Research Article
Minimizing Total Earliness and Tardiness for Common Due Date Single-Machine Scheduling with an Unavailability Interval
Table 2
Dynamic programming method performance.
| Case | n | | | | Time (s) | Time (s) | Time (s) |
| 1 | 5 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 10 | <0.01 | 0.01 | 0.03 | 15 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.09 | 20 | 0.01 | 0.04 | 0.18 | 25 | 0.02 | 0.09 | 0.29 | 30 | 0.03 | 0.10 | 0.63 | 35 | 0.05 | 0.23 | 0.83 | 50 | 0.14 | 0.66 | 1.86 | 75 | 0.50 | 3.09 | 7.32 | 100 | 1.44 | 3.82 | 24.16 | 150 | 2.85 | 5.11 | 70.54 | 200 | 6.82 | 7.35 | 177.91 |
| 2 | 5 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 10 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.02 | 15 | 0.01 | 0.03 | 0.15 | 20 | 0.01 | 0.03 | 0.17 | 25 | 0.02 | 0.08 | 0.22 | 30 | 0.04 | 0.14 | 0.75 | 35 | 0.06 | 0.25 | 0.88 | 50 | 0.20 | 0.67 | 1.55 | 75 | 0.58 | 3.25 | 6.81 | 100 | 1.23 | 5.19 | 19.73 | 150 | 3.85 | 7.96 | 58.62 | 200 | 9.76 | 11.25 | 183.36 |
| 3 | 5 | <0.01 | 0.01 | <0.01 | 10 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 15 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 20 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 25 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 30 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 35 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 50 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 75 | <0.01 | 0.01 | <0.01 | 100 | <0.01 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 150 | <0.01 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 200 | <0.01 | 0.01 | 0.02 |
|
|