MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413958624 · doi:10.5267/j.jpm.2025.7.002

A learnheuristic method for solving resource constrained project scheduling problem

2025· article· en· W4413958624 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Project Management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicResource-Constrained Project Scheduling
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMathematical optimizationNurse scheduling problemScheduling (production processes)Dynamic priority schedulingMathematicsTwo-level schedulingSchedule

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Project scheduling in resource-constrained mode is one of the most important issues in the field of project management. The main philosophy of this problem is to use less resources while respecting the resource limit to complete the project in a shorter time although other goals can be considered. When a very large amount of data is generated by the meta-heuristic algorithm and there are many variables involved in solving the problem, no other algorithm or technique is able to analyze the output. For this purpose, learnheuristics have the ability to use combined metaheuristics and machine learning tools with high accuracy and in less time to analyze data. The primary purpose of this research is to combine machine learning and genetic algorithms to reduce the project completion time which can lead to a reduction in the cost of the project. Due to the population-based nature of the problem a large amount of initial population was generated. In order to convert the generated schedules into feasible ones, a repair strategy was used. A data matrix was created to import data into the ML model. After specifying the training and testing settings of the model, the decision tree was used to analyze the data of the problem, then its output was applied to the initial population using the displacement or relocation procedure. This manipulated population is given to Genetic Algorithm (GA) and continues until a certain iteration. j60data on the PSPLIB website was used to evaluate the suggested approach. The findings indicate that the implemented approach has improved by 21.75% compared to the normal GA. This improvement means that a better solution could be achieved in less time with fewer calls.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.818
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.347 · 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