A comparison of priority rules for the job shop scheduling problem under different flow time- and tardiness-related objective functions
In this paper, a comparison and validation of various priority rules for the job shop scheduling problem under different objective functions is made. In a first computational experiment, 30 priority rules from literature are used to schedule job shop problems under two flow time-related and three tardiness-related objectives. Based on this comparative study, the priority rules are extended to 13 combined scheduling rules in order to improve the performance of the currently bestknown rules from literature. Moreover, the best performing priority rules on each of these five objective functions are combined into hybrid priority rules in order to be able to optimize various objectives at the same time. In a second part of the computational experiment, the robustness on the relative ranking of the performance quality is checked for the various priority rules when applied on larger problem instances, on the extension of multiple machines possibilities per job as well as on the introduction of sequence-dependent setup times. Moreover, the influence of dynamic arrivals of jobs has also been investigated to check the robustness on the relative ranking of the performance quality between static and dynamic job arrivals. The results of the computational experiments are presented and critical remarks and future research avenues are suggested.
|Date of creation:||Sep 2010|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Hoveniersberg 4, B-9000 Gent|
Phone: ++ 32 (0) 9 264 34 61
Fax: ++ 32 (0) 9 264 35 92
Web page: http://www.ugent.be/eb
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rug:rugwps:10/680. 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: (Nathalie Verhaeghe)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.