Advertisement

Semi-permutation-based genetic algorithm for order acceptance and scheduling in two-stage assembly problem

  • Mohammad YavariEmail author
  • Mozhgan Marvi
  • Amir Hosein Akbari
Original Article
  • 22 Downloads

Abstract

The joint decision-making of order acceptance and scheduling has recently gained increasing attention. Besides, the two-stage assembly scheduling problem has various real-life applications. The current paper considers an integrated model for order acceptance and scheduling decisions in two-stage assembly problem. The objective is maximizing profit which is the sum of revenues minus total weighted tardiness of the accepted orders. A mixed-integer linear programming model is developed based on time-index variables. Also, a new concept of semi-permutation scheduling is introduced assuming that positions of each job on all of the machines have no significant difference in the optimal solution. This problem is NP-hard, and therefore, a genetic algorithm (GA)-based heuristic is proposed to apply semi-permutation concept, named semi-permutation GA (SPGA), to solve the problem efficiently. The solutions of SPGA are compared with those of CPLEX and non-semi permutation GA (N-SPGA). Computational experiments are conducted in a diverse range of problem instances indicating that the SPGA performs much better than CPLEX regarding the average percentage of improvement, ranging from 1.4 to 168.84%, and run time. The results revealed that an increasing number of machines and orders could lead to a dramatic decrease in the performance of CPLEX and N-SPGA than SPGA. Also, the effect of semi-permutation scheduling is investigated. According to the result, semi-permutation scheduling had a strong effect on the performance of the algorithm. As a result, the SPGA algorithm outperformed the non-semi permutation version of GA completely. Moreover, SPGA could represent the better performance of 36.27% in average in comparison with N-SPGA.

Keywords

Two-stage assembly Order acceptance and scheduling Mixed-integer linear program Genetic algorithm 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Allahverdi A, Aydilek H, Aydilek A (2016) Two-stage assembly scheduling problem for minimizing total tardiness with setup times. Appl Math Model 40(17):7796–7815MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lee CY, Cheng TC, Lin BM (1993) Minimizing the makespan in the 3-machine assembly-type flowshop scheduling problem. Manag Sci 39(5):616–625CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Potts CN, Sevast’Janov SV, Strusevich VA, Van Wassenhove LN, Zwaneveld CM (1995) The two-stage assembly scheduling problem: complexity and approximation. Oper Res 43(2):346–355MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Al-Anzi FS, Allahverdi A (2006) A hybrid tabu search heuristic for the two-stage assembly scheduling problem. Int J Oper Res 3(2):109–119MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Koulamas C, Kyparisis GJ (2001) The three-stage assembly flowshop scheduling problem. Comput Oper Res 28(7):689–704MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mozdgir A, Fatemi Ghomi SM, Jolai F, Navaei J (2013) Two-stage assembly flow-shop scheduling problem with non-identical assembly machines considering setup times. Int J Prod Res 51(12):3625–3642CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Slotnick SA, Morton TE (1996) Selecting jobs for a heavily loaded shop with lateness penalties. Comput Oper Res 23(2):131–140CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ghosh JB (1997) Job selection in a heavily loaded shop. Comput Oper Res 24(2):141–145CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Slotnick SA, Morton TE (2007) Order acceptance with weighted tardiness. Comput Oper Res 34(10):3029–3042CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rom WO, Slotnick SA (2009) Order acceptance using genetic algorithms. Comput Oper Res 36(6):1758–1767CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hariri AM, Potts CN (1997) A branch and bound algorithm for the two-stage assembly scheduling problem. Eur J Oper Res 103(3):547–556CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tian Y, Liu D, Yuan D, Wang K (2013) A discrete PSO for two-stage assembly scheduling problem. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 66(1–4):481–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jung S, Woo YB, Kim BS (2017) Two-stage assembly scheduling problem for processing products with dynamic component-sizes and a setup time. Comput Ind Eng 1(104):98–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tozkapan A, Kırca Ö, Chung CS (2003) A branch and bound algorithm to minimize the total weighted flowtime for the two-stage assembly scheduling problem. Comput Oper Res 30(2):309–320MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Allahverdi A, Al-Anzi FS (2009) The two-stage assembly scheduling problem to minimize total completion time with setup times. Comput Oper Res 36(10):2740–2747MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Yavari M, Isvandi S (2018) Integrated decision making for parts ordering and scheduling of jobs on two-stage assembly problem in three level supply chain. J Manuf Syst 31(46):137–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Torabzadeh E, Zandieh M (2010) Cloud theory-based simulated annealing approach for scheduling in the two-stage assembly flowshop. Adv Eng Softw 41(10):1238–1243CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Terekhov D, Doğru MK, Özen U, Beck JC (2012) Solving two-machine assembly scheduling problems with inventory constraints. Comput Ind Eng 63(1):120–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lee JY, Bang JY (2016) A two-stage assembly-type flowshop scheduling problem for minimizing total tardiness. Math Probl Eng 18:2016MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hatami S, Ebrahimnejad S, Tavakkoli-Moghaddam R, Maboudian Y (2010) Two meta-heuristics for three-stage assembly flowshop scheduling with sequence-dependent setup times. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 50(9–12):1153–1164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Maleki-Darounkolaei A, Modiri M, Tavakkoli-Moghaddam R, Seyyedi I (2012) A three-stage assembly flow shop scheduling problem with blocking and sequence-dependent set up times. J Ind Eng Int 8(1):1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Slotnick SA (2011) Order acceptance and scheduling: a taxonomy and review. Eur J Oper Res 212(1):1–11MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Nobibon FT, Leus R (2011) Exact algorithms for a generalization of the order acceptance and scheduling problem in a single-machine environment. Comput Oper Res 38(1):367–378MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Cesaret B, Oğuz C, Salman FS (2012) A tabu search algorithm for order acceptance and scheduling. Comput Oper Res 39(6):1197–1205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Chen C, Yang Z, Tan Y, He R (2014) Diversity controlling genetic algorithm for order acceptance and scheduling problem. Math Probl Eng.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/367152 Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Zandieh M, Roumani M (2017) A biogeography-based optimization algorithm for order acceptance and scheduling. J Ind Prod Eng 34(4):312–321Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Chaurasia SN, Singh A (2017) Hybrid evolutionary approaches for the single machine order acceptance and scheduling problem. Appl Soft Comput 1(52):725–747CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Silva YL, Subramanian A, Pessoa AA (2018) Exact and heuristic algorithms for order acceptance and scheduling with sequence-dependent setup times. Comput Oper Res 1(90):142–160MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Geramipour S, Moslehi G, Reisi-Nafchi M (2017) Maximizing the profit in customer’s order acceptance and scheduling problem with weighted tardiness penalty. J Oper Res Soc 68(1):89–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Memari A, Rahim AR, Hassan A, Ahmad R (2017) A tuned NSGA-II to optimize the total cost and service level for a just-in-time distribution network. Neural Comput Appl 28(11):3413–3427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Memari A, Rahim AR, Absi N, Ahmad R, Hassan A (2016) Carbon-capped distribution planning: a JIT perspective. Comput Ind Eng 1(97):111–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Memari A, Ahmad R, Rahim AR (2017) Metaheuristic algorithms: guidelines for implementation. J Soft Comput Decis Support Syst 4(6):1–6Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Gen M, Cheng R, Wang D (1997) Genetic algorithms for solving shortest path problems. In: Evolutionary computation, IEEE international conference on. IEEE, pp 401–406Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Du J, Leung JY (1990) Minimizing total tardiness on one machine is NP-hard. Math Oper Res 15(3):483–495MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Zegordi SH, Yavari M (2018) A branch and bound algorithm for solving large-scale single-machine scheduling problems with non-identical release dates. Eur J Ind Eng 12(1):24–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Allahverdi A, Aydilek H, Aydilek A (2018) No-wait flowshop scheduling problem with two criteria; total tardiness and makespan. Eur J Oper Res 269(2):590–601MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Lin SW, Ying KC (2015) Order acceptance and scheduling to maximize total net revenue in permutation flowshops with weighted tardiness. Appl Soft Comput 1(30):462–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mohammad Yavari
    • 1
    Email author
  • Mozhgan Marvi
    • 1
  • Amir Hosein Akbari
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Industrial Engineering, Faculty of Technology and EngineeringUniversity of QomQomIran
  2. 2.Department of Industrial EngineeringUniversity of TehranTehranIran

Personalised recommendations