On-the-Fly Scheduling as a Manifestation of Partial-Order Planning and Dynamic Task Values

Abstract

On-the-fly task scheduling is computationally tractable despite its surface complexity and understandable as an example of both the partial-order planning strategy and the dynamic-value approach to prioritization.

Modelling people’s behaviour using discrete-event simulation: a review

“…The speeding up of service is triggered by the appearance of long customer queues. Hannah and Neal (2014) treated the decision process as a two-stage process with tasks selected for execution but then considered for either immediate execution or deferral until a later time depending on variables such as workload and time to deadline. Finally Kokkinou and Cranage (2011) used an online scenario-based survey to identify relevant variables and derived a regression equation for the choice between self-service or manual service in a hotel check-in process.…”

“…Within the literature review, Ilar (2008) judged an approach suggested (but not implemented) by Baines and Benedettini (2007) might be too complex to be industrially applicable and put forward a more straightforward method which in their view offers most of the advantages with much less effort. Hannah and Neal (2014) provided a highly simplified representation of the tasks undertaken by people but determine that the level of abstraction is appropriate for the aims of the study. This trade-off between meeting simulation study objectives against the cost and effort of doing may be resolved by adjusting the conceptual model specification in an iterative process until a feasible solution is found (Robinson, 2014).…”

“…Colombi and Ward (2010) suggested that the effectiveness of their model could have been improved with additional validation to the real system. Hannah and Neal (2014) used data collected from the behaviour of just two people for their model and recognised the challenge of generalising the model across different people and different work environments. There are particular challenges when using and validating a DES that uses a cognitive model as in Brailsford et al (2012) who was able to undertake a validation exercise by comparing simulation results to historical data.…”

“…Articles reporting on the use of DES to model people’s behaviour (2005-2017): Ajaefobi et al (2010) Brailsford et al (2012) Colombi and Ward (2010) Dode et al (2016) Dubiel and Tsimhoni (2005) Elliman et al (2005) Hannah and Neal (2014) Ilar (2008) Kazmierczak et al (2007) Khalil and Weston (2009) Knight et al (2012) Kokkinou and Cranage (2011) Kozine (2007) Lassila et al (2005) Majid and Herawan (2013) Malachowski and Korytkowski (2016) Mason et al (2005) McHaney (2008) Nehme et al (2008) Nembhard (2014) Neumann and Medbo (2009) Neumann and Medbo (2017) Perez et al (2014) Plott (2006) Riedel et al (2009) Robinson (2015) Shewchuk et al (2017) Silva et al (2014) Wang et al (2013)…”

<b>Human factors in an automotive discrete event simulation model

“…However, changes are taking place on this subject and the incorporation of human factors has become a major discussion among professionals from different areas of modeling and simulation, as reported by Cummings and Guerlain (2007), Bruzzone, Briano, Bocca, and Massei (2007), Hannah and Neal (2014) and Chen, et al (2016).…”