IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jcomop/v28y2014i4d10.1007_s10878-012-9593-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Online scheduling with rejection and reordering: exact algorithms for unit size jobs

Author

Listed:
  • Leah Epstein

    (University of Haifa)

  • Hanan Zebedat-Haider

    (University of Haifa)

Abstract

We study an online scheduling problem with rejection on $$m\ge 2$$ identical machines, in which we deal with unit size jobs. Each arriving job has a rejection value (a rejection cost or penalty for minimization problems, and a rejection profit for maximization problems) associated with it. A buffer of size $$K$$ is available to store $$K$$ jobs. A job which is not stored in the buffer must be either assigned to a machine or rejected. Upon the arrival of a new job, the job can be stored in the buffer if there is a free slot (possibly created by evicting other jobs and assigning or rejecting every evicted job). At termination, the buffer must be emptied. We study four variants of the problem, as follows. We study the makespan minimization problem, where the goal is to minimize the sum of the makespan and the penalty of rejected jobs, and the $$\ell _p$$ norm minimization problem, where the goal is to minimize the sum of the $$\ell _p$$ norm of the vector of machine completion times and the penalty of rejected jobs. We also study two maximization problems, where the goal in the first version is to maximize the sum of the minimum machine load (the cover value of the machines) and the total rejection profit, and in the second version the goal is to maximize a function of the machine completion times (which measures the balance of machine loads) and the total rejection profit. We show that an optimal solution (an exact solution for the offline problem) can always be obtained in this environment, and determine the required buffer size. Specifically, for all four variants we present optimal algorithms with $$K=m-1$$ and prove that in each case, using a buffer of size at most $$m-2$$ does not allow the design of an optimal algorithm, which makes our algorithms optimal in this respect as well. The lower bounds hold even for the special case where the rejection value is equal for all input jobs.

Suggested Citation

  • Leah Epstein & Hanan Zebedat-Haider, 2014. "Online scheduling with rejection and reordering: exact algorithms for unit size jobs," Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, Springer, vol. 28(4), pages 875-892, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:jcomop:v:28:y:2014:i:4:d:10.1007_s10878-012-9593-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s10878-012-9593-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10878-012-9593-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10878-012-9593-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. György Dósa & Leah Epstein, 2010. "Online scheduling with a buffer on related machines," Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 161-179, August.
    2. D. K. Friesen & B. L. Deuermeyer, 1981. "Analysis of Greedy Solutions for a Replacement Part Sequencing Problem," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 74-87, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Baruch Mor & Gur Mosheiov & Dana Shapira, 2021. "Single machine lot scheduling with optional job-rejection," Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 1-11, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yong He & Zhiyi Tan, 2002. "Ordinal On-Line Scheduling for Maximizing the Minimum Machine Completion Time," Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, Springer, vol. 6(2), pages 199-206, June.
    2. Xiangzhong Xiang, 2015. "Prompt mechanism for online auctions with multi-unit demands," Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 335-346, August.
    3. Bahram Alidaee & Haibo Wang & R. Bryan Kethley & Frank Landram, 2019. "A unified view of parallel machine scheduling with interdependent processing rates," Journal of Scheduling, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 499-515, October.
    4. Rico Walter, 2013. "Comparing the minimum completion times of two longest-first scheduling-heuristics," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 21(1), pages 125-139, January.
    5. Rico Walter & Martin Wirth & Alexander Lawrinenko, 2017. "Improved approaches to the exact solution of the machine covering problem," Journal of Scheduling, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 147-164, April.
    6. Alexander Lawrinenko & Stefan Schwerdfeger & Rico Walter, 2018. "Reduction criteria, upper bounds, and a dynamic programming based heuristic for the max–min $$k_i$$ k i -partitioning problem," Journal of Heuristics, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 173-203, April.
    7. Leah Epstein & Asaf Levin & Rob van Stee, 2016. "A Unified Approach to Truthful Scheduling on Related Machines," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 41(1), pages 332-351, February.
    8. Leah Epstein, 2018. "A survey on makespan minimization in semi-online environments," Journal of Scheduling, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 269-284, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:jcomop:v:28:y:2014:i:4:d:10.1007_s10878-012-9593-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.