D. Applegate, B. Cook. A Computational study of the Job-Shop Problem ORSA Jouranl on Computing, 3, p. 149-156, 1991.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles

....9 available(r) x window(I) 2 x 5 = 10 t size(t) t1 2 7 1 3 t2 2 7 1 3 t3 2 7 1 3 t t use(t) t1 t3 Figure 6: An obvious infeasible situation In order to detect such situations, we propose to timetable the resource requirements. In the former example, t1 has a time span of 3 for the time window [2,7]. Therefore, its earliest end is 5 and its latest start 4: in any case, one can be sure that t1 is in process between time instants 4 and 5. Thus we can note that the level of the total resource available for t2 is only 1 during [4,5] The same can be done with t2 and t3 and we note that the ....

.... exclusion rule. We have used it with the rules presented in [8] It must be noticed that shaving is very timeconsuming and does not accomodate well with propagation schemes that are too costly. For instance, we cannot use shaving jointly with the improvements that we propose in [9] problem [2] [7] 8] shaving MT10. 372 s 16 Kb 230 s 1575 bk 232 s 7 bk LA19. 1460 s 94 Kb 189 s 300 bk 208 s 9 bk LA20. 1402 s 82 Kb 156 s 910 bk 24 s 0 bk ORB1 1482 s 72 Kb 1000 s 7265 bk 1460 s 99 bk ORB2 2484 s 153 Kb 108 s 456 bk 128s 6 bk ABZ5 951 s 58 Kb 255 s 1350 bk 336 s 26 bk Figure 11: ....

D. Applegate, B. Cook. A Computational study of the Job-Shop Problem ORSA Jouranl on Computing, 3, p. 149-156, 1991.

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC