4.7 Article

Due-date assignment scheduling with only mean and support of processing times

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/00207543.2023.2191143

关键词

Due-date assignment; scheduling; the mean and support; stochastic processing times; approximation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article addresses a single-machine scheduling problem with stochastic processing times and due-date assignment. The decision maker has only knowledge about the mean and support of the processing times. The objective is to minimize the total expected individually weighted costs of earliness, tardiness, and due-date assignment by jointly determining a scheduling policy and a set of due dates. The authors propose an approximated problem by establishing upper and lower bounds with the robust optimization approach and using a linear function to approximate the objective function. They also present a branch-and-bound algorithm for finding an optimal solution. Finally, computational experiments are conducted to evaluate the performance of problem approximation and two developed heuristic algorithms.
We consider a single-machine scheduling problem with due-date assignment and stochastic processing times, where only the mean and support (i.e. an interval bounded with lower and upper values) of processing times are known to the decision maker. The objective is to jointly determine a scheduling policy and a set of due dates for all jobs, so as to minimise the total expected individually weighted costs of earliness, tardiness and due-date assignment. By identifying an upper bound with the robust optimisation approach and a lower bound, and using a linear function of them to approximate the studied objective function, we establish an approximated problem. Then, a branch-and-bound algorithm is proposed to find an optimal solution for the approximated problem. Finally, a series of computational experiments are conducted to examine the performance of problem approximation and two developed heuristic algorithms.

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