Flexible job-shop scheduling problem with the number of workers dependent processing times
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studies in the literature on flexible job-shop scheduling problems (FJSP) generally assume that one worker is assigned to each machine and that processing times are constant. However, in some industries, multiple workers with cooperation can process complex operations faster than one worker. If the possibility of completing jobs in a shorter time with worker cooperation is not taken into account, the opportunity to create more effective schedules may not be taken advantage of. Therefore, it is essential to consider the flexibility of collaboration between employees. However, to increase labor efficiency in businesses, jobs are also expected to be done with the minimum number of workers possible. This study considers the FJSP with both machine and number of workers dependent processing times. The objectives are minimizing the total tardiness and the total number of workers. A bi-objective mathematical model and an NSGA-II algorithm for large-sized problems have been proposed. The performance of the proposed solution approaches is demonstrated by using randomly generated test problems. For each problem, the most successful Pareto solution among the obtained solutions by the mathematical model and the NSGA-II algorithm was determined using the TOPSIS method. Furthermore, the effect of the total number of workers on the total tardiness is examined. The performance of proposed solution approaches, and when the worker number increases, the total tardiness of jobs can be reduced by an average of 75.88%, have been shown through comprehensive experimental studies.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".