A multi-objective fuzzy flexible job shop scheduling problem considering the maximization of processing quality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper analyzes practical production characteristics, including customer's stringent quality requirements and uncertain processing time in aircraft shaft parts manufacturing. Considering the above characteristics, we propose a multi-objective fuzzy aircraft shaft parts production scheduling problem considering the maximization of production quality. We define this problem as a multi-objective fuzzy flexible job shop scheduling problem (MO-fFJSP) with fuzzy processing time. To address this problem, we developed an improved multi-objective spider monkey optimization (IMOSMO) algorithm. IMOSMO integrates strategies such as genetic operators, variable neighborhood search and Pareto optimization theory on the framework of the conventional Spider Monkey Optimization (SMO) framework and discretize the continuous SMO algorithm to solve MO-fFJSP. To enhance the efficiency of the algorithm, we further adjust the sequence of the local leader learning phase and the global leader learning phase within the proposed IMOSMO framework. We conduct a comparative analysis between the performance of IMOSMO and NSGA-Ⅱ using 28 cases of varying scales. The computational results demonstrate the superiority of our algorithm over NSGA-Ⅱ in terms of both solution diversity and quality. Moreover, the performance of the proposed algorithm upgrades as the problem scale increases.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".