Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T08:14:41.818Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Minimizing expected makespan in stochastic open shops

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2016

Michael L. Pinedo
Affiliation:
Georgia Institute of Technology
Sheldon M. Ross*
Affiliation:
University of California, Berkeley
*
∗∗Postal address: Department of Industrial Engineering and Operations Research, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, U.S.A.

Abstract

Suppose that two machines are available to process n tasks. Each task has to be processed on both machines; the order in which this happens is immaterial. Task j has to be processed on machine 1 (2) for random time Xj (Yj) with distribution Fj (Gj). This kind of model is usually called an open shop. The time that it takes to process all tasks is normally called the makespan. Every time a machine finishes processing a task the decision-maker has to decide which task to process next. Assuming that Xj and Yj have the same exponential distribution we show that the optimal policy instructs the decision-maker, whenever a machine is freed, to start processing the task with longest expected processing time among the tasks still to be processed on both machines. If all tasks have been processed at least once, it does not matter what the decision-maker does, as long as he keeps the machines busy. We then consider the case of n identical tasks and two machines with different speeds. The time it takes machine 1 (2) to process a task has distribution F (G). Both distributions F and G are assumed to be new better than used (NBU) and we show that the decision-maker stochastically minimizes the makespan when he always gives priority to those tasks which have not yet received processing on either machine.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Applied Probability Trust 1982 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

a

Present address: Department of Industrial Engineering and Operations Research, S. W. Mudd Building, Columbia University, New York, NY 10027, U.S.A.

Partially supported by the Office of Naval Research, Center for Production and Distribution Research, Georgia Institute of Technology and by the National Science Foundation under grant ECS-8115344 with the Georgia Institute of Technology.

Partially supported by the Air Force Office of Scientific Research (AFSC), USAF, under Grant AFOSR with the University of California, Berkeley.

References

[1] Emmons, H. (1973) The two-machine job-shop with exponential processing times. In Symp. Theory of Scheduling and its Applications, ed. Elmaghraby, S. E. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
[2] Gonzalez, T. and Sahni, S. (1976) Open shop scheduling to minimize finish time. J. Assoc. Comput. Mach. 23, 665697.Google Scholar
[3] Pinedo, M. (1981) On flow time and due dates in stochastic open shops. ISyE Technical Report, Georgia Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
[4] Pinedo, M. and Schrage, L. (1982) Stochastic shop scheduling: A survey, in Deterministic and Stochastic Scheduling, ed. Dempster, M. A. H. et al. Reidel, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
[5] Pinedo, M. and Weiss, G. (1979) Scheduling stochastic tasks on two parallel processors. Naval Res. Logist. Quart. 26, 527535.Google Scholar
[6] Ross, S. M. (1972) Dynamic programming and gambling models. Adv. Appl. Prob. 6, 593606.Google Scholar
[7] Van Der Heyden, L. (1981) Scheduling jobs with exponential processing and arrival times on identical processors so as to minimize the expected makespan. Math. Operat. Res. 6, 305312.Google Scholar
[8] Weber, R. R. (1982) Scheduling jobs with stochastic processing requirements on parallel machines to minimize makespan or flow time. J. Appl. Prob. 19, 167182.Google Scholar
[9] Weiss, G. and Pinedo, M. (1980) Scheduling tasks with exponential service times on non-identical processors to minimize various cost functions. J. Appl. Prob. 17, 187202.Google Scholar