MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7084045237 · doi:10.1080/01605682.2025.2554741

Multi-operator driven iterated tabu search for inter-hospital operating room scheduling

2025· article· en· W7084045237 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Operational Research Society · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing in Agriculture
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsTabu searchScheduling (production processes)Job shop schedulingIterated local searchProject managementInformation systemIterated function

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we investigate a new inter-hospital operating room (OR) scheduling problem (IHORS) taking into consideration the downstream recovery beds so that integrated decisions are made at the tactical and operational levels. To solve this challenging problem, we develop an effective multi-operator driven iterated tabu search (MOITS) algorithm comprised three search phases. The greedy construction phase employs a priority scoring rule to sequence patients, thereby generating a high-quality initial schedule. The multi-operator driven tabu search phase employs different move operators to manipulate surgeries among OR time blocks, change recovery hospitals of the scheduled surgeries, and change specialties of the OR time blocks. New evaluation functions are introduced to allow capacity violations during the search. The elite set guided adaptive perturbation phase uses historical information from a pool of best solutions to adjust the OR time blocks assigned to each specialty. Experimental results demonstrate that our proposed algorithm computes high-quality solutions, achieving objective gaps of less than 2% relative to the lower bounds. Moreover, it often requires substantially less time to reach comparable or better solution quality compared to the Gurobi solver. The effectiveness of the specific strategies incorporated into the algorithm is validated, and the managerial implications are explored.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.657
Threshold uncertainty score0.960

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Operational Research SocietySame topicRemote Sensing in AgricultureFrench-language works237,207