IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/navres/v51y2004i7p1005-1017.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Due‐window assignment with unit processing‐time jobs

Author

Listed:
  • Gur Mosheiov
  • Daniel Oron

Abstract

In due‐window assignment problems, jobs completed within a designated time interval are regarded as being on time, whereas early and tardy jobs are penalized. The objective is to determine the location and size of the due‐window, as well as the job schedule. We address a common due‐window assignment problem on parallel identical machines with unit processing time jobs. We show that the number of candidate values for the optimal due‐window starting time and for the optimal due‐window completion time are bounded by 2. We also prove that the starting time of the first job on each of the machines is either 0 or 1, thus introducing a fairly simple, constant‐time solution for the problem. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Naval Research Logistics, 2004

Suggested Citation

  • Gur Mosheiov & Daniel Oron, 2004. "Due‐window assignment with unit processing‐time jobs," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 51(7), pages 1005-1017, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:navres:v:51:y:2004:i:7:p:1005-1017
    DOI: 10.1002/nav.20039
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/nav.20039
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/nav.20039?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hoogeveen, J. A. & van de Velde, S. L., 1991. "Scheduling around a small common due date," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 237-242, November.
    2. Gordon, Valery & Proth, Jean-Marie & Chu, Chengbin, 2002. "A survey of the state-of-the-art of common due date assignment and scheduling research," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(1), pages 1-25, May.
    3. S. S. Panwalkar & M. L. Smith & A. Seidmann, 1982. "Common Due Date Assignment to Minimize Total Penalty for the One Machine Scheduling Problem," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(2), pages 391-399, April.
    4. Nicholas G. Hall & Marc E. Posner, 1991. "Earliness-Tardiness Scheduling Problems, I: Weighted Deviation of Completion Times About a Common Due Date," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 39(5), pages 836-846, October.
    5. Michael X. Weng & Jose A. Ventura, 1994. "Scheduling about a large common due date with tolerance to minimize mean absolute deviation of completion times," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(6), pages 843-851, October.
    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. G Mosheiov & A Sarig, 2011. "A note: a due-window assignment problem on parallel identical machines," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(1), pages 238-241, 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. Lin, Shih-Wei & Chou, Shuo-Yan & Ying, Kuo-Ching, 2007. "A sequential exchange approach for minimizing earliness-tardiness penalties of single-machine scheduling with a common due date," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(2), pages 1294-1301, March.
    2. Ramon Alvarez-Valdes & Enric Crespo & Jose Tamarit & Fulgencia Villa, 2012. "Minimizing weighted earliness–tardiness on a single machine with a common due date using quadratic models," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 20(3), pages 754-767, October.
    3. Dvir Shabtay & George Steiner, 2008. "The single-machine earliness-tardiness scheduling problem with due date assignment and resource-dependent processing times," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 159(1), pages 25-40, March.
    4. Sang, Yao-Wen & Wang, Jun-Qiang & Sterna, Małgorzata & Błażewicz, Jacek, 2023. "Single machine scheduling with due date assignment to minimize the total weighted lead time penalty and late work," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    5. Shabtay, Dvir & Mosheiov, Gur & Oron, Daniel, 2022. "Single machine scheduling with common assignable due date/due window to minimize total weighted early and late work," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 303(1), pages 66-77.
    6. Biskup, Dirk & Feldmann, Martin, 2005. "On scheduling around large restrictive common due windows," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 162(3), pages 740-761, May.
    7. Gordon, Valery & Proth, Jean-Marie & Chu, Chengbin, 2002. "A survey of the state-of-the-art of common due date assignment and scheduling research," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(1), pages 1-25, May.
    8. Koulamas, Christos & Kyparisis, George J., 2023. "A classification of dynamic programming formulations for offline deterministic single-machine scheduling problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 305(3), pages 999-1017.
    9. Hoogeveen, Han, 2005. "Multicriteria scheduling," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 167(3), pages 592-623, December.
    10. Oğuzhan Ahmet Arik, 2023. "A heuristic for single machine common due date assignment problem with different earliness/tardiness weights," OPSEARCH, Springer;Operational Research Society of India, vol. 60(3), pages 1561-1574, September.
    11. Baker, Kenneth R., 2014. "Minimizing earliness and tardiness costs in stochastic scheduling," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 236(2), pages 445-452.
    12. Shabtay, Dvir & Steiner, George & Zhang, Rui, 2016. "Optimal coordination of resource allocation, due date assignment and scheduling decisions," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 41-54.
    13. Du-Juan Wang & Yunqiang Yin & Shuenn-Ren Cheng & T.C.E. Cheng & Chin-Chia Wu, 2016. "Due date assignment and scheduling on a single machine with two competing agents," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(4), pages 1152-1169, February.
    14. T C E Cheng & L Kang & C T Ng, 2004. "Due-date assignment and single machine scheduling with deteriorating jobs," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 55(2), pages 198-203, February.
    15. Philip Kaminsky & Onur Kaya, 2008. "Scheduling and due‐date quotation in a make‐to‐order supply chain," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 55(5), pages 444-458, August.
    16. C N Potts & V A Strusevich, 2009. "Fifty years of scheduling: a survey of milestones," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(1), pages 41-68, May.
    17. Cai, X. & Lum, V. Y. S. & Chan, J. M. T., 1997. "Scheduling about a common due date with kob-dependent asymmetric earliness and tardiness penalties," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 98(1), pages 154-168, April.
    18. Li, Shisheng & Ng, C.T. & Yuan, Jinjiang, 2011. "Group scheduling and due date assignment on a single machine," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(2), pages 230-235, April.
    19. Enrique Gerstl & Gur Mosheiov, 2013. "Minmax due-date assignment with a time window for acceptable lead-times," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 211(1), pages 167-177, December.
    20. Kerem Bülbül & Safia Kedad-Sidhoum & Halil Şen, 2019. "Single-machine common due date total earliness/tardiness scheduling with machine unavailability," Journal of Scheduling, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 543-565, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:navres:v:51:y:2004:i:7:p:1005-1017. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)1520-6750 .

    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.