<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim">
 <record>
  <leader>     caa a22        4500</leader>
  <controlfield tag="001">44583868X</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="003">CHVBK</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="005">20180317145337.0</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="007">cr unu---uuuuu</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="008">170323e20110801xx      s     000 0 eng  </controlfield>
  <datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="a">10.1007/s10951-009-0150-8</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">doi</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">(NATIONALLICENCE)springer-10.1007/s10951-009-0150-8</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="245" ind1="0" ind2="2">
   <subfield code="a">A polynomial-time algorithm for a flow-shop batching problem withequal-length operations</subfield>
   <subfield code="h">[Elektronische Daten]</subfield>
   <subfield code="c">[Peter Brucker, Natalia Shakhlevich]</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="520" ind1="3" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">A flow-shop batching problem with consistent batches is considered in which the processing times of all jobs on each machine are equal to p and all batch set-up times are equal to s. In such a problem, one has to partition the set of jobs into batches and to schedule the batches on each machine. The processing time of a batch B i is the sum of processing times of operations in B i and the earliest start of B i on a machine is the finishing time of B i on the previous machine plus the set-up times. Cheng et al. (Naval Research Logistics 47:128-144, 2000) provided an O(n) pseudopolynomial-time algorithm for solving the special case of the problem with two machines. Mosheiov and Oron (European Journal of Operational Research 161:285-291, 2005) developed an algorithm of the same time complexity for the general case with more than two machines. Ng and Kovalyov (Journal of Scheduling 10:353-364, 2007) improved the pseudopolynomial complexity to $O(\sqrt{n})$ . In this paper, we provide a polynomial-time algorithm of time complexity O(log 3 n).</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="540" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, 2009</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Batch scheduling</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Flow shop</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Polynomial-time algorithm</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Brucker</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">Peter</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">Fachbereich Mathematik/Informatik, Universität Osnabrück, 49069, Osnabrück, Germany</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Shakhlevich</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">Natalia</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">School of Computing, University of Leeds, LS2 9JT, Leeds, UK</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="t">Journal of Scheduling</subfield>
   <subfield code="d">Springer US; http://www.springer-ny.com</subfield>
   <subfield code="g">14/4(2011-08-01), 371-389</subfield>
   <subfield code="x">1094-6136</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">14:4&lt;371</subfield>
   <subfield code="1">2011</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">14</subfield>
   <subfield code="o">10951</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10951-009-0150-8</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">text/html</subfield>
   <subfield code="z">Onlinezugriff via DOI</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="908" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="D">1</subfield>
   <subfield code="a">research-article</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">jats</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">856</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">40</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10951-009-0150-8</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">text/html</subfield>
   <subfield code="z">Onlinezugriff via DOI</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">700</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">1-</subfield>
   <subfield code="a">Brucker</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">Peter</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">Fachbereich Mathematik/Informatik, Universität Osnabrück, 49069, Osnabrück, Germany</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">700</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">1-</subfield>
   <subfield code="a">Shakhlevich</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">Natalia</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">School of Computing, University of Leeds, LS2 9JT, Leeds, UK</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">773</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">0-</subfield>
   <subfield code="t">Journal of Scheduling</subfield>
   <subfield code="d">Springer US; http://www.springer-ny.com</subfield>
   <subfield code="g">14/4(2011-08-01), 371-389</subfield>
   <subfield code="x">1094-6136</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">14:4&lt;371</subfield>
   <subfield code="1">2011</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">14</subfield>
   <subfield code="o">10951</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="900" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Metadata rights reserved</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">Springer special CC-BY-NC licence</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="898" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">BK010053</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">XK010053</subfield>
   <subfield code="c">XK010000</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="949" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="F">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">NL-springer</subfield>
  </datafield>
 </record>
</collection>
