Minimizing value-at-risk in single-machine scheduling
- 329 Downloads
The vast majority of the machine scheduling literature focuses on deterministic problems in which all data is known with certainty a priori. In practice, this assumption implies that the random parameters in the problem are represented by their point estimates in the scheduling model. The resulting schedules may perform well if the variability in the problem parameters is low. However, as variability increases accounting for this randomness explicitly in the model becomes crucial in order to counteract the ill effects of the variability on the system performance. In this paper, we consider single-machine scheduling problems in the presence of uncertain parameters. We impose a probabilistic constraint on the random performance measure of interest, such as the total weighted completion time or the total weighted tardiness, and introduce a generic risk-averse stochastic programming model. In particular, the objective of the proposed model is to find a non-preemptive static job processing sequence that minimizes the value-at-risk (VaR) of the random performance measure at a specified confidence level. We propose a Lagrangian relaxation-based scenario decomposition method to obtain lower bounds on the optimal VaR and provide a stabilized cut generation algorithm to solve the Lagrangian dual problem. Furthermore, we identify promising schedules for the original problem by a simple primal heuristic. An extensive computational study on two selected performance measures is presented to demonstrate the value of the proposed model and the effectiveness of our solution method.
KeywordsSingle-machine scheduling Stochastic scheduling Value-at-risk Probabilistic constraint Stochastic programming Scenario decomposition Cut generation Dual stabilization K-assignment problem
- Atakan, S., Tezel, B., Bülbül, K., & Noyan, N. (2011). Minimizing value-at-risk in the single-machine total weighted tardiness problem. In Proceedings of the 5th Multidisciplinary International Scheduling Conference on Scheduling: Theory and Applications (MISTA 2011), 9–11 August 2011 (pp. 215–229). Arizona: Phoenix.Google Scholar
- Beck, J. C., & Wilson, N. (2007). Proactive algorithms for job shop scheduling with probabilistic durations. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 28(1), 183–232.Google Scholar
- Birge, J., & Louveaux, F. (1997). Introduction to stochastic programming. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
- Bonfietti, A., Lombardi, M., & Milano, M. (2014). Disregarding duration uncertainty in partial order schedules? Yes, we can! In Simonis, H. (ed) Integration of AI and OR techniques in constraint programming, volume 8451 of Lecture notes in computer science (pp. 210–225). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
- Daniels, R. L., & Carrillo, J. (1997). \(\beta \)-robust scheduling for single-machine systems with uncertain processing times. IIE Transactions, 29(11), 977–985.Google Scholar
- Danielsson, J. & Zhou, C. (2015). Why risk is so hard to measure. Technical report, Working Paper, SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2597563.
- Danielsson, J., Jorgensen, B. N., Mandira, S., Samorodnitsky, G., & De Vries, C. G. (2005). Subadditivity re–examined: The case for value-at-risk. Discussion paper, 549. Financial Markets Group, London School of Economics and Political Science, London.Google Scholar
- Davis, M. (2015). Consistency of risk measure estimates. Technical report, Working Paper, SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2342279.
- de Farias, I. R. Jr., Zhao, H., & Zhao, M. (2010). A family of inequalities valid for the robust single machine scheduling polyhedron. Computers and Operations Research, 37(9), 1610–1614.Google Scholar
- Helmberg, C. (2011). The ConicBundle library for convex optimization. Last viewed on August 16, 2013.Google Scholar
- Heyde, C. C., Kou, S. G., & Peng, X. H. (2006). What is a good risk measure: Bridging the gaps between data, coherent risk measures, and insurance risk measures. Technical report, Columbia University.Google Scholar
- IBM ILOG CPLEX (2012). IBM ILOG CPLEX Optimization Studio 12.5 Information Center. http://pic.dhe.ibm.com/infocenter/cosinfoc/v12r5/index.jsp. Last viewed on April 8, 2014.
- Jörnsten, K. O., Näsberg, M., & Smeds, P. A. (1985). Variable splitting: A new Lagrangean relaxation approach to some mathematical programming models. Sweden: Linköping University, Department of Mathematics.Google Scholar
- Larsen, N., Mausser, H., & Uryasev, S. (2002). Algorithms for optimization of value-at-risk. In P. M. Pardalos & V. K. Tsitsiringos (Eds.), Financial engineering, E-commerce and supply chain, volume 70 of Applied optimization (Vol. 70, pp. 19–46). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
- Louveaux, F. V., & Schultz, R. (2003). Stochastic integer programming. In A. Ruszczyński & A. Shapiro (Eds.), Stochastic programming, volume 10 of Handbooks in operations research and management science (Vol. 10, pp. 213–266). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
- Pascoal, M., Captivo, M. E., & Clímaco, J. (2003). A note on a new variant of Murty’s ranking assignments algorithm. 4OR, 255(1), 243–255.Google Scholar
- Pinedo, M. (2008). Scheduling: Theory, algorithms, and systems (3rd ed.). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
- Sarykalin, S., Serraino, G., & Uryasev, S. (2008). Value-at-risk vs. conditional value-at-risk in risk management and optimization. In Tutorials in operations research: State-of-the-art decision-making tools in the information-intensive age (chap. 13, pp. 270–294). Hanover, MD: INFORMS. doi:10.1287/educ.1080.0052.
- Sen, S. (2005). Algorithms for stochastic mixed-integer programming models. In K. Aardal, G. L. Nemhauser, & R. Weismantel (Eds), Discrete optimization, volume 12 of Handbooks in operations research and management science (pp. 515–558). Elsevier.Google Scholar
- van der Vlerk, M. H. (1996–2007). Stochastic integer programming bibliography. World Wide Web. http://www.eco.rug.nl/mally/biblio/sip.html.
- Wolsey, L. A. (1998). Integer programming. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Yamai, Y., & Yoshiba, T. (2002a). Comparative analyses of expected shortfall and value-at-risk: Their estimation error, decomposition, and optimization. Monetary and Economic Studies, 20(1), 87–121.Google Scholar
- Yamai, Y., & Yoshiba, T. (2002b). Comparative analysis with expected shortfall (3): Their validity under market stress. Monetary and Economic Studies, 20(3), 181–237.Google Scholar