1995
DOI: 10.1007/bf00123681
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Scheduling independent jobs on uniform parallel machines to minimize tardiness criteria

Abstract: The problem of scheduling N jobs on M uniform parallel machines is studied. The objective is to minimize the mean tardiness or the weighted sum of tardiness with weights based on jobs, on periods or both. For the mean tardiness criteria in the preemptive case, this problem is NP-hard but good solutions can be calculated with a transportation problem algorithm. In the nonpreemptive case the problem is therefore NP-hard, except for the cases with equal job processing times or with job due dates equal to job proc… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
12
0
1

Year Published

1996
1996
2010
2010

Publication Types

Select...
7
3

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 31 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
0
12
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In this work, a solution procedure is introduced beginning with the single machine problem and then extended to the general case of m machines. Alain Guinet [42] considered the problem of scheduling n jobs on m uniform parallel machines with the objective of minimizing the mean tardiness or the weighted sum of tardiness with weights based on jobs, periods or both. For the mean tardiness criterion in the non-preemptive case, the problem is NP-hard, except for the cases with equal job processing times or with job due dates equal to job processing times.…”
Section: Offline Scheduling Of Non-preemptive Jobs Tomentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this work, a solution procedure is introduced beginning with the single machine problem and then extended to the general case of m machines. Alain Guinet [42] considered the problem of scheduling n jobs on m uniform parallel machines with the objective of minimizing the mean tardiness or the weighted sum of tardiness with weights based on jobs, periods or both. For the mean tardiness criterion in the non-preemptive case, the problem is NP-hard, except for the cases with equal job processing times or with job due dates equal to job processing times.…”
Section: Offline Scheduling Of Non-preemptive Jobs Tomentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is the work of Wilkerson & Irwin, (1979) and finally one must mention the Montagne's Ratio Method (Montagne, 1969). We can also quote works of: Eom et al, (2002), the tabu search based method of Armentano and Yamashita, (2000), the three phase method of , the neural network method of Park & Kim, (1997), the work of Radhawa and Kuo, (1997) and also Guinet, (1995). And the former work of Arkin & Roundy, (1991), Luh et al, (1990), Emmons &Pinedo, (1990) andEmmons, (1987).…”
Section: M1mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Suresh & Chaudhuri (1994) presented a GAP-EDD algorithm to minimize maximum tardiness. Guinet (1995) employed a simulated annealing method to minimize mean tardiness. Randhawa & Kuo (1994) examined the factors that may have influence on the scheduling performance and proposed heuristics to minimize mean tardiness.…”
Section: Previously Related Studies On Parallel Machine Schedulingmentioning
confidence: 99%