MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399681193 · doi:10.5267/j.ijiec.2024.5.002

Ant colony algorithms for minimizing costs in multi-mode resource constrained project scheduling problems with spatial constraints

2024· article· en· W4399681193 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Miguel P. de la Pisa, Ignacio Eguía

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Industrial Engineering Computations · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicResource-Constrained Project Scheduling
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematical optimizationAnt colony optimization algorithmsScheduling (production processes)Computer scienceMode (computer interface)Resource constraintsAlgorithmDistributed computingMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper addresses the problem of activity scheduling and operator assignment in workstations of aerospace assembly lines. The problem is modelled as a new variant of the Multi-Mode Resource Constrained Project Scheduling Problem (MRCPSP), which incorporates practical features from aerospace workstations in assembly lines. These workstations have a substantial number of activities to be scheduled within a given assembly cycle time. It introduces particularities which are not usually addressed such as considering additional workers for performing activities, different workers’ proficiency, and spatial limitations in work zones. The objective is to schedule the activities of an aerospace workstation, minimising the total labour cost, while satisfying the cycle time and the zone’s limitations. The problem is initially formulated by employing mixed-integer linear programming methods with mathematical modelling and solved using two different algorithms: an Ant Colony System (ACS) and a memetic ACS. Given the novelty of the problem presented, new sets of benchmark cases of different sizes for this problem are also proposed and solved. To assess the performance of the algorithms, the solutions for the small-sized instances are compared in terms of deviation with the results obtained by an optimisation modelling software. Further experimentation with the algorithms is carried out with medium and large instances, showing good performance and providing reasonably good results in realistic problems.

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)0.003
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Industrial Engineering ComputationsSame topicResource-Constrained Project SchedulingFrench-language works237,207