Preemptive online algorithms for scheduling with machine cost
- 81 Downloads
- 16 Citations
Abstract.
For most scheduling problems the set of machines is fixed initially and remains unchanged. Recently Imreh and Noga proposed adding the concept of machine cost to scheduling problems and considered the so-called List Model problem. For this problem, we are given a sequence of independent jobs with positive sizes, which must be processed non-preemptively on a machine. No machines are initially provided, and when a job is revealed the algorithm has the option to purchase new machines. The objective is to minimize the sum of the makespan and cost of machines. In this paper, a modified model of List Model is presented where preemption is allowed. For this model, it is shown that better performance is possible. We present an online algorithm with a competitive ratio of \((2\sqrt{6} + 2)/5\approx 1.3798\) while the lower bound is 4/3. For the semi-online problem with decreasing sizes, we design an optimal algorithm with a competitive ratio of 4/3, which improves the known upper bound of 3/2. The algorithm does not introduce any preemption, and hence is also an optimal semi-online algorithm for the non-preemptive semi-online problem. For the semi-online problem with known largest size, we present an optimal algorithm with a competitive ratio of 4/3.
Keywords
Operating System Data Structure Communication Network Optimal Algorithm Information TheoryPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.Cai, S.Y., He, Y. (2003) Semi-online algorithms for scheduling non-increasing processing jobs with processor cost. Acta Automatica Sinica 29: 917-921 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
- 2.Chen, B., van Vliet, A., Woeginger, G. (1995) An optimal algorithm for preemptive on-line scheduling. Operations Research Letters 18: 127-131Google Scholar
- 3.Dósa, G., He, Y. (2004) Better on-line algorithms for scheduling with machine cost. SIAM Journal on Computing 33: 1035-1051Google Scholar
- 4.Dósa, G., He, Y. (2004) Semi-online algorithms for parallel machine scheduling problems. Computing 72: 355-363Google Scholar
- 5.Epstein, L. (2003) Bin stretching revisited. Acta Informatica 39: 97-117Google Scholar
- 6.Graham, R.L. (1969) Bounds on multiprocessing finishing anomalies. SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics 17: 416-429Google Scholar
- 7.He, Y., Cai, S.Y. (2002) Semi-online scheduling with machine cost. Journal of Computer Science and Technology 17: 781-787Google Scholar
- 8.He, Y., Jiang, Y.W. (2004) Optimal algorithms for semi-online preemptive scheduling problems on two uniform machines. Acta Informatica 40: 367-383Google Scholar
- 9.He, Y., Zhang, G. (1999) Semi-online scheduling on two identical machines. Computing 62: 179-187Google Scholar
- 10.Imreh, C., Noga, J. (1999) Scheduling with machine cost. In: Proc. of RANDOM-APPROX’99 (Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1671). Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York 1999, pp. 168-176Google Scholar
- 11.Kellerer, H., Kotov, V., Speranza, M.R., Tuza, Z. (1997) Semi on-line algorithms for the partition problem. Operations Research Letters 21: 235-242Google Scholar
- 12.Panwalker, S., Liman, S.D. (2002) Single operation earliness-tardiness scheduling with machine activation costs. IIE Transactions 34: 509-513Google Scholar
- 13.Seiden, S. (2000) A guessing game and randomized online algorithms. In: Proceedings of the 32nd Annual ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing, ACM, New York 2000, pp. 592-601Google Scholar