Addressing Operating Room Planning and Scheduling Problem by Genetic Engineering Algorithm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Operating room (OR) planning and scheduling is a highly complex combinatorial optimization problem that involves patient assignment, OR allocation, and surgical sequencing within a constrained planning horizon. This study addresses the OR scheduling problem by incorporating downstream bed availability in both hospital wards and intensive care units (ICUs), aiming to improve operational efficiency and patient outcomes. A mixed-integer programming (MIP) model is developed to minimize the total completion time across all operating rooms during the planning period. Given the NP-hard nature of the problem, a novel Genetic Engineering Algorithm (GEA) is proposed as an advanced extension of the traditional Genetic Algorithm (GA). The GEA incorporates three innovative search strategies inspired by genetic engineering principles, refining the crossover and mutation operators to improve solution quality and convergence speed. To evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed algorithm, GEA and its variants are tested on 18 benchmark instances of varying problem sizes for the proposed OR planning and scheduling problem. A real-world case study from a hospital in Pakistan illustrates the practical applicability of the proposed approach using different real-world criteria. The results demonstrate that GEA consistently outperforms state-of-the-art metaheuristic algorithms. Its robustness and accuracy are further validated using 10 standard mathematical benchmark functions. The results confirm the GEA’s effectiveness and efficiency in addressing complex OR planning and scheduling problems and underscore its potential for advancing metaheuristic algorithm design in combinatorial optimization.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".