Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
research-article

On the Performance of Smith’s Rule in Single-Machine Scheduling with Nonlinear Cost

Published: 13 April 2015 Publication History

Abstract

We consider a single-machine scheduling problem. Given some continuous, nondecreasing cost function, we aim to compute a schedule minimizing the weighted total cost, where the cost of each job is determined by the cost function value at its completion time. This problem is closely related to scheduling a single machine with nonuniform processing speed. We show that for piecewise linear cost functions it is strongly NP-hard. The main contribution of this article is a tight analysis of the approximation guarantee of Smith’s rule under any convex or concave cost function. More specifically, for these wide classes of cost functions we reduce the task of determining a worst-case problem instance to a continuous optimization problem, which can be solved by standard algebraic or numerical methods. For polynomial cost functions with positive coefficients, it turns out that the tight approximation ratio can be calculated as the root of a univariate polynomial. We show that this approximation ratio is asymptotically equal to k(k − 1)/(k + 1), denoting by k the degree of the cost function. To overcome unrealistic worst-case instances, we also give tight bounds for the case of integral processing times that are parameterized by the maximum and total processing time.

References

[1]
F. N. Afrati, E. Bampis, C. Chekuri, D. R. Karger, C. Kenyon, S. Khanna, I. Milis, M. Queyranne, M. Skutella, C. Stein, and M. Sviridenko. 1999. Approximation schemes for minimizing average weighted completion time with release dates. In Proceedings of the 40th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS’99). IEEE, 32--44.
[2]
S. Albers, S. K. Baruah, R. H. Möhring, and K. Pruhs (Eds.). 2010. Open Problems—Scheduling. Number 10071 in Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings. Schloss Dagstuhl--Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, Germany. Retrieved from http://drops.dagstuhl.de/opus/volltexte/2010/2536.
[3]
P. C. Bagga and K. R. Kalra. 1980. A node elimination procedure for Townsend’s algorithm for solving the single machine quadratic penalty function scheduling problem. Manage. Sci. 26 (1980), 633--636.
[4]
J. K. Baker. 1974. Introduction to Sequencing and Scheduling. John Wiley & Sons.
[5]
N. Bansal, H.-L. Chan, R. Khandekar, K. Pruhs, C. Stein, and B. Schieber. 2007. Non-preemptive min-sum scheduling with resource augmentation. In Proceedings of the 48th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS’07). IEEE, 614--624.
[6]
N. Bansal and K. Pruhs. 2010a. The geometry of scheduling. In Proceedings of the 51st Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS’10). IEEE, 407--414.
[7]
N. Bansal and K. R. Pruhs. 2010b. Server scheduling to balance priorities, fairness, and average quality of service. SIAM J. Comput. 39 (2010), 3311--3335.
[8]
C. Barnhart, D. Bertsimas, C. Caramanis, and D. Fearing. 2012. Equitable and efficient coordination in traffic flow management. Transport. Sci. 46 (2012), 262--280.
[9]
L. Becchettia, S. Leonardia, A. Marchetti-Spaccamela, and K. Pruhs. 2006. Online weighted flow time and deadline scheduling. J. Discrete Algorithms 4 (2006), 339--352.
[10]
R. A. Carrasco, G. Iyengar, and C. Stein. 2013. Single machine scheduling with job-dependent convex cost and arbitrary precedence constraints. Oper. Res. Lett. 41 (2013), 436--441.
[11]
C. Chekuri and S. Khanna. 2002. Approximation schemes for preemptive weighted flow time. In Proceedings of the 34th Annual Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC’02). ACM, 297--305.
[12]
M. Cheung and D. B. Shmoys. 2011. A primal-dual approximation algorithm for min-sum single-machine scheduling problems. In Proceedings of the 14th International Workshop on Approximation Algorithms for Combinatorial Optimization Problems (APPROX’11). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 6845. Springer, 135--146.
[13]
F. Della Croce, W. Szwarc, R. Tadei, P. Baracco, and R. di Tullio. 1995. Minimizing the weighted sum of quadratic completion times on a single machine. Nav. Res. Logist. 42 (1995), 1263--1270.
[14]
L. Epstein, A. Levin, A. Marchetti-Spaccamela, N. Megow, J. Mestre, M. Skutella, and L. Stougie. 2012. Universal sequencing on an unreliable machine. SIAM J. Comput. 41 (2012), 565--586.
[15]
R. L. Graham, E. L. Lawler, J. K. Lenstra, and A. H. G. Rinnooy Kan. 1979. Optimization and approximation in deterministic sequencing and scheduling: A survey. Ann. Discrete Math. 5 (1979), 287--326.
[16]
S. K. Gupta and T. Sen. 1984. On the single machine scheduling problem with quadratic penalty function of completion times: An improved branching procedure. Manage. Sci. 30 (1984), 644--647.
[17]
W. Höhn and T. Jacobs. 2012a. An experimental and analytical study of order constraints for single machine scheduling with quadratic cost. In Proceedings of the 14th Workshop on Algorithm Engineering and Experiments (ALENEX’12). SIAM, 103--117.
[18]
W. Höhn and T. Jacobs. 2012b. On the performance of Smith’s rule in single-machine scheduling with nonlinear cost. In Proceedings of the 10th Latin American Theoretical Informatics Symposium (LATIN’12). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 7256. Springer, 482--493.
[19]
S. Im, B. Moseley, and K. Pruhs. 2012. Online scheduling with general cost function. In Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA’12). SIAM, 1254--1265.
[20]
T. Jacobs. 2012. Analytical aspects of tie breaking. Theor. Comput. Sci. 465 (2012), 1--9.
[21]
B. Kalyanasundaram and K. Pruhs. 2000. Speed is as powerful as clairvoyance. J. ACM 47 (2000), 617--643.
[22]
H. Kellerer, T. Tautenhahn, and G. Woeginger. 1999. Approximability and nonapproximability results for minimizing total flow time on a single machine. SIAM J. Comput. 28 (1999), 1155--1166.
[23]
J. Labetoulle, E. L. Lawler, J. K. Lenstra, and A. H. G. Rinnooy Kan. 1984. Preemptive scheduling of uniform machines subject to release dates. In Progress in Combinatorial Optimization. Academic Press, Toronto, 245--261.
[24]
E. L. Lawler. 1977. A “Pseudopolynomial” algorithm for sequencing jobs to minimize total tardiness. Ann. Discrete Math. 1 (1977), 331--342.
[25]
J. K. Lenstra, A. H. G. Rinnooy Kan, and P. Brucker. 1977. Complexity of machine scheduling problems. Ann. Discrete Math. 1 (1977), 343--362.
[26]
N. Megow and J. Verschae. 2013. Dual techniques for scheduling on a machine with varying speed. In Proceedings of the 40th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming (ICALP’13). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 7965. Springer, 745--756.
[27]
J. Mestre and J. Verschae. 2014. A 4-approximation for scheduling on a single machine with general cost function. CoRR abs/1403.0298.
[28]
S. A. Mondal and A. K. Sen. 2000. An improved precedence rule for single machine sequencing problems with quadratic penalty. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 125 (2000), 425--428.
[29]
B. Moseley, K. Pruhs, and C. Stein. 2013. The complexity of scheduling for p-norms of flow and stretch. In Proceedings of the 16th Conference on Integer Programming and Combinatorial Optimization (IPCO’13). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 7801. Springer, 278--289.
[30]
C. N. Potts and V. A. Strusevich. 2009. Fifty years of scheduling: A survey of milestones. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 60 (2009), 41--68.
[31]
Michael H. Rothkopf. 1966. Scheduling independent tasks on parallel processors. Manage. Sci. 12 (1966), 437--447.
[32]
M. H. Rothkopf and S. A. Smith. 1984. There are no undiscovered priority index sequencing rules for minimizing total delay costs. Oper. Res. 32 (1984), 451--456.
[33]
A. Schild and I. J. Fredman. 1962. Scheduling tasks with deadlines and non-linear loss functions. Manage. Sci. 9 (1962), 73--81.
[34]
T. Sen, P. Dileepan, and B. Ruparel. 1990. Minimizing a generalized quadratic penalty function of job completion times: An improved branch-and-bound approach. Eng. Cost. Prod. Econ. 18 (1990), 197--202.
[35]
W. E. Smith. 1956. Various optimizers for single-stage production. Nav. Res. Logist. Q. 3 (1956), 59--66.
[36]
S. Stiller and A. Wiese. 2010. Increasing speed scheduling and flow scheduling. In Proceedings of the 21st International Symposium on Algorithms and Computation (ISAAC’10). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 6507. Springer, 279--290.
[37]
W. Townsend. 1978. The single machine problem with quadratic penalty function of completion times: A branch-and-bound solution. Manage. Sci. 24 (1978), 530--534.
[38]
J. Yuan. 1992. The NP-hardness of the single machine common due date weighted tardiness problem. System Sci. Math. Sci. 5 (1992), 328--333.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Deep Reinforcement Learning-Based Social Welfare Maximization for Collaborative Edge Computing2024 IEEE International Workshop on Radio Frequency and Antenna Technologies (iWRF&AT)10.1109/iWRFAT61200.2024.10594571(162-167)Online publication date: 31-May-2024
  • (2024)On the local dominance properties in single machine scheduling problemsAnnals of Operations Research10.1007/s10479-023-05801-9338:1(335-345)Online publication date: 24-Jan-2024
  • (2022)An Optimal Control Framework for Online Job Scheduling with General Cost FunctionsOperations Research10.1287/opre.2022.232170:5(2674-2701)Online publication date: 1-Sep-2022
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. On the Performance of Smith’s Rule in Single-Machine Scheduling with Nonlinear Cost

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Transactions on Algorithms
    ACM Transactions on Algorithms  Volume 11, Issue 4
    June 2015
    302 pages
    ISSN:1549-6325
    EISSN:1549-6333
    DOI:10.1145/2756876
    Issue’s Table of Contents
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 13 April 2015
    Accepted: 01 May 2014
    Revised: 01 March 2014
    Received: 01 October 2013
    Published in TALG Volume 11, Issue 4

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. Scheduling
    2. Smith’s rule
    3. min-sum objective
    4. nonlinear cost
    5. single machine
    6. universal sequence
    7. worst-case guarantee

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed

    Funding Sources

    • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) as part of the Priority Program “Algorithm Engineering”(1307)
    • fellowship within the Postdoc-Programme of the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD)

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)18
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
    Reflects downloads up to 26 Sep 2024

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)Deep Reinforcement Learning-Based Social Welfare Maximization for Collaborative Edge Computing2024 IEEE International Workshop on Radio Frequency and Antenna Technologies (iWRF&AT)10.1109/iWRFAT61200.2024.10594571(162-167)Online publication date: 31-May-2024
    • (2024)On the local dominance properties in single machine scheduling problemsAnnals of Operations Research10.1007/s10479-023-05801-9338:1(335-345)Online publication date: 24-Jan-2024
    • (2022)An Optimal Control Framework for Online Job Scheduling with General Cost FunctionsOperations Research10.1287/opre.2022.232170:5(2674-2701)Online publication date: 1-Sep-2022
    • (2022)Near-optimal Broadcast Scheduling of Dynamic Map in Cooperative Intelligent Transport SystemsICC 2022 - IEEE International Conference on Communications10.1109/ICC45855.2022.9838622(4372-4377)Online publication date: 16-May-2022
    • (2021)The Efficiency-Fairness Balance of Round Robin SchedulingOperations Research Letters10.1016/j.orl.2021.11.008Online publication date: Nov-2021
    • (2021)Optimal algorithms for scheduling under time-of-use tariffsAnnals of Operations Research10.1007/s10479-021-04059-3Online publication date: 8-Apr-2021
    • (2019)On Submodular Search and Machine SchedulingMathematics of Operations Research10.1287/moor.2018.097844:4(1431-1449)Online publication date: 1-Nov-2019
    • (2019)Submodular Maximization with Uncertain Knapsack CapacitySIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics10.1137/18M117442833:3(1121-1145)Online publication date: 2-Jul-2019
    • (2019)Sequential Anomaly Detection under a Nonlinear System CostIEEE Transactions on Signal Processing10.1109/TSP.2019.2918981(1-1)Online publication date: 2019
    • (2019)Scheduling uniform manufacturing resources via the Internet: A reviewJournal of Manufacturing Systems10.1016/j.jmsy.2019.01.00650(247-262)Online publication date: Jan-2019
    • Show More Cited By

    View Options

    Get Access

    Login options

    Full Access

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media