×
Well done. You've clicked the tower. This would actually achieve something if you had logged in first. Use the key for that. The name takes you home. This is where all the applicables sit. And you can't apply any changes to my site unless you are logged in.

Our policy is best summarized as "we don't care about _you_, we care about _them_", no emails, so no forgetting your password. You have no rights. It's like you don't even exist. If you publish material, I reserve the right to remove it, or use it myself.

Don't impersonate. Don't name someone involuntarily. You can lose everything if you cross the line, and no, I won't cancel your automatic payments first, so you'll have to do it the hard way. See how serious this sounds? That's how serious you're meant to take these.

×
Register


Required. 150 characters or fewer. Letters, digits and @/./+/-/_ only.
  • Your password can’t be too similar to your other personal information.
  • Your password must contain at least 8 characters.
  • Your password can’t be a commonly used password.
  • Your password can’t be entirely numeric.
Enter the same password as before, for verification.
Login

Grow A Dic
Define A Word
Make Space
Set Task
Mark Post
Apply Votestyle
Create Votes
(From: saved spaces)
Exclude Votes
Apply Dic
Exclude Dic

Minimizing the Number of Tardy Jobs with Uniform Processing Times on Parallel Machines

Click here to flash read.

arXiv:2404.14208v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: In this work, we study the computational (parameterized) complexity of $P \mid r_j, p_j=p \mid \sum_j w_j U_j$. Here, we are given $m$ identical parallel machines and $n$ jobs with equal processing time, each characterized by a release date, a due date, and a weight. The task is to find a feasible schedule, that is, an assignment of the jobs to starting times on machines, such that no job starts before its release date and no machine processes several jobs at the same time, that minimizes the weighted number of tardy jobs. A job is considered tardy if it finishes after its due date.
Our main contribution is showing that $P \mid r_j, p_j=p \mid \sum_j U_j$ (the unweighted version of the problem) is NP-hard and W[2]-hard when parameterized by the number of machines. The former resolves an open problem in Note 2.1.19 by Kravchenko and Werner [Journal of Scheduling, 2011] and Open Problem 2 by Sgall [ESA, 2012], and the latter resolves Open Problem 7 by Mnich and van Bevern [Computers & Operations Research, 2018]. Furthermore, our result shows that the known XP-algorithm for $P \mid r_j, p_j=p \mid \sum_j w_j U_j$ parameterized by the number of machines is optimal from a classification standpoint.
On the algorithmic side, we provide alternative running time bounds for the above-mentioned known XP-algorithm. Our analysis shows that $P \mid r_j, p_j=p \mid \sum_j w_j U_j$ is contained in XP when parameterized by the processing time, and that it is contained in FPT when parameterized by the combination of the number of machines and the processing time. Finally, we give an FPT-algorithm for $P \mid r_j, p_j=p \mid \sum_j w_j U_j$ parameterized by the number of release dates or the number of due dates. With this work, we lay out the foundation for a systematic study of the parameterized complexity of $P \mid r_j, p_j=p \mid \sum_j w_j U_j$.

Click here to read this post out
ID: 817122; Unique Viewers: 0
Unique Voters: 0
Total Votes: 0
Votes:
Latest Change: April 23, 2024, 7:31 a.m. Changes:
/u/anonymous
Dictionaries:
Words:
Spaces:
Views: 6
CC:
No creative common's license
Comments: