Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Two-stage three-machine assembly scheduling problem with sum-of-processing-times-based learning effect

  • Methodologies and Application
  • Published:
Soft Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Researchers claim that the processing of most products can be formulated as a two-stage assembly scheduling model. The literature states that cumulative learning experience is neglected in solving two-stage assembly scheduling problems. The sum-of-processing-times-based learning effect means that the actual processing time of a job becomes shorter when it is scheduled later, which depends on the sum of processing time of the jobs already processed. Motivated by this observation, we investigate a novel two-stage assembly scheduling with three machines and sum-of-processing-times-based learning effect to minimize the makespan criterion, where two machines operate at the first stage and an assembly machine operates at the second stage. To solve this NP-hard problem, a branch-and-bound method incorporating with ten dominance properties and a lower bound procedure is first derived to obtain an optimal solution. Three heuristics based on Johnson’s rule with and without improvement are then applied separately to a genetic algorithm and a cloud theory-based simulated annealing algorithm, which are further modified with an interchange pairwise method for finding near-optimal solutions. Finally, the numerical results obtained using all proposed algorithms are reported and evaluated.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Al-Anzi FS, Allahverdi A (2006) A hybrid tabu search heuristic for the two-stage assembly scheduling problem. Int J Op Res 3:109–119

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Al-Anzi FS, Allahverdi A (2007) A self-adaptive differential evolution heuristic for two-stage assembly scheduling problem to minimize maximum lateness with setup times. Eur J Oper Res 182:80–94

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Allahverdi A, Al-Anzi FS (2006a) A PSO and a Tabu search heuristics for assembly scheduling problem of the two-stage distributed database application. Comput Op Res 33:1056–1080

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Allahverdi A, Al-Anzi FS (2006b) Evolutionary heuristics and an algorithm for the two-stage assembly scheduling problem to minimize makespan with setup times. Int J Prod Res 44:4713–4735

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Allahverdi A, Al-Anzi FS (2008) The two-stage assembly flowshop scheduling problem with bicriteria of makespan and mean completion time. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 37:166–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allahverdi A, Al-Anzi FS (2009) The two-stage assembly scheduling problem to minimize total completion time with setup times. Comput Op Res 36:2740–2747

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Allahverdi A, Aydilek H (2015) The two stage assembly flowshop scheduling problem to minimize total tardiness. J Intell Manuf 26:225–237

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Azzouz A, Ennigrou M, Ben Said L (2018) Scheduling problems under learning effects: classification and cartography. Int J Prod Res 56(4):1642–1661

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Babaei M, Mohammadi M, Ghomi SMTF (2014) A genetic algorithm for the simultaneous lot sizing and scheduling problem in capacitated flow shop with complex setups and backlogging. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 70(1–4):125–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bettinelli A, Cacchiani V, Malaguti E (2017) A branch-and-bound algorithm for the knapsack problem with conflict graph. INFORMS J Comput 29(3):457–473

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Biskup D (1999) Single-machine scheduling with learning considerations. Eur J Op Res 115:173–178

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Biskup D (2008) A state-of-the-art review on scheduling with learning effect. Eur J Op Res 188:315–329

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng TCE, Wang Q (1999) Scheduling the fabrication and assembly of components in a two-machine flowshop. IIE Trans 31:135–148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng TCE, Wang G (2000) Single machine scheduling with learning effect considerations. Ann Op Res 98:273–290

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng TCE, Wu CC, Chen JC, Wu W-H, Cheng SR (2013) Two-machine flowshop scheduling with a truncated learning function to minimize the makespan. Int J Prod Econ 141(1):79–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Della Croce F, Narayan V, Tadei R (1996) The two-machine total completion time flow shop problem. Eur J Op Res 90:227–237

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Dondeti VR, Mohanty BB (1998) Impact of learning and fatigue factors on single machine scheduling with penalties for tardy jobs. Eur J Op Res 105:509–524

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Etiler O, Toklu B, Atak M, Wilson J (2004) A genetic algorithm for flow shop scheduling problems. J Op Res Soc 55:830–835

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Falkenauer E, Bouffoix S, (1991) A genetic algorithm for job shop. In: Proceedings of the 1991 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation

  • Fu Y, Ding J, Wang H, Wang J (2018) Two-objective stochastic flow-shop scheduling with deteriorating and learning effect in Industry 4.0-based manufacturing system. Appl Soft Comput 68:847–855

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fu Y, Wang H, Tian G, Li Z, Hu H (2019) Two-agent stochastic flow shop deteriorating scheduling via a hybrid multi-objective evolutionary algorithm. J Intell Manuf 30(5):2257–2272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta JND, Sexton RS, Tunc EA (2000) Selecting scheduling heuristics using neural networks. INFORMS J Comput 12(2):150–162

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Hariri AMA, Potts CN (1997) A branch and bound algorithm for the two-stage assembly scheduling problem. Eur J Op Res 103:547–556

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Higgins P, Le Roy P, Tierney L (1996) Manufacturing planning and control-beyond MRP II. Chapman & Hall, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Ignall E, Schrage LE (1965) Application of the branch and bound technique to some flowshop scheduling problems. Op Res 13:400–412

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iyer SK, Saxena BS (2004) Improved genetic algorithm for the permutation flowshop scheduling problem. Comput Op Res 31:593–606

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Janiak A, Krysiak T, Trela R (2011) Scheduling problems with learning and ageing effects: a survey. Decis Mak Manuf 5(1–2):19–36

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang Z, Chen F, Zhang X (2017) Single-machine scheduling with times-based and job-dependent learning effect. J Op Res Soc 68(7):809–815

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jin ZH, Ohno K, Ito T, Elmaghrabry SE (2002) Scheduling hybrid flowshop in printed circuited board assembly line. Prod Op Manag 11(2):216–230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson SM (1954) Optimal two- and three-stage production schedules with setup times. Naval Res Logist Q 1:61–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirkpatrick S, Gellat CD, Vecchi MP (1983) Optimization by simulated annealing algorithm. Science 220:671–680

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Komaki GM, Teymourian E, Kayvanfar V (2016) Minimising makespan in the two-stage assembly hybrid flow shop scheduling problem using artificial immune systems. Int J Prod Res 54(4):963–983

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koulamas C, Kyparisis GJ (2001) The three-stage assembly flowshop scheduling problem. Comput Op Res 28:689–704

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Koulamas C, Kyparisis GJ (2007a) A note on the two-stage assembly flow shop scheduling problem with uniform parallel machines. Eur J Op Res 182:945–951

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Koulamas C, Kyparisis GJ (2007b) Single-machine and two-machine flowshop scheduling with general learning functions. Eur J Op Res 178:402–407

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kuo WH, Yang DL (2006) Minimizing the total completion time in a single-machine scheduling problem with a time-dependent learning effect. Eur J Op Res 174:1184–1190

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Lai K, Hsu PH, Ting PH, Wu CC (2014) A truncated sum of processing- times-based learning model for a two-machine flowshop scheduling problem. Hum Factors Ergon Manuf Serv Ind 24(2):152–160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee CY, Cheng TCE, Lin BMT (1993) Minimizing the makespan in the 3-machine assembly-type flowshop scheduling problem. Manag Sci 39:616–625

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Lee WC, Wu C-C, Sung HJ (2004) A bi-criterion single-machine scheduling problem with learning considerations. Acta Inform 40:303–315

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Li G, Wang XY, Wang JB, Sun LY (2013a) Worst case analysis of flow shop scheduling problems with a time-dependent learning effect. Int J Prod Econ 142(1):98–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li L, Yang SW, Wu YB, Huo Y, Ji P (2013b) Single machine scheduling jobs with a truncated sum-of-processing-times-based learning effect. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 67(1):261–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li JQ, Pan QK, Mao K (2015) A discrete teaching-learning-based optimisation algorithm for realistic flowshop rescheduling problems. Eng Appl Artif Intell 37:279–292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin BMT, Cheng TCE (2002) Fabrication and assembly scheduling in a two-machine flowshop. IIE Trans 34:1015–1020

    Google Scholar 

  • Maleki-Darounkolaei A, Seyyedi I (2013) Taguchi method for three-stage assembly flow shop scheduling problem with blocking and sequence-dependent set up times. J Eng Sci Technol 8(5):603–622

    Google Scholar 

  • 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(26):1–7

    Google Scholar 

  • Nadler D, Smith WD (1963) Manufacturing progress functions for types of processes. Int J Prod Res 2:115–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niu YP, Wan L, Wang JB (2015) A note on scheduling jobs with extended sum-of-processing-times-based and position-based learning effect. Asia Pac J Op Res 32:1550001

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Oĝuz C, Ercan MF (2005) A genetic algorithm for hybrid flow-shop scheduling with multiprocessor tasks. J Sched 8(4):323–351

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Potts CN, Sevast’janov SV, Strusevich VA, VanWassenhove LN, Zwaneveld CM (1995) The two-stage assembly scheduling problem: complexity and approximation. Op Res 43:346–355

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Reeves C (1995) Heuristics for scheduling a single machine subject to unequal job release times. Eur J Op Res 80:397–403

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rudek R (2014) Computational complexity of the single processor makespan minimization problem with release dates and job-dependent learning. J Op Res Soc 65(8):1170–1176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rudek R (2017) Parallel machine scheduling with general sum of processing time based models. J Global Optim 68(4):799–814

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Solano-Charris EL, Montoya-Torres JR, Paternina-Arboleda CD (2011) Ant colony optimization algorithm for a bi-criteria 2-stage hybrid flowshop scheduling problem. J Intell Manuf 22:815–822

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sorensen K, Sevaux M, Glover F (2017) A history of metaheuristics. In: Handbook of heuristics. Springer

  • Sun LH, Cui K, Chen JH, Wang J, He XC (2013) Research on permutation flow shop scheduling problems with general position-dependent learning effects. Ann Op Res 211(1):473–480

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Sung CS, Kim HA (2008) A two-stage multiple-machine assembly scheduling problem for minimizing sum of completion times. Int J Prod Econ 113:1038–1048

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torabzadeh E, Zandieh M (2010) Cloud theory-based simulated annealing approach for scheduling in the two-stage assembly flowshop. Adv Eng Softw 41:1238–1243

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Tozkapan A, Kirca O, Chung CS (2003) A branch and bound algorithm to minimize the total weighted flowtime for the two-stage assembly scheduling problem. Comput Op Res 30:309–320

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Vahedi-Nouri B, Fattahi P, Ramezanian R (2013) Minimizing total flow time for the non-permutation flow shop scheduling problem with learning effects and availability constraints. J Manuf Syst 32(1):167–173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vahedi-Nouri B, Fattahi P, Ramezanian R (2014) A general flow shop scheduling problem with consideration of position-based learning effect and multiple availability constraints. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 73(5–8):601–611

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Villafáñez F, Poza D, López-Paredes A, Pajares J, del Olmo R (2019) A generic heuristic for multi-project scheduling problems with global and local resource constraints (RCMPSP). Soft Comput 23(10):3456–3479

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang S, Liu M (2013) A genetic algorithm for two-stage no-wait hybrid flow shop scheduling problem. Comput Op Res 40(4):1064–1075

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Wang JJ, Zhang BH (2015) Permutation flowshop problems with bi-criterion makespan and total completion time objective and position-weighted learning effects. Comput Op Res 58:24–31

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Wang JB, Wang XY, Sun LH, Sun LY (2013) Scheduling jobs with truncated exponential learning functions. Optim Lett 7(8):1857–1873

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Wu YB, Wang JJ (2016) Single-machine scheduling with truncated sum-of- processing-times-based learning effect including proportional delivery times. Neural Comput Appl 27(4):937–943

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu CC, Yin Y, Cheng SR (2011) Some single-machine scheduling problems with a truncation learning effect. Comput Ind Eng 60(4):790–795

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu C-C, Wu WH, Hsu PH, Lai K (2012a) A two-machine flowshop scheduling problem with a truncated sum of processing-times-based learning function. Appl Math Model 36(10):5001–5014

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Wu CC, Yin Y, Wu W-H, Cheng SR (2012b) Some polynomial solvable single-machine scheduling problems with a truncation sum-of-processing-times based learning effect. Eur J Ind Eng 6(4):441–453

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu CC, Yin Y, Cheng SR (2013) Single-machine and two-machine flowshop scheduling problems with truncated position-based learning functions. J Op Res Soc 64:147–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu WH, Yin Y, Cheng SR, Hsu PH, Wu CC (2014) Genetic algorithm for a two-agent scheduling problem with truncated learning consideration. Asia-Pac J Op Res 31(6):1450046

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Wu WH, Yin Y, Cheng TCE, Lin WC, Chen JC, Luo SY, Wu C-C (2017) A combined approach for two-agent scheduling with sum-of- processing- times- based learning effect. J Op Res Soc 68(2):111–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu C-C, Chen J-Y, Lin W-C, Lai K, Liu SC, Yu PW (2018a) A two-stage three-machine assembly flow shop scheduling with learning consideration to minimize the flowtime by six hybrids of particle swarm optimization. Swarm Evolut Comput 41:97–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu C-C, Wang DJ, Cheng SR, Chung IH, Lin WC (2018b) A two-stage three-machine assembly scheduling problem with a position-based learning effect. Int J Prod Res 56(9):3064–3079

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yelle LE (1979) The learning curve: historical review and comprehensive survey. Decis Sci 10:302–328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin Y, Xu D, Sun K, Li H (2009) Some scheduling problems with general position-dependent and time-dependent learning effects. Inf Sci 179:2416–2425

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Yin Y, Xu D, Wang J (2010a) Single-machine scheduling with a general sum-of- actual-processing-times-based and job-position-based learning effect. Appl Math Model 34:3623–3630

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Yin Y, Xu D, Wang J (2010b) Some single-machine scheduling problems past-sequence-dependent setup times and a general learning effect. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 48:1123–1132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin Y, Xu D, Huang X (2011) Notes on “some single-machine scheduling problems with general position-dependent and time-dependent learning effects”. Inf Sci 181:2209–2217

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Yin Y, Liu M, Hao J, Zhou M (2012a) Single machine scheduling with job position-dependent learning and time-dependent deterioration. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part A Syst Hum 42:192–200

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin Y, Wu C-C, Wu W-H, Cheng S-S (2012b) The single-machine total weighted tardiness scheduling problem with position-based learning effects. Comput Op Res 39:1109–1116

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang X, Liu SC, Yin Y, Wu CC (2018) Single-machine scheduling problems with a learning effect matrix. Iran J Sci Technol Trans A Sci 42(3):1327–1335

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Zhu W, Hu X, Xia W, Jin P (2019) A two-phase genetic annealing method for integrated earth observation satellite scheduling problems. Soft Comput 23(1):181–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This article is supported in part by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 71501024, 71871148), by China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (Nos. 2018T110631, 2017M612099), by Sichuan Science and Technology Planning Project (No. 2019JDR0161), by the Fundamental Research Funds (Nos. YJ201842, 2018hhs-47), and in part by Ministry of Science and Technology of Taiwan (No. MOST 108-2410-H-035-046).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dujuan Wang.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors certify that there is no conflict of interest with any individual/organization for the paper.

Human and animals rights

The paper does not involve human participants and animals. All authors have checked the paper and have agreed to the submission.

Additional information

Communicated by V. Loia.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

The following is the detailed proof of Property 1. According to the definition in Eq. (1), we have

$$ C_{1i} \left( \sigma \right) = t_{1} + a_{i} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{a} }}{{T_{a} }}} \right)^{\beta } , $$
$$ C_{2i} \left( \sigma \right) = t_{2} + b_{i} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{b} }}{{T_{b} }}} \right)^{\beta } , $$
$$ C_{3i} \left( \sigma \right) = \hbox{max} \left\{ {C_{1i} \left( \sigma \right), C_{2i} \left( \sigma \right),t_{3} } \right\} + c_{i} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{c} }}{{T_{c} }}} \right)^{\beta } , $$
$$ C_{1j} \left( \sigma \right) = t_{1} + a_{i} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{a} }}{{T_{a} }}} \right)^{\beta } + a_{j} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{a} + a_{i} }}{{T_{a} }}} \right)^{\beta } , $$
$$ C_{2j} \left( \sigma \right) = t_{2} + b_{i} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{b} }}{{T_{b} }}} \right)^{\beta } + b_{j} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{b} + b_{i} }}{{T_{b} }}} \right)^{\beta } , $$
$$ \begin{aligned} C_{3j} \left( \sigma \right) & = \hbox{max} \left\{ {C_{1j} \left( \sigma \right), C_{2j} \left( \sigma \right), { \hbox{max} }\left\{ {C_{1i} \left( \sigma \right),C_{2i} \left( \sigma \right),t_{3} } \right\} + c_{i} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{c} }}{{T_{c} }}} \right)^{\beta }}\right\} + c_{j} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{c} + c_{i} }}{{T_{c} }}} \right)^{\beta } \\ & = { \hbox{max} }\left\{ {t_{1} + a_{i} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{a} }}{{T_{a} }}} \right)^{\beta } + a_{j} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{a} + a_{i} }}{{T_{a} }}} \right)^{\beta } ,} \right. \\ & \quad \quad \left. {t_{2} + b_{i} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{b} }}{{T_{b} }}} \right)^{\beta } + b_{j} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{b} + b_{i} }}{{T_{b} }}} \right)^{\beta } , { \hbox{max} }\left\{ {C_{1i} \left( \sigma \right),C_{2i} \left( \sigma \right),t_{3} } \right\} + c_{i} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{c} }}{{T_{c} }}} \right)^{\beta } } \right\} \\ & \quad + c_{j} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{c} + c_{i} }}{{T_{c} }}} \right)^{\beta } , \\ \end{aligned} $$
$$ C_{1j} \left( {\sigma^{\prime}} \right) = t_{1} + a_{j} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{a} }}{{T_{a} }}} \right)^{\beta } , $$
$$ C_{2j} \left( {\sigma^{\prime}} \right) = t_{2} + b_{j} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{b} }}{{T_{b} }}} \right)^{\beta } , $$
$$ C_{3j} \left( {\sigma^{\prime}} \right) = \hbox{max} \left\{ {C_{1j} \left( {\sigma^{\prime}} \right), C_{2j} \left( {\sigma^{\prime}} \right),t_{3} } \right\} + c_{j} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{c} }}{{T_{c} }}} \right)^{\beta } . $$
$$ C_{1i} \left( {\sigma^{\prime}} \right) = t_{1} + a_{j} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{a} }}{{T_{a} }}} \right)^{\beta } + a_{i} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{a} + a_{j} }}{{T_{a} }}} \right)^{\beta } , $$
$$ C_{2i} \left( {\sigma^{\prime}} \right) = t_{2} + b_{j} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{b} }}{{T_{b} }}} \right)^{\beta } + b_{i} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{b} + b_{j} }}{{T_{b} }}} \right)^{\beta } , $$
$$ \begin{aligned} C_{3i} \left( {\sigma^{\prime}} \right) & = \hbox{max} \left\{ {C_{1i} \left( {\sigma^{\prime}} \right), C_{2i} \left( {\sigma^{\prime}} \right), { \hbox{max} }\left\{ {C_{1j} \left( {\sigma^{\prime}} \right),C_{2j} \left( {\sigma^{\prime}} \right),t_{3} } \right\} + c_{j} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{c} }}{{T_{c} }}} \right)^{\beta } } \right\} \\ & \quad + c_{i} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{c} + c_{j} }}{{T_{c} }}} \right)^{\beta } {\text{ = max}}\left\{ {t_{1} + a_{j} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{a} }}{{T_{a} }}} \right)^{\beta } + a_{i} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{a} + a_{j} }}{{T_{a} }}} \right)^{\beta } ,} \right. \\ & \left. {\quad \quad t_{2} + b_{j} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{b} }}{{T_{b} }}} \right)^{\beta } + b_{i} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{b} + b_{j} }}{{T_{b} }}} \right)^{\beta } , { \hbox{max} }\left\{ {C_{1i} \left( {\sigma^{\prime}} \right),C_{2i} \left( {\sigma^{\prime}} \right),t_{3} } \right\} + c_{j} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{c} }}{{T_{c} }}} \right)^{\beta } } \right\} \\ & \quad + c_{i} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{c} + c_{j} }}{{T_{c} }}} \right)^{\beta } . \\ \end{aligned} $$

We will show that \( C_{3j} \left( \sigma \right) \le C_{3i} \left( {\sigma^{\prime}} \right) \) or \( C_{3i} \left( {\sigma^{\prime}} \right) - C_{3j} \left( \sigma \right) \ge 0 \).

Since \( t_{3} > t_{1} + a_{j} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{a} }}{{T_{a} }}} \right)^{\beta } \),\( t_{3} > t_{2} + b_{j} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{b} }}{{T_{b} }}} \right)^{\beta } \), and \( a_{j} > a_{i} \), \( b_{j} > b_{i} , then\,also t_{3} > t_{1} + a_{i} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{a} }}{{T_{a} }}} \right)^{\beta } and\, t_{3} > t_{2} + b_{i} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{b} }}{{T_{b} }}} \right)^{\beta } . It\,is\,easily\,seen\,that\,C_{3i} \left( {\sigma^{\prime}} \right) - C_{3j} \left( \sigma \right) can\,be\,simplified\,as\,below. \)

$$ \begin{aligned} C_{3i} \left( {\sigma^{\prime}} \right) - C_{3j} \left( \sigma \right) & = \hbox{max} \left\{ {C_{1i} \left( {\sigma^{\prime}} \right), C_{2i} \left( {\sigma^{\prime}} \right), t_{3} + c_{j} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{c} }}{{T_{c} }}} \right)^{\beta } } \right\} + c_{i} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{c} + c_{j} }}{{T_{c} }}} \right)^{\beta } \\ & \quad - \hbox{max} \left\{ {C_{1j} \left( \sigma \right), C_{2j} \left( \sigma \right), t_{3} + c_{i} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{c} }}{{T_{c} }}} \right)^{\beta } } \right\} + c_{j} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{c} + c_{i} }}{{T_{c} }}} \right)^{\beta } . \\ \end{aligned} $$
(2)

The given condition that

$$ \begin{aligned} C_{1i} \left( {\sigma^{\prime}} \right) & = t_{1} + a_{j} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{a} }}{{T_{a} }}} \right)^{\beta } + a_{i} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{a} + a_{j} }}{{T_{a} }}} \right)^{\beta } \\ & > \hbox{max} \left\{ { C_{2i} \left( {\sigma^{\prime}} \right), t_{3} + c_{j} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{c} }}{{T_{c} }}} \right)^{\beta } } \right\} \\ & \quad \quad {\text{implies}}\;{\text{that}}\,C_{3i} \left( {\sigma^{\prime}} \right) = C_{1i} \left( {\sigma^{\prime}} \right) + c_{i} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{c} + c_{j} }}{{T_{c} }}} \right)^{\beta } . \\ \end{aligned} $$
(3)

The given condition that

$$ \begin{aligned} C_{1j} \left( \sigma \right) & = t_{1} + a_{i} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{a} }}{{T_{a} }}} \right)^{\beta } + a_{j} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{a} + a_{i} }}{{T_{a} }}} \right)^{\beta } \\ & > { \hbox{max} }\left\{ {C_{2j} \left( \sigma \right), t_{3} + c_{i} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{c} }}{{T_{c} }}} \right)^{\beta } } \right\} \\ & \quad \quad {\text{implies}}\;{\text{that}}C_{3j} \left( \sigma \right) = C_{1j} \left( \sigma \right) + c_{j} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{c} + c_{i} }}{{T_{c} }}} \right)^{\beta }. \\ \end{aligned} $$
(4)

Now, from Eqs. (2), (3), and (4), \( \begin{aligned} C_{3i} \left( {\sigma^{\prime}} \right) - C_{3j} \left( \sigma \right) & = \left[ {C_{1i} \left( {\sigma^{\prime}} \right) + c_{i} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{c} + c_{j} }}{{T_{c} }}} \right)^{\beta } } \right] - \left[ { C_{1j} \left( \sigma \right) + c_{j} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{c} + c_{i} }}{{T_{c} }}} \right)^{\beta } } \right] \\ & = \left[ {t_{1} + a_{j} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{a} }}{{T_{a} }}} \right)^{\beta } + a_{i} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{a} + a_{j} }}{{T_{a} }}} \right)^{\beta } + c_{i} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{c} + c_{j} }}{{T_{c} }}} \right)^{\beta } } \right] \\ & \quad - \left[ {t_{1} + a_{i} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{a} }}{{T_{a} }}} \right)^{\beta } + a_{j} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{a} + a_{i} }}{{T_{a} }}} \right)^{\beta } + c_{j} \left( {1 - \frac{{{\text{PT}}_{c} + c_{i} }}{{T_{c} }}} \right)^{\beta } } \right]. \\ \end{aligned} \)

After a simple algebraic,

$$ \begin{aligned} C_{3i} \left( {\sigma^{\prime}} \right) - C_{3j} \left( \sigma \right) & = \left\{ {a_{j} \left[ {\left( {\frac{{T_{a} - {\text{PT}}_{a} }}{{T_{a} }}} \right)^{\beta } - \left( {\frac{{T_{a} - {\text{PT}}_{a} - a_{i} }}{{T_{a} }}} \right)} \right]^{\beta } } \right. \\ & \quad - \left. {a_{j} \left[ {\left( {\frac{{T_{a} - {\text{PT}}_{a} }}{{T_{a} }}} \right)^{\beta } - \left( {\frac{{T_{a} - {\text{PT}}_{a} - a_{j} }}{{T_{a} }}} \right)^{\beta } } \right]} \right\} \\ & \quad + \left[ { c_{i} \left( {\frac{{T_{c} - {\text{PT}}_{c} - c_{j} }}{{T_{c} }}} \right)^{\beta } - c_{j} \left( {\frac{{T_{c} - {\text{PT}}_{c} - c_{i} }}{{T_{c} }}} \right)^{\beta } } \right]. \\ \end{aligned} $$
(5)

The second term of Eq. (5) is greater than 0, because \( c_{i} > c_{j} \) and β > 0, whereas the first term greater than or equal to 0 can easily be obtained by the argument of the proof of Theorem 1 in Koulamas and Kyparisis (2007a, b). Therefore, \( C_{3i} \left( {\sigma^{\prime}} \right) - C_{3j} \left( \sigma \right) \ge 0 \), as required.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zou, Y., Wang, D., Lin, WC. et al. Two-stage three-machine assembly scheduling problem with sum-of-processing-times-based learning effect. Soft Comput 24, 5445–5462 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-019-04301-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-019-04301-y

Keywords

Navigation