SORTING APPROACHES IN THE HEURISTIC BASED ON REMAINING AVAILABLE AND PROCESSING PERIODS TO MINIMIZE TOTAL WEIGHTED TARDINESS IN PROGRESSIVE IDLING-FREE 1-MACHINE PREEMPTIVE SCHEDULING

Background. In preemptive job scheduling, total weighted tardiness minimization is commonly reduced to solving a combinatorial problem, which becomes practically intractable as the number of jobs and the numbers of their processing periods increase. To cope with this challenge, heuristics are used. A heuristic, in which the decisive ratio is the weighted reciprocal of the maximum of a pair of the remaining processing period and remaining available period, is closely the best one. However, the heuristic may produce schedules of a few jobs whose total weighted tardiness is enormously huge compared to the real minimum. Therefore, this heuristic needs further improvements, one of which already exists for jobs without priority weights with a sorting approach where remaining processing periods are minimized. Three other sorting approaches still can outperform it, but such exceptions are quite rare. Objective. The goal is to determine the influence of the four sorting approaches and try to select the best one in the case where jobs have their priority weights. The heuristic will be applied to tight-tardy progressive idling-free 1-machine preemptive scheduling, where the release dates are given in ascending order starting from 1 to the number of jobs, and the due dates are tightly set after the release dates. Methods. To achieve the said goal, a computational study is carried out with applying each of the four heuristic approaches to minimize total weighted tardiness. For this, two series of 4151500 scheduling problems are generated. In the solution of a scheduling problem, a sorting approach can “win” solely or “win” in a group of approaches, producing the heuristically minimal total weighted tardiness. In each series, the distributions of sole-and-group “wins” are ascertained. Results. The sole “wins” and non-whole-group “wins” are rare: the four sorting approaches produce schedules with the same total weighted tardiness in over 98.39 % of scheduling problems. Although the influence of these approaches is different, it is therefore not really significant. Each of the sorting approaches has heavy disadvantages leading sometimes to gigantic inaccuracies, although they occur rarely. When the inaccuracy occurs to be more than 30 %, this implies that 3 to 9 jobs are scheduled. Conclusions. Unlike the case when jobs do not have their priority weights, it is impossible to select the best sorting approach for the case with job priority weights. Instead, a hyper-heuristic comprising the sorting approaches (i. e., the whole group, where each sorting is applied) may be constructed. If a parallelization can be used to process two or even four sorting routines simultaneously, the computation time will not be significantly affected.

Infinity Substitute in Finding Exact Minimum of Total Weighted Tardiness in Tight-Tardy Progressive 1-machine Scheduling by Idling-free Preemptions

A job schedule ensuring the exact minimum of total weighted tardiness can be found with the respective integer linear programming problem model, in which the infinity showing that the respective states are either forbidden or impossible is substituted with a sufficiently great positive integer. An open question is whether the substitute can be selected so that the computation time would be decreased. Thus, it is ascertained that, whichever job lengths and its priority weights are, substituting the infinity with just “a sufficiently great positive integer” is never recommended. To decrease the computation time on average, it is strongly recommended to select the infinity substitute as multiple maximum over finite decision variable weights in the exact model. It is sufficient to take 2 to 5 such maxima as the infinity substitute. However, the shortened computation time is not guaranteed for solving a single or few scheduling problems. It is only an expected benefit, which builds up as a few hundred scheduling problems are solved at least.

Parallel Algorithm with Blocks for a Single-Machine Total Weighted Tardiness Scheduling Problem

In this paper, the weighted tardiness single-machine scheduling problem is considered. To solve it an approximate (tabu search) algorithm, which works by improving the current solution by searching the neighborhood, is used. Methods of eliminating bad solutions from the neighborhood (the so-called block elimination properties) were also presented and implemented in the algorithm. Blocks allow a significant shortening of the process of searching the neighborhood generated by insert type moves. The designed parallel tabu search algorithm was implemented using the MPI (Message Passing Interface) library. The obtained speedups are very large (over 60,000×) and superlinear. This may be a sign that the parallel algorithm is superior to the sequential one as the sequential algorithm is not able to effectively search the solution space for the problem under consideration. Only the introduction of diversification process through parallelization can provide an adequate coverage of the entire search process. The current methods of parallelization of metaheuristics give a speedup which strongly depends on the problem’s instances, rarely greater than number of used parallel processors. The method proposed here allows the obtaining of huge speedup values (over 60,000×), but only when so-called blocks are used. The above-mentioned speedup values can be obtained on high performance computing infrastructures such as clusters with the use of MPI library.

Branch and bound algorithm for solving the total weighted tardiness criterion for the permutation flowshop scheduling problem with time lags

This paper deals with the permutation flowshop scheduling problem with time lags constraints to minimize the total weighted tardiness criterion by using the Branch and Bound algorithm. A new lower bound was developed for the flowshop scheduling problem. The computational experiments indicate that the proposed algorithm provides good solution in terms of quality and time requirements.