Comparison of Heuristic Priority Rules in the Solution of the Resource-Constrained Project Scheduling Problem

Abstract

Resource-constrained project scheduling (RCPS) aims to minimize project duration under limited resource availabilities. The heuristic methods that are often used to solve the RCPS problem make use of different priority rules. The comparative merits of different priority rules have not been discussed in the literature in sufficient detail. This study is a response to this research gap. It compares 17 heuristic priority rules and seeks the best performing heuristic priority rule. This is the first study ever that compares heuristic priority rules by considering combinations of variations in (1) resource allocation procedures, (2) number of activities, (3) number of resource constraints, and (4) resource supply levels. The objective is to understand the relative merits of heuristic rules used in solving the RCPS problem. The findings indicate that the “minimum late finish time” rule generates the shortest predicted project duration when used in parallel resource allocation, whereas the “minimum late start time”, “minimum late finish time”, and the “highest rank of positional weight 2” rules perform best in serial resource allocation. It was also found that parallel resource allocation is slightly superior to serial resource allocation in most instances.

Automated design of priority rules for resource-constrained project scheduling problem using surrogate-assisted genetic programming

“…We have no real explanation for this observation, but we saw that when we applied both SGSs on the test data, 33% of the time, the SSGS performed best, and in 47% of the cases, the PSGS performed best (in 20% of the cases, the results were identical). Some studies show that no method outperforms the other (Kolisch and Hartmann [12], Kolisch [65]), while other studies have shown that the PSGS scheme outperforms the SSGS (Türkakın et al [67], Coelho and Vanhoucke [71]). None of them give reasons why this is the case.…”

“…Thus, the performance can be better revealed. In a more recent study [67], which results are based on the performance of 17 priority rules, the authors have shown that the parallel SGS is slightly superior to the serial in most cases. Therefore, there is no guideline for which scheme is more effective than the other to be used in the training phase.…”