Skip to main content
Log in

The proactive and reactive resource-constrained project scheduling problem

  • Published:
Journal of Scheduling Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Uncertainty has become an inevitable aspect of project scheduling. We study the resource-constrained project scheduling problem with stochastic durations. One of the most studied approaches to deal with stochastic durations is that of proactive and reactive scheduling. Previous researches often studied proactive and reactive scheduling rather separately and ignored the fact that proactive scheduling and reactive scheduling are closely connected. In this paper, we address this ignored aspect by formulating an integrated proactive and reactive scheduling problem with a combined cost function which includes a baseline schedule cost as well as costs of a series of reactions. We introduce solutions to this integrated problem as proactive-and-reactive policies (PR-policies). We discuss that PR-policies are more powerful and informative than their traditional counterparts (i.e., a combination of a baseline schedule and a reactive policy), provide better stability and robustness, and are more flexible when extra constraints are added to the problem. We also propose four dynamic programming based models (Models 1–4) that solve the problem to optimality over different classes of PR-policies. We compare our models with each other and with a combination of a traditional proactive approach (namely, the starting time criticality heuristic) and a reactive approach (namely, the robust parallel schedule generation scheme). Computational results show that Model 2 outperforms the traditional solution only when reaction costs are greater than zero. Moreover, Model 3 and Model 4 clearly outperform Model 1 and Model 2 in all settings and the traditional solution in most of the settings.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Robustness refers to the ability of tolerating variabilities that may affect the feasibility of a schedule.

  2. The free slack is the amount of time that each activity can be delayed without delaying any other activity.

  3. A schedule \(\mathbf {s}\) is called infeasible if at least one activity i cannot be started at \(s_i\) without violating any resource or precedence constraint.

References

  • Abbasi, B., Shadrokh, S., & Arkat, J. (2006). Bi-objective resource-constrained project scheduling with robustness and makespan criteria. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 180(1), 146–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akkan, C., Külünk, M. E., & Koçaş, C. C. (2016). Finding robust timetables for project presentations of student teams. European Journal of Operational Research, 249(2), 560–576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Al-Fawzan, M. A., & Haouari, M. (2005). A bi-objective model for robust resource-constrained project scheduling. International Journal of Production Economics, 96(2), 175–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alvarez-Valdes, R., & Tamarit, J. (1993). The project scheduling polyhedron: Dimension, facets and lifting theorems. European Journal of Operational Research, 67(2), 204–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashtiani, B., Leus, R., & Aryanezhad, M. B. (2011). New competitive results for the stochastic resource-constrained project scheduling problem: Exploring the benefits of pre-processing. Journal of Scheduling, 14(2), 157–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ballestín, F., & Leus, R. (2009). Resource-constrained project scheduling for timely project completion with stochastic activity durations. Production and Operations Management, 18(4), 459–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Tal, A., Goryashko, A., Guslitzer, E., & Nemirovski, A. (2003). Adjustable robust solutions of uncertain linear programs. Mathematical Programming, 99(2), 351–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chaari, T., Chaabane, S., Aissani, N., & Trentesaux, D. (2014). Scheduling under uncertainty: Survey and research directions. In 2014 International conference on advanced logistics and transport (ICALT) (pp. 229–234).

  • Chtourou, H., & Haouari, M. (2008). A two-stage-priority-rule-based algorithm for robust resource-constrained project scheduling. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 55(1), 183–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creemers, S. (2015). Minimizing the expected makespan of a project with stochastic activity durations under resource constraints. Journal of Scheduling, 18(3), 263–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creemers, S., Leus, R., & Lambrecht, M. (2010). Scheduling markovian PERT networks to maximize the net present value. Operations Research Letters, 38(1), 51–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deblaere, F., Demeulemeester, E., & Herroelen, W. (2011). Proactive policies for the stochastic resource-constrained project scheduling problem. European Journal of Operational Research, 214(2), 308–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Demeulemeester, E., & Herroelen, W. (1992). A branch-and-bound procedure for the multiple resource-constrained project scheduling problem. Management Science, 38(12), 1803–1818.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Demeulemeester, E., & Herroelen, W. (1997). New benchmark results for the resource-constrained project scheduling problem. Management Science, 43(11), 1485–1492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Demeulemeester, E., & Herroelen, W. (2011). Robust project scheduling. Foundations and Trends in Technology, Information and Operations Management, 3, 201–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flyvbjerg, B., Bruzelius, N., & Rothengatter, W. (2003). Megaprojects and risk: An anatomy of ambition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gabrel, V., Murat, C., & Thiele, A. (2014). Recent advances in robust optimization: An overview. European Journal of Operational Research, 235(3), 471–483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herroelen, W. (2005). Project scheduling: Theory and practice. Production and Operations Management, 14(4), 413–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herroelen, W., & Leus, R. (2004). The construction of stable project baseline schedules. European Journal of Operational Research, 156(3), 550–565.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herroelen, W., & Leus, R. (2005). Project scheduling under uncertainty: Survey and research potentials. European Journal of Operational Research, 165(2), 289–306.

  • Igelmund, G., & Radermacher, F. J. (1983). Preselective strategies for the optimization of stochastic project networks under resource constraints. Networks, 13(1), 1–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolisch, R., & Sprecher, A. (1997). PSPLIB—A project scheduling problem library. European Journal of Operational Research, 96(1), 205–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lamas, P., & Demeulemeester, E. (2016). A purely proactive scheduling procedure for the resource-constrained project scheduling problem with stochastic activity durations. Journal of Scheduling, 19(4), 409–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leus, R. (2003). The generation of stable project plans. Ph.D. thesis, KU Leuven.

  • Leus, R., & Herroelen, W. (2005). The complexity of machine scheduling for stability with a single disrupted job. Operations Research Letters, 33(2), 151–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liebchen, C., Lübbecke, M., Möhring, R., & Stiller, S. (2009). The concept of recoverable robustness, linear programming recovery, and railway applications. In R. K. Ahuja, R. H. Möhring, & C. D. Zaroliagis (Eds.), Robust and online large-scale optimization: Models and techniques for transportation systems (pp. 1–27). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Möhring, R., Radermacher, F., & Weiss, G. (1984). Stochastic scheduling problems I—General strategies. Zeitschrift für Operations Research, 28(7), 193–260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Möhring, R., Radermacher, F., & Weiss, G. (1985). Stochastic scheduling problems II—Set strategies. Zeitschrift für Operations Research, 29(3), 65–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, A. (2011). A dynamic programming approach to adjustable robust optimization. Operations Research Letters, 39(2), 83–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stork, F. (2001). Stochastic resource-constrained project scheduling. Ph.D. thesis, TU Berlin.

  • Van de Vonder, S., Ballestin, F., Demeulemeester, E., & Herroelen, W. (2007). Heuristic procedures for reactive project scheduling. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 52(1), 11–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Vonder, S., Demeulemeester, E., & Herroelen, W. (2008). Proactive heuristic procedures for robust project scheduling: An experimental analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 189(3), 723–733.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Vonder, S., Demeulemeester, E., Herroelen, W., & Leus, R. (2005). The use of buffers in project management: The trade-off between stability and makespan. International Journal of Production Economics, 97(2), 227–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Vonder, S., Demeulemeester, E., Herroelen, W., & Leus, R. (2006). The trade-off between stability and makespan in resource-constrained project scheduling. International Journal of Production Research, 44(2), 215–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Morteza Davari.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Davari, M., Demeulemeester, E. The proactive and reactive resource-constrained project scheduling problem. J Sched 22, 211–237 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10951-017-0553-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10951-017-0553-x

Keywords

Navigation