Annals of Operations Research

, Volume 129, Issue 1–4, pp 187–204 | Cite as

Lower Bounds for Scheduling on Identical Parallel Machines with Heads and Tails

Article

Abstract

In this paper, we investigate new lower bounds for the P|rj,qj|Cmax scheduling problem. A new bin packing based lower bound, as well as several new lifting procedures are derived for this strongly NP -hard problem. Extensive numerical experiments show that the proposed lower bounds consistently outperform the best existing ones.

scheduling identical parallel machines release dates delivery times makespan lower bound 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Blocher, J.D. and S. Chand. (1991). “Scheduling of Parallel Processors: A Posteriori Bound on LPT Sequencing and a Two-Step Algorithm.” Naval Research Logistics 38, 273–287.Google Scholar
  2. Carlier, J. (1982). “The One Machine Sequencing Problem.” European Journal of Operational Research 11, 42–47.Google Scholar
  3. Carlier, J. (1987). “Scheduling Jobs with Release Dates and Tails on Identical Machines to Minimize the Makespan.” European Journal of Operational Research 29, 298–306.Google Scholar
  4. Carlier, J. and B. Latapie. (1991). “Une méthode arborescente pour résoudre les problèmes cumulatifs.” RAIRO 25, 311–340.Google Scholar
  5. Carlier, J. and E. Pinson. (1998). “Jackson's Pseudo Preemptive Schedule for the Pm/rj, qj /Cmax Scheduling Problem.” Annals of Operations Research 83, 41–58.Google Scholar
  6. Dell'Amico, M. and S. Martello. (1995). “Optimal Scheduling of Tasks on Identical Parallel Processors.” ORSA Journal on Computing 7, 191–200.Google Scholar
  7. Garey, M.R. and D.S. Johnson. (1978). “Strong NP-Completeness Results: Motivation, Examples and Implications.” Journal of the Association of Computer Machinery 25, 499–508.Google Scholar
  8. Gharbi, A. and M. Haouari. (2002). “Minimizing Makespan on Parallel Machines Subject to Release Dates and Delivery Times.” Journal of Scheduling 5, 329–355.Google Scholar
  9. Hoogeveen, H., C. Hurkens, J.K. Lenstra, and A. Vandevelde. (1995). “Lower Bounds for the Multiprocessor Flow Shop.” In Second Workshop on Models and Algorithms for Planning and Scheduling. Wernigerode.Google Scholar
  10. Horn, W.A. (1974). “Some Simple Scheduling Algorithms.” Naval Research Logistics Quarterly 21, 177–185.Google Scholar
  11. Lawler, E.L., J.K. Lenstra, A.H.G. Rinnooy Kan, and D. Shmoys. (1993). “Sequencing and Scheduling: Algorithms and Complexity.” In S.C. Graves et al. (eds.), Handbooks in Operations Research and Management Science, Vol. 4, pp. 445–522. North-Holland.Google Scholar
  12. Martello, S. and P. Toth. (1990). Knapsack Problems: Algorithms and Computer Implementations. Wiley.Google Scholar
  13. Perregaard, M. (1995). “Branch and Bound Method for the Multiprocessor Jobshop and Flowshop Scheduling Problem.” Master Thesis, Datalogisk Institut Københavns Universitet.Google Scholar
  14. Schmidt, G. (2000). “Scheduling with Limited Machine Availability.” European Journal of Operational Research 121, 1–15.Google Scholar
  15. Vandevelde, A. (1994). “Minimizing the Makespan in a Multiprocessor Flowshop.” Master Thesis, Eindhoven University of Technology.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Laboratory of Mathematical EngineeringEcole Polytechnique de TunisieLa MarsaTunisia

Personalised recommendations