When-to-Revise Against Uncertainty?



Even if a pertinent schedule is initially obtained, its smooth progress will be inhibited by a variety of uncertainties in the real circumstances. It is, as a matter of course, very important to provide against these uncertainties, but at the same time the proactive activities against them have limitations after all. One of the realizable approaches to this kind of problem is to adaptively revise the ongoing schedule or make an adjustment to it on a case-by-case basis. This chapter focuses on the timing to revise or adjust the existing schedule on the condition that the status of the ongoing schedule is monitored. Considered are four types of policies all of which prescribe the timing of revising the ongoing schedule.


Planning Horizon Machine Breakdown Current Schedule Inspection Point Present Schedule 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Albers S, Schmidt G (2001) Scheduling with unexpected machine breakdowns. Discret Appl Math 110(2–3):85–99Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Allahverdi A, Mittenthal J (1994) Two-machine ordered flowshop scheduling under random breakdowns. Math Comput Model 20(2):9–17MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aytug H, Layley M, McKay K, Mohan S, Uzsoy R (2005) Executing production schedules in the face of uncertainties: a review and some future directions. Eur J Oper Res 161:86–110MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Balasubramanian J, Grossmann IE (2000) Scheduling to minimize expected completion time in flowshop plants with uncertain processing times. Comput Aided Chem Eng 8:79–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Balasubramanian J, Grossmann IE (2002) A novel branch and bound algorithm for scheduling flowshop plants with uncertain processing times. Comput Chem Eng 26(1):41–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Baker KR, Peterson DW (1979) An analytic framework for evaluating rolling schedules. Manag Sci 25(4):341–351Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Beraldi P, Ghiani G, Guerriero E, Grieco A (2006) Scenario-based planning for lot-sizing and scheduling with uncertain processing times. Int J Prod Econ 101(1):140–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Blackburn JD, Millen RA (1982) The impact of a rolling schedule in a multi-level MRP system. J Oper Manag 2(2):125–135Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bonfill A, Espuña A, Puigjaner L (2008) Proactive approach to address the uncertainty in short-term scheduling. Comput Chem Eng 32(8):1689–1706Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chung C-H, Krajewski LJ (1984) Planning horizons for master production scheduling. J Oper Manag 4(4):389–406Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Church LK, Uzsoy R (1992) Analysis of periodic and event-driven rescheduling policies in dynamic shops. Int J Comput Integr Manuf 5(3):153–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Daniel Ng CT, Edwin Cheng TC, Kovalyov MY, Lam SS (2003) Single machine scheduling with a variable common due date and resource-dependent processing times. Comput Oper Res 30(8):1173–1185MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ecker KH, Gupta JND (2005) Scheduling tasks on a flexible manufacturing machine to minimize tool change delays. Eur J Oper Res 164(3):627–638MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Geneste L, Grabot B, Letouzey A (2003) Scheduling uncertain orders in the customer-subcontractor context. Eur J Oper Res 147(2):297–311MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Holthaus O (1999) Scheduling in job shops with machine breakdowns-an experimental study. Comput Ind Eng 36(1):137–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Huang YG, Kanal LN, Tripath SK (1990) Reactive scheduling for a single machine: Problem definition, analysis, and heuristic solution. Comput Integr Manuf 3(1):6–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jia C (2001) Stochastic single machine scheduling with an exponentially distributed due date. Oper Res Lett 28(5):199–203MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kim SC, Bobrowski PM (1997) Scheduling jobs with uncertain setup times and sequence dependency. Omega 25(4):437–447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kimms A (1998) Stability measures for rolling schedules with applications to capacity expansion planning, master production scheduling, and lot sizing. Omega 26(3):355–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Li Z, Ierapetritou M (2009) Integration of planning and scheduling and consideration of uncertainty in process operations. Comput Aided Chem Eng 27:87–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Liao CJ, Chen WJ (2004) Scheduling under machine breakdown in a continuous process industry. Comput Oper Res 31(3):415–428MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    McKay K, Buzacott J, Safayeni F (1989) The scheduler’s knowledge of uncertainty: the missing link. In: Browne J (ed) Knowledge based production management systems: the IFIP WG5.7 working conference on knowledge based production management systems, Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Millar HH (1998) The impact of rolling horizon planning on the cost of industrial fishing activity. Comput Oper Res 25(10):825–837MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Muhlemann AP, Lockett AG, Farn CK (1982) Job shop scheduling heuristics and frequency of scheduling. Int J Prod Res 20(2):227–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ovacik IM, Uzsoy R (1994) Rolling horizon algorithms for a single-machine dynamic scheduling problem with sequence-dependent setup times. Int J Prod Res 32(6):1243–1263MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ovacik IM, Uzsoy R (1995) Rolling horizon procedures for dynamic parallel machine scheduling with sequence-dependent setup times. Int J Prod Res 33(11):3173–3192MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Prickett PW, Johns C (1999) An overview of approaches to end milling tool monitoring. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 39(1):105–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Raheja AS, Subramaniam V (2002) Int J Adv Manuf Technol 19(10):756–763CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Shafaei R, Brunn P (1999) Workshop scheduling using practical (inaccurate) data Part 1: the performance of heuristic scheduling rules in a dynamic job shop environment using a rolling time horizon approach. Int J Prod Res 37(17):3913–3925Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Shafaei R, Brunn P (1999) Workshop scheduling using practical (inaccurate) data Part 2: an investigation of the robustness of scheduling rules in a dynamic and stochastic environment. Int J Prod Res 37(18):4105–4117Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sun J, Xue D (2001) A dynamic reactive scheduling mechanism for responding to changes of production orders and manufacturing resources. Comput Ind 46(2):189–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Suwa H (2007) A new when-to-schedule policy in online scheduling based on cumulative task delays. Int J Prod Econ 110:175–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Suwa H, Sandoh H (2007) Capability of cumulative delay based reactive scheduling for job shops with machine breakdowns. Comput Ind Eng 53:63–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Techawiboonwong A, Yenradee P, Das SK (2006) A master scheduling model with skilled and unskilled temporary workers. Int J Prod Econ 103(2):798–809CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Vieira GE, Herrmann JW, Lin E (2000) Analytical models to predict the performance of a single-machine system under periodic and event-driven rescheduling strategies. Int J Prod Res 38(8):1899–1915MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wu SD, Storer RH, Chang PC (1993) One-machine rescheduling heuristics with efficiency and stability as criteria. Comput Oper Res 20(1):1–14MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Zheng F, Chin FYL, Fung SPY, Poon CK, Xu Y (2006) A tight lower bound for job scheduling with cancellation. Inf Process Lett 97(1):1–3MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringSetsunan UniversityNeyagawa, OsakaJapan
  2. 2.Graduate School of EconomicsOsaka UniversityToyonaka, OsakaJapan

Personalised recommendations