Learning Surrogate Functions for the Short-Horizon Planning in Same-Day Delivery Problems

Author(s):  
Adrian Bracher ◽  
Nikolaus Frohner ◽  
Günther R. Raidl
Data Analysis ◽  
1987 ◽  
pp. 273-282 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Garcia ◽  
J. M. Proth

2011 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam Janiak ◽  
Tomasz Krysiak ◽  
Radosław Trela

In recent years, many papers concerning scheduling problems with simultaneous learning and ageing effects were published. In this paper, the state of the art of research concerning these problems is presented. In order to facilitate understanding this subject, the scheduling problems where these effects occur separately, are firstly explained. Then, the papers devoted to scheduling problems combining the effects of learning and ageing are discussed. Particular attention was paid on practical applications of the considered scheduling problems. After thorough analysis it turned out that both scheduling problems with learning effect, and with ageing effect, as well as, in particular, the problems with models merging learning and ageing effects do not have any reasonable real-life applications. This is because the learning and ageing effects are in general long time horizon phenomena observed in repetitive systems and scheduling theory concerns either with repetitive short-horizon planning problems or single long-horizon projects. Therefore, there is no sense to continue research considering these scheduling problems from practical (computer engineering, automatic control, technical and economical) point of view, unless such reasonable real-life example appears.


2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 (15) ◽  
pp. 101-1-1018
Author(s):  
Ayan Mitra ◽  
David G. Politte ◽  
Joseph A. O'Sullivan

1970 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 272-280
Author(s):  
Richard C. Porter

A common problem of finite-horizon planning models is that there is no logical determinant of investment in the final year (s). Where post-horizon production is not valued by a model, later-year investment, whose sole function is creation of capacity for post-horizon output, looks as incongruous as last rites for an atheist. A number of artificial devices have been developed to handle this difficulty1, but one predominates: to assume that terminal-year investment is a function of terminal-year output. The purpose of this note is to show: 1) how varied and arbitrary are the assumed functions (Section I); 2) that the terminal-year variables and the apparent feasibility of the resulting Plan are highly sensitive to the choice of function (Section II); and 3) that the arbitrariness of functional form is inevitable in the sense that generally acceptable criteria do not much restrict the choice (Section III). Throughout this note, we shall neglect four complexities that are not essential to the problem at hand. One, the marginal capital-output ratio (


Author(s):  
Sam James Henkel ◽  
J. Spencer Martin ◽  
Federico Nardari
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document