On the Expected Completion Time of Diffusion Activity Networks (DiAN)

  • S. E. Elmaghraby
  • M. K. Aggerwal
Part of the NATO ASI Series book series (NSPS, volume 17)


Traditionally, uncertainties in activity durations have been modelled as random variables with corresponding probability distribution functions. These latter are assumed to be known a priori. In reality estimates of activities’ “remaining work cbntents” as well as their duration vary dynamically over time, with divergent variability as the planning horizon extends into the future. To capture this dynamic nature of the estimates, we model the activity as diffusion processes.


Completion Time Polynomial Approximation Activity Duration Complex Project Work Content 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Agrawal, M.K. and Elmaghraby, S.E. (1996). “On the convolution of piecewise polynomial distributions,” OR Report No. 313, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA..Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Boor, C.D. (1978). A Practical Guide to Splines, Springer-Verlag, New York, NY.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dierckx, P. (1993). Cu rve and Surface Fitting with Splines, Oxford Science Publications.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Elmaghraby, S.E. (1977). Activity Networks: Project Planning and Control by Network Methods, Wiley.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Elmaghraby, S.E. (1989). The estimation of some network parameters in the PERT model of activity networks: review and critique, Chapter 1, Part III, in Advances in Project Scheduling, R. Sowinski and J. Weglarz, eds., Elsevier, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Elmaghraby, S.E. (1994). Activity Nets: A guided tour through some recent development Euro. J. Operl Res. 82, 348–408.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Elmaghraby, S.E. (1995). Bounding the expected project duration: A control net approach,’ OR Report No. 311, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hamming, R.W. (1986). Numerical Methods for Scientists and Engineers, 2nd ed., Dover, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Grimmett, G.R. and Stirzaker, D.R. (1994). Probability and Random Processes, 2nd ed., Oxford Science Publications, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hagstorm, Jane H. (1988). Computational complexity of PERT problems, Networks 18, 139–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Karlin, S. and Taylor, M.H. (1975). A First Course in Stochastic Processes, 2nd ed., Academic Press, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Luenberger, David G. (1989). Linear and Nonlinear Programming, 2nd ed., Addison Wesley, Menlo Park, CA.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Martin, J.J. (1965). Distribution of the time through a directed, acyclic network, Oper. Res. 13, 46–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. E. Elmaghraby
    • 1
  • M. K. Aggerwal
    • 1
  1. 1.Graduate Program in Operations ResearchNorth Carolina State UniversityRaleighUSA

Personalised recommendations