Advertisement

A Probabilistic Characterization of Allocation Performance in a Worker-Constrained Job Shop

  • Benjamin J. LoboEmail author
  • T. J. Thoney
  • Russell E. King
  • James R. Wilson
Chapter
Part of the International Series in Operations Research & Management Science book series (ISOR, volume 200)

Abstract

We analyze a dual resource constrained (DRC) job shop in which both machines and workers are limited, and we seek to minimize L max, the maximum job lateness. An allocation of workers to machine groups is required to generate a schedule, and determining a schedule that minimizes L max is NP-hard. This chapter details a probabilistic method for evaluating the quality of a specific (but arbitrary) allocation in a given DRC job shop scheduling problem based on two recent articles by Lobo et al. (2013a) The first article Lobo et al. (2013b) describes a lower bound on L max given an allocation, and an algorithm to find an allocation yielding the smallest such lower bound, while the second article Lobo et al. (2013b) establishes criteria for verifying the optimality of an allocation. For situations where the optimality criteria are not satisfied, Lobo et al. (2013c) presents HSP, a heuristic search procedure to find allocations enabling the Virtual Factory (a heuristic scheduler developed by Hodgson et al. in 1998) to generate schedules with smaller L max than can be achieved with allocations yielding article 1’s final lower bound. From simulation replications of the given DRC job shop scheduling problem, we estimate the distribution of the difference between (a) the “best” (smallest) L max value achievable with a Virtual Factory–generated schedule, taken over all feasible allocations; and (b) the final lower bound of Lobo et al. (2013b). To evaluate the quality of a specific allocation for the given problem, we compute the difference between L max for the Virtual Factory–generated schedule based on the specific allocation, and the associated lower bound (b) for the problem; then we refer this difference to the estimated distribution to judge the likelihood that the specific allocation yields the Virtual Factory’s “best” schedule (a) for the given problem. We present several examples illustrating the usefulness of our approach, and summarize the lessons learned in this work.

Keywords

Staffing Level Machine Group Lower Endpoint Simulation Replication Virtual Factory 
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.

References

  1. Adams, J., Balas, E., & Zawack, D. (1988). The shifting bottleneck procedure for job shop scheduling. Management Science, 34(3), 391–401.Google Scholar
  2. Bickel, P. J., & Doksum, K. A.. (2007). Mathematical Statistics: Basic Ideas and Selected Topics (2nd edn.). Upper Saddle River, Pearson Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  3. Coles, S. (2001). An Introduction to Statistical Modeling of Extreme Values. Springer, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Derigs, U. (1985). Using confidence limits for the global optimum in combinatorial optimization. Operations Research, 33(5), 1024–1049.Google Scholar
  5. Felan, J., Fry, T., & Philipoom, P. (1993). Labour flexibility and staffing levels in a dual-resource constrained job shop. International Journal of Production Research, 31(10), 2487–2506.Google Scholar
  6. Gargeya, V., Deane, R. (1996). Scheduling research in multiple resource constrained job shops: A review and critique. International Journal of Production Research, 34(8), 2077–2097.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Geer Mountain Software Corp. (2001). Stat::Fit, Version 2. South Kent, Geer Mountain Software Corp.Google Scholar
  8. Golden, B. L., & Alt, F. B. (1979). Interval estimation of a global optimum for large combinatorial problems. Naval Research Logistics Quarterly, 26(1), 69–77.Google Scholar
  9. Hodgson, T., Cormier, D., Weintraub, A., & Zozom, A. (1998). Satisfying due dates in large job shops. Management Science, 44(10), 1442–1446.Google Scholar
  10. Hodgson, T., King, R., Thoney, K., Stanislaw, N., Weintraub, A., & Zozom, A. (2000). On satisfying due-dates in large job shops: Idle time insertion. IIE Transactions, 32, 177–180.Google Scholar
  11. Hodgson, T., Melendez, B., Thoney, K., & Trainor, T. (2004). The deployment scheduling analysis tool (DSAT). Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 39(6-8), 905–924.Google Scholar
  12. Hottenstein, M., & Bowman, S. (1998). Cross-training and worker flexibility: A review of DRC system research. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 9(2), 157–174.Google Scholar
  13. Jaber, M., & Neumann, W. (2010). Modelling worker fatigue and recovery in dual-resource constrained systems. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 59(1), 75–84.Google Scholar
  14. Kelton, W. D., Sadowski, R. P., & Swets, N. B.. (2010). Simulation with Arena 4th edn. New York, McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  15. Kher, H. (2000). Examination of flexibility acquisition policies in dual resource constrained job shops with simultaneous worker learning and forgetting effects. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 51(5), 592–601.Google Scholar
  16. Kher, H., Malhotra, M., Philipoom, P., & Fry, T. (1999). Modeling simultaneous worker learning and forgetting in dual resource constrained systems. European Journal of Operational Research, 115(1), 158–172.Google Scholar
  17. Kuhl, M., Ivy, J., Lada, E., Steiger, N., Wagner, M., & Wilson, J. (2010). Univariate input models for stochastic simulation. Journal of Simulation, 4, 81–97.Google Scholar
  18. Law, A. M (2007). Simulation Modeling and Analysis. McGraw-Hill, New York, 4th edn.Google Scholar
  19. Law, A. M. (2011). How the ExpertFit distribution-fitting software can make your simulation models more valid. In Proceedings of the 2011 Winter Simulation Conference, S. Jain, R. R. Creasy, J. Himmelspach, K. P. White, & M. Fu (eds.) Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (pp. 63–69). New Jersey, Piscataway.Google Scholar
  20. Leadbetter, M. R., Lindgren, G., & Rootzén, H. (1983). Extremes and Related Properties of Random Sequences and Processes. New York, Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lenstra, J., & Rinnooy Kan, A. (1979). Computational complexity of discrete optimization problems. In Discrete Optimization I Proceedings of the Advanced Research Institute on Discrete Optimization and Systems Applications of the Systems Science Panel of NATO and of the Discrete Optimization Symposium, P. Hammer, E. Johnson, and B. Korte, eds., Elsevier, vol. 4 of Annals of Discrete Mathematics. 121–140.Google Scholar
  22. Lobo, B., Hodgson, T., King, R., Thoney, K., & Wilson, J. (2013a). An effective lower bound on \(L\rm \max\) in a worker-constrained job shop. Computers & Operations Research, 40(1), 328–343.Google Scholar
  23. Lobo, B., Hodgson, T., King, R., Thoney, K., & Wilson, J. (2013b). Allocating job-shop manpower to minimize \(L\rm \max\) in a job shop: Optimality criteria, search heuristics, and probabilistic quality metrics. Computers & Operations Research, 40(10), 2569–2584.Google Scholar
  24. Lobo, B., Wilson, J., Thoney, K., Hodgson, T., & King, R. (2013c). A practical method for evaluating worker-allocations in large-scale dual resource constrained job shops. http://people.engr.ncsu.edu/bjlobo/papers/loboetal_paper4.pdf.
  25. Malhotra, M., Fry, T., Kher, H., & Donohue, J. (1993). The impact of learning and labor attrition on worker flexibility in dual resource constrained job shops. Decision Sciences, 24(3), 641–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nelson, R. (1967). Labor and machine limited production systems. Management Science, 13(9), 648–671.Google Scholar
  27. Park, S., & Miller K (1988) Random number generators: good ones are hard to find. Communications of the ACM, 31(10), 1192–1201.Google Scholar
  28. Pinedo, M. (2012). Scheduling: Theory, Algorithms, and Systems, (4th edn). SpringerGoogle Scholar
  29. Schultz, S., Hodgson, T., King, R., & Thoney, K. (2004). Minimizing \(L\rm \max\) for large-scale, job-shop scheduling problems. International Journal of Production Research, 42(23), 4893–4907.Google Scholar
  30. Scott, D. (1979). On optimal and data-based histograms. Biometrika, 66(3), 605–610.Google Scholar
  31. Thoney, K., Hodgson, T., King, R., Taner, M., & Wilson, A. (2002). Satisfying due-dates in large multi-factory supply chains. IIE Transactions, 34(9), 803–811.Google Scholar
  32. Treleven, M. (1989). A review of the dual resource constrained system research. IIE Transactions, 21(3), 279–287.Google Scholar
  33. Treleven M, & Elvers D. (1985). An investigation of labor assignment rules in a dual-constrained job shop. Journal of Operations Management, 6(1), 51–68.Google Scholar
  34. Weintraub, A., Cormier, D., Hodgson, T., King, R., Wilson, J., & Zozom, A. (1999). Scheduling with alternatives: a link between process planning and scheduling. IIE Transactions, 31(11), 1093–1102.Google Scholar
  35. Wilson, A. D., King, R. E., & Wilson, J. R. (2004). Case study on statistically estimating minimum makespan for flow line scheduling problems. European Journal of Operational Research, 155, 439–454.Google Scholar
  36. Zozom, A., Hodgson, T., King, R., Weintraub, A., & Cormier, D. (2003). Integrated job release and shop-floor scheduling to minimize WIP and meet due-dates. International Journal of Production Research, 41(1), 31–45.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Benjamin J. Lobo
    • 1
    Email author
  • T. J. Thoney
    • 2
  • Russell E. King
    • 1
  • James R. Wilson
    • 1
  1. 1.Edward P. Fitts Department of Industrial and Systems EngineeringNorth Carolina State UniversityRaleighUSA
  2. 2.Department of Textile and Apparel, Technology and ManagementNorth Carolina State UniversityRaleighUSA

Personalised recommendations