Local search for multiprocessor scheduling: how many moves does it take to a local optimum?

Authors:
C. A. J. Hurkens;T. Vredeveld
Affiliations:
Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, Eindhoven University of Technology, P.O. Box 513, Eindhoven NL-5600 MB, The Netherlands;Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, Eindhoven University of Technology, P.O. Box 513, Eindhoven NL-5600 MB, The Netherlands
Venue:
Operations Research Letters
Year:
2003

Citing 2
Cited 3

Improving local search heuristics for some scheduling problems. Part II

Discrete Applied Mathematics - Special issue on models and algorithms for planning and scheduling problems
Performance Guarantees of Local Search for Multiprocessor Scheduling

Proceedings of the 8th International IPCO Conference on Integer Programming and Combinatorial Optimization

Performance Guarantees of Local Search for Multiprocessor Scheduling

INFORMS Journal on Computing
On the Road to $\mathcal{PLS}$-Completeness: 8 Agents in a Singleton Congestion Game

WINE '08 Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Internet and Network Economics
Very large-scale neighborhoods with performance guarantees for minimizing makespan on parallel machines

WAOA'07 Proceedings of the 5th international conference on Approximation and online algorithms

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

We analyze two local search algorithms for multiprocessor scheduling. The first algorithm is a job interchange algorithm for identical parallel machines due to Finn and Horowitz (Bit 19 (1979) 312). We construct instances for which this algorithm takes a quadratic number of iterations. This contradicts the original analysis of Finn and Horowitz who claimed a linear number of iterations. The second algorithm adds an additional rule to the Finn and Horowitz algorithm. Even for n jobs on m uniformly related machines, this modified algorithm takes only O(nm) iterations.