1991
DOI: 10.1016/0191-2607(91)90132-a
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An algorithm for computer assisted sequencing and scheduling of terminal area operations

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
41
0

Year Published

1999
1999
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 79 publications
(41 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
0
41
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For instance, an aircraft in the 16th position in a FCFS queue would have to land in one of the positions 14-18 if the specified maximum position shift (MPS) is 2. Through many numerical examples and for several reasonable objective functions, Dear (1976) showed that by setting MPS to a small number, such as two or three, one can obtain most of the benefits of an unconstrained optimized system (e.g., 60%-80% of the potential improvements). This finding motivated several researchers (e.g., Psaraftis 1980, Venkatakrishnan et al 1992, Bianco et al 2001 to investigate a number of increasingly complex and realistic versions of the sequencing problem.…”
Section: Airside Operationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For instance, an aircraft in the 16th position in a FCFS queue would have to land in one of the positions 14-18 if the specified maximum position shift (MPS) is 2. Through many numerical examples and for several reasonable objective functions, Dear (1976) showed that by setting MPS to a small number, such as two or three, one can obtain most of the benefits of an unconstrained optimized system (e.g., 60%-80% of the potential improvements). This finding motivated several researchers (e.g., Psaraftis 1980, Venkatakrishnan et al 1992, Bianco et al 2001 to investigate a number of increasingly complex and realistic versions of the sequencing problem.…”
Section: Airside Operationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Dear (1976) and Dear and Sherif (1991) developed the concept of constrained position shifting (CPS), i.e., of a limit in the number of positions by which an aircraft can deviate from its FCFS position in a queue. For instance, an aircraft in the 16th position in a FCFS queue would have to land in one of the positions 14-18 if the specified maximum position shift (MPS) is 2.…”
Section: Airside Operationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For an overview of approaches for the dynamic version we refer to Beasley et al [4] and Dear and Sherif [7]. Psaraftis [13,14] developed a dynamic programming formulation of the ALP with successive separation for single runways with E a = 0, i.e., all aircraft are available to land at time 0.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, if the maximum position shift allowed were two, an aircraft that is in the eighth position in the FCFS order can be placed at the sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, or tenth position in the new order. Several researchers in both the United States and Europe have since used CPS to model fairness and worked toward developing fast solution techniques for scheduling within the CPS framework [1], [7], [13]. While some variants of CPS were shown to be solvable in polynomial time [14], [15], they were unable to handle all the operational constraints that arose in practice [16].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%