HEURISTIC’S JOB ORDER EFFICIENCY IN TIGHT-TARDY PROGRESSIVE IDLING-FREE 1-MACHINE PREEMPTIVE SCHEDULING OF EQUAL-LENGTH JOBS
Uložené v:
| Názov: | HEURISTIC’S JOB ORDER EFFICIENCY IN TIGHT-TARDY PROGRESSIVE IDLING-FREE 1-MACHINE PREEMPTIVE SCHEDULING OF EQUAL-LENGTH JOBS |
|---|---|
| Autori: | Romanuke, Vadim V. |
| Prispievatelia: | ELAKPI |
| Zdroj: | KPI Science News, Iss 2 (2020) Наукові вісті КПІ; № 2 (2020); 64-73 KPI Science News; № 2 (2020); 64-73 Научные вести КПИ; № 2 (2020); 64-73 |
| Informácie o vydavateľovi: | Kyiv Politechnic Institute, 2020. |
| Rok vydania: | 2020 |
| Predmety: | preemptive single machine job scheduling, descending job order, Ascending job order, ефективний порядок завдань, висхідний порядок завдань, 0211 other engineering and technologies, Heuristic, 02 engineering and technology, Планування завдань на одній машині з перемиканнями, Рівноцінні завдання, Загальне запізнювання, Евристика, Висхідний порядок завдань, Спадний порядок завдань, Час обчислень, Ефективний порядок завдань, рівноцінні завдання, Equal-length jobs, equal-length jobs, ascending job order, Preemptive single machine job scheduling, Total tardiness, Descending job order, Computation time, Efficient job order, общее запаздывание, спадний порядок завдань, эффективный порядок заданий, нисходящий порядок заданий, T1-995, Technology (General), планування завдань на одній машині з перемиканнями, планирование заданий на одной машине с переключениями, total tardiness, computation time, евристика, Планирование заданий на одной машине с переключениями, Равноценные задания, Общее запаздывание, Эвристика, восходящий порядок заданий, Нисходящий порядок заданий, Время вычислений, Эффективный порядок заданий, загальне запізнювання, efficient job order, равноценные задания, время вычислений, эвристика, 8. Economic growth, heuristic, час обчислень |
| Popis: | Background. In setting a problem of minimizing total tardiness by the heuristic based on remaining available and processing periods, there are two opposite ways to input the data: the job release dates are given in either ascending or descending order. It was recently proved that an efficient job order can save significant computation time by using the Boolean linear programming model provided for finding schedules with the exactly minimal total tardiness. Objective. The goal is to ascertain whether the job order input is significant in scheduling by using the heuristic. Job order efficiency will be studied on tight-tardy progressive idling-free 1-machine preemptive scheduling of equal-length jobs. Methods. To achieve the said goal, a computational study is carried out with a purpose to estimate the averaged computation time for both ascending and descending orders of job release dates. Instances of the job scheduling problem are generated so that schedules which can be obtained trivially, without the heuristic, are excluded. Results. Scheduling a few jobs is expectedly faster by ascending order, but this part is full of computational artifacts. Scheduling 30 to 70 jobs is 1.5 % to 2.5 % faster by descending order. However, scheduling up to 90 jobs is expectedly still faster by descending order, although a risk of losing this advantage exists. For the number of jobs between roughly 90 and 250, the ascending job order again results in shorter computation times. Since the point of about 250 jobs, the advantage trend (of either ascending or descending order) appears more stable. Conclusions. In scheduling by using the heuristic, the job order input is indeed significant. The average relative difference does not exceed 1.5 % for 2 to 1000 jobs consisting up to 17 processing periods. For obtaining a statistically reliable computation speed advantage, it is better to consider no less than 250 jobs. As either the number of jobs or the number of job parts increases, the computation speed advantage may become unstable and eventually vanish. Nevertheless, the ascending job order can save a lot of computational time in the case of scheduling at least a few thousand jobs having just a few processing periods each. After solving thousands of such cases the saved time may be counted in hours. |
| Druh dokumentu: | Article Other literature type |
| Popis súboru: | application/pdf |
| ISSN: | 2617-5509 |
| DOI: | 10.20535/kpi-sn.2020.2.181869 |
| Prístupová URL adresa: | http://scinews.kpi.ua/article/download/181869/pdf_61 https://doaj.org/article/ca71c23583894f8aa7e610d048d5a216 http://scinews.kpi.ua/article/view/181869 http://scinews.kpi.ua/article/download/181869/pdf_61 https://ela.kpi.ua/handle/123456789/40383 http://scinews.kpi.ua/article/view/181869 |
| Rights: | CC BY |
| Prístupové číslo: | edsair.doi.dedup.....50fd64be48ae86d80a6b40f44a3719e0 |
| Databáza: | OpenAIRE |
Nájsť tento článok vo Web of Science | Abstrakt: | Background. In setting a problem of minimizing total tardiness by the heuristic based on remaining available and processing periods, there are two opposite ways to input the data: the job release dates are given in either ascending or descending order. It was recently proved that an efficient job order can save significant computation time by using the Boolean linear programming model provided for finding schedules with the exactly minimal total tardiness. Objective. The goal is to ascertain whether the job order input is significant in scheduling by using the heuristic. Job order efficiency will be studied on tight-tardy progressive idling-free 1-machine preemptive scheduling of equal-length jobs. Methods. To achieve the said goal, a computational study is carried out with a purpose to estimate the averaged computation time for both ascending and descending orders of job release dates. Instances of the job scheduling problem are generated so that schedules which can be obtained trivially, without the heuristic, are excluded. Results. Scheduling a few jobs is expectedly faster by ascending order, but this part is full of computational artifacts. Scheduling 30 to 70 jobs is 1.5 % to 2.5 % faster by descending order. However, scheduling up to 90 jobs is expectedly still faster by descending order, although a risk of losing this advantage exists. For the number of jobs between roughly 90 and 250, the ascending job order again results in shorter computation times. Since the point of about 250 jobs, the advantage trend (of either ascending or descending order) appears more stable. Conclusions. In scheduling by using the heuristic, the job order input is indeed significant. The average relative difference does not exceed 1.5 % for 2 to 1000 jobs consisting up to 17 processing periods. For obtaining a statistically reliable computation speed advantage, it is better to consider no less than 250 jobs. As either the number of jobs or the number of job parts increases, the computation speed advantage may become unstable and eventually vanish. Nevertheless, the ascending job order can save a lot of computational time in the case of scheduling at least a few thousand jobs having just a few processing periods each. After solving thousands of such cases the saved time may be counted in hours. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 26175509 |
| DOI: | 10.20535/kpi-sn.2020.2.181869 |