduling and Optimization AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207