2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.asoc.2016.09.051
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Hybrid evolutionary approaches for the single machine order acceptance and scheduling problem

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
17
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
0
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Oguz et al (2010) proposed the OAS problem with a penalty for late completion, time windows and sequence-dependent setup times. The problem was approached by MIP (Cesaret et al 2012), TS (Cesaret et al 2012), genetic algorithm (Nguyen et al 2015;Chen et al 2014;Chaurasia and Singh 2017), artificial bee colony algorithm (Lin and Ying 2013;Chaurasia and Kim 2019), hyper-heuristic based methods (Nguyen 2016) and iterated local search (Silva et al 2018). Recently, Silva et al (2018) used Lagrangian relaxation and column generation to find tight upper bounds of problem instances.…”
Section: Domain Instancesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Oguz et al (2010) proposed the OAS problem with a penalty for late completion, time windows and sequence-dependent setup times. The problem was approached by MIP (Cesaret et al 2012), TS (Cesaret et al 2012), genetic algorithm (Nguyen et al 2015;Chen et al 2014;Chaurasia and Singh 2017), artificial bee colony algorithm (Lin and Ying 2013;Chaurasia and Kim 2019), hyper-heuristic based methods (Nguyen 2016) and iterated local search (Silva et al 2018). Recently, Silva et al (2018) used Lagrangian relaxation and column generation to find tight upper bounds of problem instances.…”
Section: Domain Instancesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…ABC [9], HSSGA [16], and EA/G-LS [16]. Note that the performance of MIP solved by ILOG CPLEX has been tested by Cesaret et al [5] and its performance is bad for large instances with more than 25 orders.…”
Section: Comparison With State-of-the-art Algorithmsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Besides Sparrow, we include two other algorithms which correspond to the state of the art: ILS by Silva et al [8] and HSSGA by Chaurasia and Singh [16].…”
Section: The Performances Of Different Algorithms On New Instancesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Silva et al (2018) considered the OA&S with sequence-dependent setup times on a single machine. Chaurasia and Singh (2017) considered the same problem by considering release dates and sequence dependent setup times. This problem, with customer class set up, was investigated by Xie and Wang (2016).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Table 1 summarizes the assumptions and features of some of recently closely related papers of OA&S and LS. Emami et al, 2016)     Lagrangian relaxation (Chaurasia & Singh, 2016)     GA (Ou & Zhong, 2016)     Heuristic (Nguyen, 2016)     GA (Lei & Guo, 2015)     PNS (C. Chen et al, 2014)     GA (Wang et al, 2013)      (Cesaret et al, 2012)     TS (Noroozi et al, 2017)      GA+PSO (Lalitha et al, 2017)    Heuristic (Zhang et al, 2017)   MBO (Han et al, 2016)   NSGA-II (Mukherjee et al, 2017)    Optimal properties (Nejati et al, 2016)   GA&SA (Ming Cheng et al, 2016)   Heuristic (Sang et al, 2015)   IWO As can be seen in the Table 1, the OA&S or LS studies only focused on determining schedules of the orders to minimize the production cost without taking account of the distribution costs and revenue of the orders. While to achieve business goals integrating the production and distribution scheduling is critical (Chen, 2010).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%