Incremental Scheduling to Maximize Quality in a Dynamic Environment

We present techniques for incrementally managing schedules in domains where activities accrue quality as a function of the time and resources allocated to them and the goal is to maximize the overall quality of actions executed over time. The scheduling problem of interest is both over-subscribed and dynamic; there is generally more to do than is possible within imposed deadlines, and opportunities to execute new, potentially higher payoff activities continually arrive. Like other dynamic domains, schedule stability and computational cost concerns argue for the use of incremental techniques in this context. The novel emphasis on maintaining schedules that produce "high value" results when faced with a changing environment differentiates this problem focus from that of previous research. We develop and evaluate methods for incrementally maintaining schedules that maximize the quality (or utility) of executed activities. We contrast the performance of our incremental techniques to that of comparable schedule (re)generation techniques with respect to quality, stability and cost considerations. The results clearly favor incremental scheduling in this context, and suggest opportunities for broader schedule improvement search.

[1]  Riccardo Bettati,et al.  Imprecise computations , 1994, Proc. IEEE.

[2]  Victor R. Lesser,et al.  Design-to-time real-time scheduling , 1993, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern..

[3]  David Joslin,et al.  "Squeaky Wheel" Optimization , 1998, AAAI/IAAI.

[4]  Alice C. Parker,et al.  Incorporating imprecise computation into system-level design of application-specific heterogeneous multiprocessors , 1997, DAC.

[5]  Rina Dechter,et al.  Temporal Constraint Networks , 1989, Artif. Intell..

[6]  Shlomo Zilberstein,et al.  Optimal Scheduling of Dynamic Progressive Processing , 1998, ECAI.

[7]  Stephen F. Smith,et al.  Exploiting Temporal Flexibility to Obtain High Quality Schedules , 2005, AAAI.

[8]  Monte Zweben,et al.  Scheduling and rescheduling with iterative repair , 1993, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern..

[9]  Mark Wallace,et al.  Probe Backtrack Search for Minimal Perturbation in Dynamic Scheduling , 2000, Constraints.

[10]  R. E. Cooke-Yarborough,et al.  Critical Path Planning and Scheduling: An Introduction and Example , 1964 .

[11]  Gilbert Syswerda,et al.  The Application of Genetic Algorithms to Resource Scheduling , 1991, International Conference on Genetic Algorithms.

[12]  Stephen F. Smith,et al.  Mixed-Initiative Resource Management: The AMC Barrel Allocator , 2000, AIPS.

[13]  Stephen F. Smith,et al.  Retaining Flexibility to Maximize Quality: When the Scheduler Has the Right to Decide Activity Durations , 2005, ICAPS.

[14]  Roman Barták,et al.  A New Approach to Modeling and Solving Minimal Perturbation Problems , 2003, CSCLP.

[15]  Donald F. Towsley,et al.  On-Line Scheduling Policies for a Class of IRIS (Increasing Reward with Increasing Service) Real-Time Tasks , 1996, IEEE Trans. Computers.

[16]  James E. Kelley,et al.  Critical-path planning and scheduling , 1899, IRE-AIEE-ACM '59 (Eastern).

[17]  Roberto Rossi,et al.  Cost-Based Filtering for Stochastic Inventory Control , 2006, CSCLP.

[18]  Stephen F. Smith,et al.  Amplification of Search Performance through Randomization of Heuristics , 2002, CP.

[19]  Mark S. Fox,et al.  Intelligent Scheduling , 1998 .

[20]  John L. Bresina,et al.  Heuristic-Biased Stochastic Sampling , 1996, AAAI/IAAI, Vol. 1.

[21]  Nobuyuki Yamasaki,et al.  Scheduling Imprecise Computations with Wind-up Parts , 2003, Computers and Their Applications.