Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A new neuro-dominance rule for single-machine tardiness problem with double due date

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Neural Computing and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this study, the single-machine total weighted tardiness scheduling problem with double due date has been addressed. The neuro-dominance rule (NDR-D) is proposed to decrease the total weighted tardiness (TWT) for the double due date. To obtain NDR-D, a back-propagation artificial neural network was trained using 12,000 data items and tested using another 15,000 items. The adjusted pairwise interchange method was used to prepare training and test data of the neural network. It was proved that if there is any sequence violating the proposed NDR-D then, according to the TWT criterion, these violating jobs are switched. The proposed NDR was compared with a number of generated heuristics. However, all of the used heuristics were generated for double due date based on using the original heuristic (ATC, COVERT, SPT, LPT, EDD, WDD, WSPT and WPD). These generated competing heuristics were called ATC1, ATC2, ATC3, COV1, COV2, COV3, COV4, EDD1, EDD2, EDD3, WDD1, WDD2, WDD3, WSPT1, WSPT2, WSPT3, WPD1, WPD2, WPD3 and WPD4. The arrangements among the heuristics were made according to the double due date. The proposed NDR-D was applied to the generated heuristics and metaheuristics, simulated annealing and genetic algorithms, for a set of randomly generated problems. Problem sizes were chosen as 50, 70 and 100. In this study, 202,500 problems were randomly generated and used to demonstrate the performance of NDR-D. From the computational results, it can be clearly seen that the NDR-D dominates the generated heuristics and metaheuristics in all runs. Additionally, it is possible to see which heuristics are the best for the double due date single-machine TWT problems.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hsu CJ, Yang SJ, Yang DL (2011) Two due date assignment problems with position dependent processing time on a single machine. Comput Ind Eng 60:796–800

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Gordon VS, Strusevich VA (2009) Single machine scheduling and due date assignment with positionally dependent processing times. Eur J Oper Res 198(57–62):2009

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. Shabtay D, Steiner G (2006) Two due date assignment problems in scheduling a single machine. Oper Res Lett 34:683–691

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Wang C (2011) Due-date management through iterative bidding. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern—Part A Syst Hum 41(6):1182–1198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Van den Akker JM, Diepen G, Hoogeveen JA (2010) Minimizing total weighted tardiness on a single machine with release dates and equal-length jobs. J Sched 13(6):561–576

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Li JQ, Yuan XH, Lee ES, Xu DH (2011) Setting due dates to minimize the total weighted possibilistic mean value of the weighted earliness-tardiness costs on a single machine. Comput Math Appl 62(11):4126–4139

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Kellegoz T, Toklu B, Wilson J (2008) Comparing efficiencies of genetic crossover operators for one machine total weighted tardiness problem. Appl Math Comput 199:590–598

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Yoon SH, Lee IS (2011) New constructive heuristics for the total weighted tardiness problem. J Oper Res Soc 62(1):232–237

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Adams J, Balas E, Zawack D (1988) The shifting bottleneck procedure for job shop scheduling. Manag Sci 34(3):391–401

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Colka Altunc AB, Burak Keha A (2009) Interval-indexed formulation based heuristics for single machine total weighted tardiness problem. Comput Oper Res 36(6):2122–2131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Lawler EL (1997) A “Pseudopolynomial” algorithm for sequencing job to minimize total tardiness. Ann Discret Math 1:331–342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Chambers RJ, Carraway RL, Lowe TJ, Morin TL (1991) Dominance and decomposition heuristics for single machine scheduling. Oper Res 39:639–647

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Emmons H (1969) One machine sequencing to minimize certain functions of job tardiness. Oper Res 17:701–715

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Rinnooy Kan AHG, Lageweg BJ, Lenstra JK (1975) Minimizing total costs in one machine scheduling. Oper Res 23:908–927

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Fisher ML (1976) A dual algorithm for the one-machine scheduling problem. Math Progr 11:229–251

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Potts CN, Van Wassenhove LN (1985) A branch and bound algorithm for total weighted tardiness problem. Oper Res 33:363–377

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Potts CN, Van Wassenhove LN (1987) Dynamic programming and decomposition approaches for the single machine total tardiness problem. Eur J Oper Res 32:405–414

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Sabuncuoglu I, Gurgun B (1996) A neural network model for scheduling problems. Eur J Oper Res 93(2):288–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Abdul-Razaq TS, Potts CN, Van Wassenhove LN (1990) A survey of algorithms for the single machine total weighted tardiness scheduling problem. Discret Appl Math 26:235–253

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. Bozejko W (2010) Parallel path relinking method for the single machine total weighted tardiness problem with sequence-dependent setups. J Intell Manuf 21(6):777–785

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Cheng H, Yixun L, Ruyan F (2009) Bicriteria scheduling with double due dates to minimize the maximum lateness. Chin J Eng Math 26(1):147–150

    Google Scholar 

  22. Mahnam M, Moslehi G (2009) A branch-and-bound algorithm for minimizing the sum of maximum earliness and tardiness with unequal release times. Eng Optim 41(6):521–536

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  23. Li K, Yang SL, Ren ML (2011) Single machine scheduling problem with resource dependent release dates to minimize total resource-consumption. Int J Syst Sci 42(10):1811–1820

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Geiger MJ (2010) On heuristic search for the single machine total weighted tardiness problem—some theoretical insights and their empirical verification. Eur J Oper Res 207:1235–1243

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. Eren T (2009) Minimizing the total weighted completion time on a single machine scheduling with release dates and a learning effect. Appl Math Comput 208:355–358

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  26. Kenneth KR, Keller B (2010) Solving the single-machine sequencing problem using integer programming. Comput Ind Eng 59:730–735

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Vepsalainen APJ, Morton TE (1987) Priority rules for job shops with weighted tardiness cost. Manag Sci 33:1035–1047

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Akturk MS, Yidirim MB (1998) A new lower bounding scheme for the total weighted tardiness problem. Comput Oper Res 25(4):265–278

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. Kanet JJ (2007) New precedence theorems for one-machine weighted tardiness. Math Oper Res 32(3):579–588

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. Jouglet A, Carlier J (2011) Dominance rules in combinatorial optimization problems. Eur J Oper Res 212:433–444

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  31. Akturk MS, Ozdemir D (2001) A new dominance rule to minimize total weighted tardiness with unequal release date. Eur J Oper Res 135:394–412

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  32. Cakar T (2005) A new neuro-dominance rule for single machine tardiness problem. Lect Notes Comput Sci 3483:1241–1250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Cakar T (2011) Single machine scheduling with unequal release date using neuro-dominance rule. J Intell Manuf 22:481–490

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Chan FTS, Chan HK, Kazerooni A (2003) Real time fuzzy scheduling rules in FMS. J Intell Manuf 14(3–4):341–350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Dudek-Dyduch E (2000) Learning based algorithms in scheduling. J Intell Manuf 11(2):135–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Laguna L, Barnes JW, Glover FW (1991) Tabu search methods for a single machine scheduling problem. J Intell Manuf 2(2):63–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Weckman GR, Ganduri CV, Koonce DA (2008) A neural network job shop scheduler. J Intell Manuf 19(2):191–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Yim SJ, Lee DY (1999) Scheduling cluster tools in wafer fabrication using candidate list and simulated annealing. J Intell Manuf 10(6):531–540

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  39. Kirkpatrick S, Gelatt CD, Vecchi MP (1983) Optimization by simulated annealing. Science 220(4598):671–680

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  40. Schlunz EB, Van Vuuren JH (2013) “An investigation into the effectiveness of simulated annealing as a solution approach for the generator maintenance scheduling problem. Electr Power Energy Syst 53:166–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Köker R (2013) A neuro-simulated annealing approach to the inverse kinematics solution of redundant robotic manipulators. Eng Comput 29(4):507–515

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Çakar T, Yazgan HR, Köker R (2008) Parallel robot manipulators, new developments. In: Ryu J-H (ed) Parallel robot scheduling with genetic algorithms. I-Tech Education and Publishing, Vienna, pp 153–170

    Google Scholar 

  43. Çakar T, Köker R, Demir I (2008) Parallel robot scheduling to minimize mean tardiness with precedence constraints using a genetic algorithm. Adv Eng Softw 39(1):47–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Engineering Faculty, Department of Industrial Engineering, Sakarya University, 54187, Adapazarı, Turkey

    Tarik Cakar

  2. Technology Faculty, Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Sakarya University, 54187, Adapazarı, Turkey

    Raşit Köker

  3. Engineering Faculty, Department of Computer Engineering, Sakarya University, 54187, Adapazarı, Turkey

    Ozkan Canay

Authors
  1. Tarik Cakar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Raşit Köker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ozkan Canay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tarik Cakar.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cakar, T., Köker, R. & Canay, O. A new neuro-dominance rule for single-machine tardiness problem with double due date. Neural Comput & Applic 26, 1439–1450 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-014-1789-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-014-1789-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation