Skip to main content
Log in

Multi-objective parallel machine scheduling problems by considering controllable processing times

  • General Paper
  • Published:
Journal of the Operational Research Society

Abstract

This study examines parallel machine scheduling problems with controllable processing times. The processing time of each job can be between lower and upper bounds, and a cost is associated with the processing of a job on a machine. The processing time of a job can be decreased, which may lower the cycle time, although doing so would incur additional costs. This study develops two multi-objective mathematical models, which consist of two and three inconsistent objective functions, respectively. The first model minimizes the total manufacturing cost (TMC) and the total weighted tardiness (TWT) simultaneously, while the second uses makespan (C max) as an additional objective function. In contrast to conventional mathematical models, efficient solutions are attained using the lexicographic weighted Tchebycheff method (LWT). Experimental results indicate that the LWT yields better-spread solutions and obtains more non-dominated solutions than its alternative, that is the weighted-sum method, which is a widely used yet promising approach to achieve multi-objective optimization. Results of this study also demonstrate that in purchasing machines, the variation in the fixed costs associated with the processing of jobs on machines is critical to reducing TWT. Moreover, using C max as an additional objective function typically improves TWT and worsens TMC.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aktürk MS, Atamtürk A and Gürel S (2010). Parallel machine match-up scheduling with manufacturing cost considerations. Journal of Scheduling 13 (1): 95–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alidaee B and Ahmadian A (1993). Two parallel machine sequencing problems involving controllable job processing times. European Journal of Operational Research 70 (3): 335–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cao D, Chen M and Wan G (2005). Parallel machine selection and job scheduling to minimize machine cost and job tardiness. Computers & Operations Research 32 (8): 1995–2012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deb K, Pratap A, Agarwal S and Meyarivan T (2002). A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 6 (2): 182–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fang K-T and Lin BMT (2013). Parallel-machine scheduling to minimize tardiness penalty and power cost. Computers & Industrial Engineering 64 (1): 224–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gharehgozli AH, Tavakkoli-Moghaddam R and Zaerpour N (2009). A fuzzy-mixed-integer goal programming model for a parallel-machine scheduling problem with sequence-dependent setup times and release dates. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 25 (4–5): 853–859.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham RL, Lawler EL, Lenstra JK and Rinnooy Kan AHG (1979). Optimization and approximation in deterministic sequencing and scheduling: A survey. Annals of Discrete Mathematics 5: 287–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gurel S and Akturk MS (2007). Scheduling parallel CNC machines with time/cost trade-off considerations. Computers & Operations Research 34 (9): 2774–2789.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gürel S, Körpeoğlu E and Aktürk MS (2010). An anticipative scheduling approach with controllable processing times. Computers & Operations Research 37 (6): 1002–1013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang B, Fery P, Xue L and Wang Y (2008). Seeking the Pareto front for multiobjective spatial optimization problems. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 22 (5): 507–526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jansen K and Mastrolilli M (2004). Approximation schemes for parallel machine scheduling problems with controllable processing times. Computers & Operations Research 31 (10): 1565–1581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kayvanfar V, Komaki GHM, Aalaei A and Zandieh M (2014). Minimizing total tardiness and earliness on unrelated parallel machines with controllable processing times. Computers & Operations Research 41: 31–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim IY and de Weck OL (2005). Adaptive weighted-sum method for bi-objective optimization: Pareto front generation. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization 29 (2): 149–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawler EL (1977). A pseudopolynomial algorithm for sequencing jobs to minimize total tardiness. Annals of Discrete Mathematics 1: 331–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leyvand Y, Shabtay D, Steiner G and Yedidsion L (2010). Just-in-time scheduling with controllable processing times on parallel machines. Journal of Combinatorial Optimization 19 (3): 347–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li K, Shi Y, Yang S-L and Cheng B-Y (2011). Parallel machine scheduling problem to minimize the makespan with resource dependent processing times. Applied Soft Computing 11 (8): 5551–5557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mazdeh MM, Zaerpour F, Zareei A and Hajinezhad A (2010). Parallel machines scheduling to minimize job tardiness and machine deteriorating cost with deteriorating jobs. Applied Mathematical Modelling 34 (6): 1498–1510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nowicki E and Zdrzałka S (1995). A bicriterion approach to preemptive scheduling of parallel machines with controllable job processing times. Discrete Applied Mathematics 63 (3): 237–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pfund M, Fowler JW, Gadkari A and Chen Y (2008). Scheduling jobs on parallel machines with setup times and ready times. Computers & Industrial Engineering 54 (4): 764–782.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samanlioglu F (2013). A multi-objective mathematical model for the industrial hazardous waste location-routing problem. European Journal of Operational Research 226 (2): 332–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shabtay D and Steiner G (2007). A survey of scheduling with controllable processing times. Discrete Applied Mathematics 155 (13): 1643–1666.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steuer RE (1986). Multiple Criteria Optimization: Theory, Computation, and Application. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steuer RE and Choo E-U (1983). An interactive weighted Tchebycheff procedure for multiple objective programming. Mathematical Programming 26 (3): 326–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tind J and Wiecek MM (1999). Augmented Lagrangian and Tchebycheff approaches in multiple objective programming. Journal of Global Optimization 14 (3): 251–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tseng C-T, Liao C-J and Huang K-L (2009). Minimizing total tardiness on a single machine with controllable processing times. Computers & Operations Research 36 (6): 1852–1858.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Wassenhove LN and Baker KR (1982). A bicriterion approach to time/cost trade-offs in sequencing. European Journal of Operational Research 11 (1): 48–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vickson RG (1980). Two single machine sequencing problems involving contollable job processing times. IIE Transactions 12 (3): 258–262.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cheng-Hsiang Liu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Liu, CH., Tsai, WN. Multi-objective parallel machine scheduling problems by considering controllable processing times. J Oper Res Soc 67, 654–663 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1057/jors.2015.82

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/jors.2015.82

Keywords

Navigation