IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Remarks on: "Some Extensions of the Discrete Lotsizing and Scheduling Problem"


  • Scott Webster

    (Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York 13244-2130)


Computational complexity results provide guideposts toward fruitful directions in algorithmic research and therefore play an important role in research on algorithm design. This note discusses complexity analysis in the context of lotsizing and scheduling problems. Such discussion is warranted for three reasons. First, research on problems that combine lotsizing and scheduling is growing rapidly. Second, these problems have the potential for requiring much less information to represent an instance than to represent a candidate solution. As a consequence, analysis may depend critically on subtle considerations relating to instance and solution size. Third, as we will see below, there is some evidence that the literature is unclear on this point.

Suggested Citation

  • Scott Webster, 1999. "Remarks on: "Some Extensions of the Discrete Lotsizing and Scheduling Problem"," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(5), pages 768-769, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:45:y:1999:i:5:p:768-769

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Marc Salomon & Leo G. Kroon & Roelof Kuik & Luk N. Van Wassenhove, 1991. "Some Extensions of the Discrete Lotsizing and Scheduling Problem," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(7), pages 801-812, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Bruggemann, Wolfgang & Jahnke, Hermann, 2000. "The discrete lot-sizing and scheduling problem: Complexity and modification for batch availability," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 124(3), pages 511-528, August.
    2. Jans, Raf & Degraeve, Zeger, 2007. "Meta-heuristics for dynamic lot sizing: A review and comparison of solution approaches," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(3), pages 1855-1875, March.

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:45:y:1999:i:5:p:768-769. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Mirko Janc). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.