Advertisement

Wireless Personal Communications

, Volume 106, Issue 2, pp 681–699 | Cite as

A New Priority Rule for Solving Project Scheduling Problems

  • Patience I. AdamuEmail author
  • Hilary I. Okagbue
  • Pelumi E. Oguntunde
Article
  • 49 Downloads

Abstract

Priority rule-based scheduling technique is a scheduling method for constructing minimum feasible schedules when solving project scheduling problems. This approach is made up of two parts: a priority rule for determining the activity list and a schedule generation scheme which constructs the feasible schedule of the constructed activity list. Quite a number of priority rules are available, selecting the best one for a particular input problem is extremely difficult. Hence, we present a new priority rule which assembles a set of priority rules and uses machine learning to form a hybrid strategy out of the assembled strategies. The hybrid strategy operates by choosing the strategy with the best performance at every point in time to construct an activity list of a project. The one with better performance is used most frequently. This removes the problem of manually searching for the best priority rule amongst the dozens of rules that are available. Experimentally, we solved a fictitious single-mode resource-constrained project scheduling problem (single-mode RCPSP) which was solved with 13 different priority rules in Pm Knowledge Center. Our result showed that the total completion time of the project obtained with our approach competes favorably with the completion times gotten with the 13 priority rules. Additionally, we computed initial population for Genetic Algorithm in solving some multi-mode RCPSP. We compared our results with the initial solutions the authors started with, and our results competes favorably with their initial solutions, making our algorithm a good entry point for metaheuristic procedures.

Keywords

Project scheduling Machine learning Motion planning Network analysis Metaheuristic procedures 

Notes

References

  1. 1.
    Adamu, P. I. & Aromolaran O. T. (2018). Machine learning priority rule (MLPR) for solving resource-constrained project scheduling problems. In Lecture Notes in engineering and computer science: Proceedings of the international multi-conference of engineers and computer scientists 2018, Hong Kong (pp. 974-979) 14–16 March 2018.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Adamu, P. I., Agarana, M. C., & Okagbue, H. I. (2018). Machine learning heuristic for solving multi-mode resource-constrained project scheduling problems. In Lecture notes in engineering and computer science: Proceedings of the international multiconference of engineers and computer scientists 2018, Hong Kong (pp. 23–28) 14–16 March 2018.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Adamu, P. I. (2009). Hard resource-constrained project scheduling problems. International Journal of Numerical Mathematics, 4, 154–169.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Blazewicz, J., Lenstra, J. K., & Rinnooy Kan, A. H. G. (1983). Scheduling subject to resource constraints: Classification and complexity. Discrete Applied Mathematics, 5, 11–24.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chand, S., Huynh, Q., Singh, H., Ray, T., & Wagner, M. (2018). On the use of genetic programming to evolve priority rules for resource constrained project scheduling problems. Information Sciences, 432, 146–163.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dumic, M., Sisejkovic, D., Coric, R., & Jakobovic, D. (2018). Evolving priority rules for resource constrained project scheduling problem with genetic programming. Future Generation Computer Systems, 86, 211–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ekenna, C., Jacobs, S. A., Thomas, S. & Amato, N. M. (2013). Adaptive neighbor connection for PRMS: A natural fit for heterogeneous environments and parallelism. In Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on robotics and system (IROS), Tokyo, Japan, Nov 2013.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hartmann, S. (1997). Project scheduling with multiple modes: A genetic algorithm”, Manuskripte aus den Instituten fur Betriebswirtschaftslehre der Universit at Kiel, no. 435.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hsu, D., Sanchez-Ante, G., & Sun, Z. (2005). Hybrid PRM sampling with a cost-sensitive adaptive strategy. In Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA) (pp. 3885–3891).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kadam, S. U. & Mane S. U. (2015). A genetic-local search algorithm approach for resource constrained project scheduling problem. In International conference on computing communication control and automation, Pune (pp. 841–846).  https://doi.org/10.1109/iccubea.2015.168.
  11. 11.
    Kolisch, R. (1996). Serial and Parallel resource-constrained project scheduling methods revisited: Theory and computation. European Journal of Operations Research, 90, 320–333.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mohammad, S. H., Mohammad, R. A., & Yagub, A. (2015). An efficient genetic algorithm for solving the multi-mode resource-constrained project scheduling problem based on random key representation. International Journal of Supply and Operations Management, 2(3), 905–924.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rezaeian, J., Soleimani, F., Mohaselafshary, S., & Arab, A. (2015). Using a meta-heuristic algorithm for solving the multi-mode resource-constrained project scheduling problem. International Journal of Operational Research, 24(1), 1–16.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sprecher, A., & Drexl, A. (1998). Multi-mode resource-constrained project scheduling problems by a simple general and powerful sequencing algorithm. European Journal of Operational Research, 107, 431–450.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Talbot, F. B. (1982). Resource-constrained project scheduling with time–resource trade-offs: The nonpreemptive case. Management Science, 28(10), 1197–1210.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Talbot, F. B., & Patterson, J. H. (1978). An efficient integer programming algorithm with network cuts for solving resource-constrained scheduling problems. Management Science, 24, 1163–1174.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Vanhoucke, M. (2012). Optimizing regular scheduling objectives: Schedule generation schemes. Pm Knowledge Center. [Online]. Available: http://www.pmknowledgecenter.com/dynamic_scheduling/baseline/optimizing-regular-scheduling-objectives-schedule-generation-schemes. Accessed 15 Mar 2018.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Industrial MathematicsCovenant UniversityOtaNigeria

Personalised recommendations