REVIEW PAPER

International J. of Recent Trends in Engineering and Technology, Vol. 3, No. 2, May 2010

Survey on Scheduling With Learning Techniques

E. Grace Mary Kanaga 1, M. L. Valarmathi 2, Juliet A Murali 3
1
Karunya University/Computer Science and Engineering, Coimbatore, India
grace@karunya.edu
2
Government College of Technology, Coimbatore, India
valarmathi@rediffmail.com
3
Karunya University/Computer Science and Engineering, Coimbatore, India
julietamurali@gmail.com

Abstract—  This paper describes about scheduling of jobs
using learning techniques. It also describes about different
learning effect. The evaluation on different learning effect
shows that the experience based learning (EBL) gives better
solution for calculating processing time. The EBL can be
incorporated with scheduling problems such as job shop
scheduling, meeting scheduling, patient scheduling etc. As
the experience increases the time required to process a job is
reduced. Hence it reduces the make span of the schedule.
The EBL can be applied to solve scheduling problem of
single as well as multiple machines. This paper also includes
a framework for patient scheduling that incorporates the
EBL.
Index Terms—Scheduling, Learning, Multi agent systems
that SPT was the best choice for optimizing waiting time
and system utilization [19,23].
B. Multi Agent Systems for Scheduling
Multi agent systems can be used to solve scheduling
problems. The participants in this system are considered
as software entities called agents. Two types of entities
are included in this agent based systems, task agents and
resource agents. The agents have proactive and reactive
nature because of that it allows the communication
between agents and also allows taking coordinated
decisions [20].
III. CATEGORIES OF LEARNING EFFECT

I. INTRODUCTION Scheduling is the process of allocating tasks in order to

Industrial scheduling techniques are studied in the field
of operations research (OR). OR techniques are very
effective for solving well-defined centralized
optimization problems, where the algorithm can
determine the optimal schedule for all parties involved
[24]. Scheduling is the process of allocating tasks in order
to achieve optimal solution. The time required to perform
a task decreases as the experience related to it increases,
even then each task takes some time for its processing.
When it has maximum experience then it takes only
minimum processing time.
II. SCHEDULING TECHNIQUES
A scheduling problem can be characterized by a set of
jobs, each with one or more operations. The operations of
a job are to be performed in a specified sequence on
specific machines [21]. The performance measures that
are related to scheduling include machine utilization,
cycle time, throughput rate and inventory level [19].
A. Scheduling Rules
The procedures are designed to provide good solutions
to complex problems in real time when scheduling
problems are considered. These procedures are called
scheduling rules. The scheduling rules have been
classified into class 1, class 2, class 3 etc, according to
performance criteria [22]. Class 1 contains simple priority
rules, which are based on information related to the jobs.
Class 2 consists of combinations of rules from class one.
Class 3 contains rules that are commonly referred to as
Weight Priority Indexes. Conway and Maxwell showed
160
achieve optimal solution. The time required to perform a
task (job) decreases as the experience related to it
increases ,even then each task takes some time for its
processing. When it have maximum experience then it
takes only minimum processing time [1].The learning
model used for scheduling are based on learning curve
introduced by Wright [3,14].
A. Scheduling Problem with Position Based Learning
In position based learning model the processing time of
job is depends on the position of the job in the sequence.
The actual processing time is a function of jobs position
in the schedule [2, 13]. The processing time of a job j if
scheduled in position r is given by
Pjr=Pjra j,r =1…n (1)
Where, a is the constant learning index,a≤0, Pjr is the
actual processing time and r is the position of job in the
schedule.
B. Sum of Processing Time Based Learning Effect
The sum of processing time based learning effect model
the actual processing time of a job as a function of total
normal processing time of jobs that are already processed
and of the job’s scheduled position.[5,12] .
C. The Time Dependent Learning Effect
The Time dependent learning effect of a job is to be a
function of the total normal processing time of the jobs
scheduled in front of the jobs [6,9]. Let pjr be the
processing time of job j if it is scheduled in position r in a
sequence. Then

© 2010 ACEEE
DOI: 01.IJRTET.2010.03.02.179
REVIEW PAPER
International J. of Recent Trends in Engineering and Technology, Vol. 3, No. 2, May 2010

Pjr=pj(1+ P[1]+ P[2]+…+ P[r-1)a (2) considered as unary. But in case of time based experience
model the experience is calculated in terms of normal
Where, pj is the normal processing time of job j, p[k] is
processing time.
the normal processing time of a job if it is scheduled in TABLE I.
the kth position in a sequence and a is the constant Input Parameters
learning index, a≤0. Tasks Arrival Time
Normal
Processing Time
D. Experience Based Learning Effect T1 0 7
According to A. Janiak and R. Rudek the learning T2 1 5
effect is modeled by the job processing time pj(E) T3 1 2
formulated as a non-increasing positive function of the T4 2 10
experience E possessed by the is equal to its normal TABLE II.
processing time aj processor. If the processor does not COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT PROCESSING TIME WITH DIFFERENT
possess experience (E =0), the processing time of a task LEARNING EFFECT
(say j), i.e., Pj(0)= aj.The processing time of job j is Proc
scheduled in the vth slot in a sequence is given as follows essin
Processing g
Pj(Eβ(v))=aj-bj(min{ Eβ(v),gj})αj (4) Time without Time
learning with
Where, aj is the normal (sequence-independent) learn
processing time of task j, αj anb bj are the exponential and ing
linear learning ratios of task j and gj is the learning Position Based Learning Model 10 6.39
threshold [10,11].
Time Based learning Model 10 4.18
For the above model, the parameters aj > 0, bj > 0, aj >
0, gj > 0 and βj=[0, 1] are assumed to be rational and since Experience Based Learning
10 3.5
Model(position based approach)
the job processing time is some positive value [1,7]. Experience Based Learning
The learning factor is represented in terms of 10 4.9
Model(time based approach)
experience and is given as,
V. PROPOSED FRAMEWORK FOR PATIENT SCHEDULING
Eβ(v)= [l] +βv e[v] (3)
The comparison given in Table II shows that the
Where, [l] is the experience already possessed by the experience based learning gives better result in reducing
processor, e[l] is the experience provided to the processor make span as compared to other techniques. Hence EBL
by a job scheduled in the lth position e[l]≥ 1 and β[v] is the is incorporated in patient scheduling and the proposed
amount of experience (percentage of e[v]) provided to the framework is shown in Fig. 1.
processor by job [v], β[v] = [0,1] .
  RS1 RSm

IV. COMPARISON LA ... LA

Resource 1 Resource m

This section presents the comparison of different

learning technique in terms of processing time. The
learning index has to be calculated fist and by using this CA
the processing time is calculated. The learning index is
the logarithm to the base two of learning rate. If the rate PS1 PSn

of improvement in the processing time is 20% means the ...

learning percentage would be 80%. Here consider

PA1 PAn
learning percentage as 80%.So the learning index is
calculated as a= αj =-0.322. Consider four tasks. Three RA: Resource Agent
tasks are already scheduled. Now the task having PA: Patient Agent
1: Send patient details CA: Common Agent
processing time 10 is trying to schedule in 4th position. 2: Send resource details PS : Patient Schedule
The input parameters are shown in Table I. The 3: Specifies the tasks for patients LA: Learning Agent
processing time is calculated for different learning effects 4: Request for resources RS : Resource
based on the equation discussed above are given in Table Schedule
II .The experience based learning model provides less Figure 1. Framework for patient scheduling using experience based
processing time. Even though time based learning model learning
is also have less processing time, but it is not consider the The framework consists of Patient Agent (PA),
threshold value for processing time. In experience based Resource Agent (RA) and Common Agent (CA).The CA
model it is considered. Here the experience calculation is a physician they collect and maintain information about
may be position based, where the experience depends on patients and resources. It also determines the tasks that
number of jobs. The experience gained by a job is have to be taken, which consists of consultation of doctor,
161

© 2010 ACEEE
DOI: 01.IJRTET.2010.03.02.179
REVIEW PAPER
International J. of Recent Trends in Engineering and Technology, Vol. 3, No. 2, May 2010
diagnostic procedures like MRI scan, CT scan lab tests
etc. Now the PA knows what are all the tasks it has to
perform and then it request for the resources. The
Resource Agent may be X-Ray, CT Scan, Lab Tests,
consultation with Physician etc.In this framework a
special agent called Learning Agent(LA) is included. The
LA calculates the experience of each resource and find
out the processing time according to the experience they
possessed.
VI. PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS
There are several performance metrics for the
scheduling problem.
A. Total completion time
This represents the total amount of time used by the
schedule. For scheduling problems the main objective is
to minimize this metric. As the experience increases the
total time requires to process a job is reduced hence the
total completion time.
Ci=Ci-1+Pi (4)
B. Total tardiness
It means how late a job is completed. Sometimes the
jobs that are not completed within specified time. This
tardiness can be reduced by the introduction of learning
effect, since it also involves the processing time.
Ti=max{0,Ci-di} (5)
VII. CONCLUSION
This paper describes the various categories of learning
effects and their use in scheduling problems. Comparison
of different learning technique such as position based
learning, time based learning and experience based
learning has been done. Among this techniques
experience based learning is considered as better for
scheduling problems. The experience based learning
model can be used to solve any type of the scheduling
problems like patient scheduling, job shop scheduling etc.
REFERENCES
[1] A. Janiak and R. Rudek, “The learning effect: Getting to the
core of theproblem,” Inf. Process. Lett., vol. 103, no. 5, pp.
183–187, Aug. 2007.
[2] G. Mosheiov, “Scheduling problems with a learning effect,”
Eur. J. Oper.Res., vol. 132, no. 3, pp. 687–693, Aug. 2001.
[3] A Janiak and R. Rudek , “Experience-Based Approach to
Scheduling Problems With the Learning Effect”, IEEE
Transactions on Systems, man, and Cybernetics—part a:
systems and humans, vol. 39, no. 2, March 2009.
[4] W. C. Lee, Chin-Chia Wu” A note on single-machine group
scheduling problems with position-based learning effect”,
Applied Mathematical Modelling 33 (2009) 2159–2163.
[5] T.C. Edwin Cheng, Chin-Chia Wub, Wen-Chiung Lee
“Some scheduling problems with sum-of-processing-times-
162
© 2010 ACEEE
DOI: 01.IJRTET.2010.03.02.179
based and job-position-based learning effects”,
Information Sciences 178 (2008) 2476–2487.
[6] J.-B. Wang,C.T. Ng, T.C.E. Chengb, L.L. Liu,” Single-
machine scheduling with a time-dependent learning effect’,
Int. J. Production Economics 111 (2008) 802–811.
[7] Adam Janiak a, Władysław Adam Janiak b, Radosław
Rudek a,1, Agnieszka Wielgus a,1“Solution algorithms for
the makespan minimization problem with the general
learning mode”,Computers & Industrial Engineering 56
(2009) 1301–1308.
[8] Tamer Eren, Ertan Gu¨ner” A bicriteria flowshop scheduling
with a learning effect”, Applied Mathematical Modelling
32 (2008) 1719–1733.
[9] D. Biskup, “Single-machine scheduling with learning
considerations,”Eur. J. Oper. Res., vol. 115, no. 1, pp.
173–178, May 1999.
[10] T. Eren and E. Güner, “A bicriteria flowshop scheduling
with a learning effect,” Appl. Math. Model., vol. 32, no. 9,
pp. 1719–1733, Sep. 2008.
[11] Tamer Eren,” A bicriteria parallel machine scheduling with
a learning effect of setup and removal times”, Applied
Mathematical Modelling 33 (2009) 1141–1150.
[12] W.-C. Lee, C.-C. Wu, and H.-J. Sung, “A bi-criterion
single-machine scheduling problem with learning
considerations,” Acta Inform., vol. 40,no. 4, pp. 303–315,
Feb. 2004.
[13] T. C. E. Cheng, C.-C. Wu, and W.-C. Lee, “Some
scheduling problems with deteriorating jobs and learning
effects,” Comput. Ind. Eng., vol. 54,no. 4, pp. 972–982,
May 2008.
[14] C. Koulamas and G. J. Kyparisis, “Single-machine and
two-machine flowshop scheduling with general learning
functions,” Eur. J. Oper. Res.,vol. 178, no. 2, pp. 402–407,
Apr. 2007.
[15] G. Mosheiov and J. B. Sidney, “Scheduling with general
job-dependent learning curves,” Eur. J. Oper. Res., vol.
147, no. 3, pp. 665–670,Jun. 2003.
[16] J.-B. Wang and T. C. E. Cheng, “Scheduling problems with
the effects of deterioration and learning,” Asia-Pac. J.
Oper. Res., vol. 24, no. 2,pp. 245–261, 2007.
[17] D. Biskup, “A state-of-the-art review on scheduling with
learning effects,”Eur. J. Oper. Res., vol. 188, no. 2, pp.
315–329, Jul. 2008.
[18] J.-B. Wang, “Single-machine scheduling problems with the
effects of learning and deterioration,” Omega, vol. 35, no.
4, pp. 397–402,Aug. 2007.
[19] C. S. Chong and Malcolm Yoke Hean Low “A Bee
Colony Optimization Algorithm To Job Shop Scheduling”,
Proceedings of the 2006 Winter Simulation Conference.
[20] A.Jones and L.C. Rabelo “Survey of Job Shop Scheduling
Techniques “, National Institute of Standards & Tech.
[21] Jain and Meeran. S., “Deterministic job shop scheduling:
past, present and future,” European Journal of Operational
Research, Vol. 113, No. 2 (1999), pp.390-434.
[22] Wu, D. (1987), “An Expert Systems Approach for the
Control and Scheduling of Flexible Manufacturing
Systems,” Ph.D. Dissertation, Pennsylvania State
University.
[23] Conway, R. and W. Maxwell (1967), Theory of Scheduling,
Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley.
[24] I Vermeulen · Sander Bohte · Koye Somefun Han La
Poutré”Multi-agent Pareto appointment exchanging in
hospital patient scheduling”, SOCA (2007) 1:185–196 DOI
10.1007/s11761-007.