Advertisement

Tractable Risk Measures for the Selective Scheduling Problem with Sequence-Dependent Setup Times

Conference paper
  • 182 Downloads
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 1162)

Abstract

Quantifying and minimizing the risk is a basic problem faced in a wide range of applications. Once the risk is explicitly quantified by a risk measure, the crucial and ambitious goal is to obtain risk-averse solutions, given the computational hurdle typically associated with optimization problems under risk. This is especially true for many difficult combinatorial problems, and notably for scheduling problems. This paper aims to present a few tractable risk measures for the selective scheduling problem with parallel identical machines and sequence-dependent setup times. We indicate how deterministic reformulations can be obtained when the distributional information is limited to first and second-order moment information for a broad class of risk measures. We propose an efficient heuristic for addressing the computational difficulty of the resulting models and we showcase the practical applicability of the proposed approach providing computational evidence on a set of benchmark instances.

Keywords

Machine scheduling Risk measure Heuristic 

References

  1. 1.
    Spectral measures of risk: a coherent representation of subjective risk aversion. J. Bank. Finance 26(7), 1505–1518 (2002)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ahmadi-Javid, A.: Addendum to: Entropic value-at-risk: a new coherent risk measure. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 155(3), 1124–1128 (2012)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ahmadi-Javid, A.: Entropic value-at-risk: a new coherent risk measure. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 155(3), 1105–1123 (2012)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Artzner, P., Delbaen, F., Eber, J.M., Heath, D.: Coherent measures of risk. Math. Finance 9(3), 203–228 (1999)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Atakan, S., Bülbül, K., Noyan, N.: Minimizing value-at-risk in single-machine scheduling. Ann. Oper. Res. 248(1–2), 25–73 (2017)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bruni, M.E., Beraldi, P., Guerriero, F., Pinto, E.: A scheduling methodology for dealing with uncertainty in construction projects. Eng. Comput. 28(8), 1064–1078 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bruni, M.E., Khodaparasti, S., Beraldi, P.: A selective scheduling problem with sequence-dependent setup times: a risk-averse approach, pp. 1–7. SciTePress (2019)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bruni, M.E., Di Puglia Pugliese, L., Beraldi, P., Guerriero, F.: An adjustable robust optimization model for the resource-constrained project scheduling problem with uncertain activity durations. Omega 71, 66–84 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bruni, M.E., Di Puglia Pugliese, L., Beraldi, P., Guerriero, F.: A computational study of exact approaches for the adjustable robust resource-constrained project scheduling problem. Comput. Oper. Res. 99, 178–190 (2018)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chang, Z., Song, S., Zhang, Y., Ding, J.Y., Zhang, R., Chiong, R.: Distributionally robust single machine scheduling with risk aversion. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 256(1), 261–274 (2017)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Emami, S., Moslehi, G., Sabbagh, M.: A benders decomposition approach for order acceptance and scheduling problem: a robust optimization approach. Comput. Appl. Math. 36(4), 1471–1515 (2017)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    El Ghaoui, L., Oks, M., Oustry, F.: Worst-case value-at-risk and robust portfolio optimization: a conic programming approach. Oper. Res. 51(4), 543–556 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hansen, P., Mladenović, N., Moreno Pérez, J.A.: Variable neighbourhood search: methods and applications. Ann. Oper. Res. 175(1), 367–407 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Krokhmal, P., Zabarankin, M., Uryasev, S.: Modeling and optimization of risk. Surv. Oper. Res. Manag. Sci. 16(2), 49–66 (2011)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Li, J.Y.M.: Technical note–closed-form solutions for worst-case law invariant risk measures with application to robust portfolio optimization. Oper. Res. 66(6), 1533–1541 (2018)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Niu, S., Song, S., Ding, J.Y., Zhang, Y., Chiong, R.: Distributionally robust single machine scheduling with the total tardiness criterion. Comput. Oper. Res. 101, 13–28 (2019)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Oguz, C., Salman, F.S., Yalçın, Z.B., et al.: Order acceptance and scheduling decisions in make-to-order systems. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 125(1), 200–211 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sarin, S.C., Sherali, H.D., Liao, L.: Minimizing conditional-value-at-risk for stochastic scheduling problems. J. Sched. 17(1), 5–15 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Xu, L., Wang, Q., Huang, S.: Dynamic order acceptance and scheduling problem with sequence-dependent setup time. Int. J. Prod. Res. 53(19), 5797–5808 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical, Energy and Management EngineeringUniversity of CalabriaRendeItaly

Personalised recommendations