Robust Scheduling to Hedge Against Processing Time Uncertainty in Single-Stage Production

Richard L. Daniels

Management Science · 1995 · 359 citations · 9 references

Concepts

TL;DR

When processing times are highly uncertain, schedules optimized under deterministic or stochastic assumptions often perform poorly, so robust scheduling—selecting the schedule with the best worst‑case performance across all possible processing times—is a more suitable criterion. This study formalizes the robust scheduling concept for situations with uncertain or variable processing times. The authors analyze a single‑machine problem minimizing total flow time, define two robustness measures, formulate the robust scheduling problem, prove its complexity, and provide exact and heuristic solution procedures. Computational experiments show that the proposed methods are both efficient and effective.

Abstract

Schedulers confronted with significant processing time uncertainty often discover that a schedule which is optimal with respect to a deterministic or stochastic scheduling model yields quite poor performance when evaluated relative to the actual processing times. In these environments, the notion of schedule robustness, i.e., determining the schedule with the best worst-case performance compared to the corresponding optimal solution over all potential realizations of job processing times, is a more appropriate guide to schedule selection. In this paper, we formalize the robust scheduling concept for scheduling situations with uncertain or variable processing times. To illustrate the development of solution approaches for a robust scheduling problem, we consider a single-machine environment where the performance criterion of interest is the total flow time over all jobs. We define two measures of schedule robustness, formulate the robust scheduling problem, establish its complexity, describe properties of the optimal schedule, and present exact and heuristic solution procedures. Extensive computational results are reported to demonstrate the efficiency and effectiveness of the proposed solution procedures.

References

9