4.7 Article

Adaptive job shop scheduling strategy based on weighted Q-learning algorithm

期刊

JOURNAL OF INTELLIGENT MANUFACTURING
卷 31, 期 2, 页码 417-432

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10845-018-1454-3

关键词

Job shop; Adaptive scheduling; Multi-agent technology; Q-learning; Searching strategy

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51705260]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of the Higher Education Institution of Jiangsu Province [16KJD460005]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Given the dynamic and uncertain production environment of job shops, a scheduling strategy with adaptive features must be developed to fit variational production factors. Therefore, a dynamic scheduling system model based on multi-agent technology, including machine, buffer, state, and job agents, was built. A weighted Q-learning algorithm based on clustering and dynamic search was used to determine the most suitable operation and to optimize production. To address the large state space problem caused by changes in the system state, four state features were extracted. The dimension of the system state was decreased through the clustering method. To reduce the error between the actual system states and clustering ones, the state difference degree was defined and integrated with the iteration formula of the Q function. To select the optimal state-action pair, improved search and iteration update strategies were proposed. Convergence analysis of the proposed algorithm and simulation experiments indicated that the proposed adaptive strategy is well adaptable and effective in different scheduling environments, and shows better performance in complex environments. The two contributions of this research are as follows: (1) a dynamic greedy search strategy was developed to avoid blind searching in traditional strategy. (2) Weighted iteration update of the Q function, including the weighted mean of the maximum fuzzy earning, was designed to improve the speed and accuracy of the improved learning algorithm.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据