1999
DOI: 10.1080/002075499189682
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Workshop scheduling using practical (inaccurate) data Part 2: An investigation of the robustness of scheduling rules in a dynamic and stochastic environment

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
14
0

Year Published

2003
2003
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Approaches to production scheduling and rescheduling in a dynamic environment can be classified into three main categories (Shafai and Bruno, 1999): completely reactive approaches, predictive-reactive approaches and robust scheduling. In completely reactive approaches, no firm schedule is generated in advance and decisions are made locally in real-time.…”
Section: Dynamic Schedulingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Approaches to production scheduling and rescheduling in a dynamic environment can be classified into three main categories (Shafai and Bruno, 1999): completely reactive approaches, predictive-reactive approaches and robust scheduling. In completely reactive approaches, no firm schedule is generated in advance and decisions are made locally in real-time.…”
Section: Dynamic Schedulingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A simple approach would be to totally reschedule the system when the deviation occurs [5]. However, this approach is not encouraged in industry as the new schedule can differ considerably from the old one and this is not desirable since many other decisions such as assignment of personnel, delivery of raw material and the subsequent processing of the jobs in other facilities, may be severely disrupted.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Scheduling research has traditionally ignored this "process view" of the problem, and focuses on optimization of the performance measures under idealized assumptions of environmental stability. However, several authors have reported that these assumptions do not hold for most of the manufacturing environments due to random machine breakdowns, rush job arrival, tool breakage [9][10][11][12] etc.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%