Proof obligations as a support tool for efficient process management in the production planning and scheduling
Abstract
Production planning and scheduling is one of the most important business processes that significantly influence the performance of manufacturing companies. There are many information systems supporting production planning and scheduling and some of them are based on very sophisticated planning algorithms. Despite this fact, many companies still face serious problems even while using professional software tools for production planning and scheduling. Obviously, a lot of other changes in form of process innovations are required.
This paper deals with the problem of process management in the field of production planning and scheduling. Our study explains reasons for low performance of advanced technologies and provides solution in form of system model of key factors affecting the efficiency of planning software. Research part is based on the study conducted within Czech manufacturing companies in form of questionnaire-based investigation combined with interviews.
Proposed solution is extended to the abstract mathematical model based on proof obligations which prove or disprove the correctness of intended algorithms. Our study provides basic example of such an abstract model and describes its functionality and influence to proper production planning and scheduling. It will be processed to the form of complex expert system based on Event B method in the future.
References
Abrial, J.R. (2010). Modeling in Event-B: System and Software Engineering. Cambridge, MA, USA: Cambridge University Press.
Belás, J. et al. (2015). Actual problems of business risk in SME segment. Case study from Slovakia. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Knowledge, 3, 46–56.
Goldratt, E.M. (2000). Necessary but not sufficient. Great Barrington, MA, USA: North River Press.
Chen, C. & Hasan, N. (2008). How to succeed with supply chain planning. Supply Chain Management Review, 12, 30-36.
Jackson, P. (1998). Introduction to expert systems. Boston, MA, USA: Addison Wesley.
Jonsson, P. & Ivert, L.K. (2015). Improving performance with sophisticated master production scheduling. International Journal of Production Economics, 168, 118-130.
Jonsson, P., Ivert, L.K. & Rudberg, M. (2007). Applying advanced planning systems for supply chain planning: Three case studies. International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 37, 816-834.
Lihong, Q. & Shengping, L. (2012). An improved genetic algorithm for integrated process planning and scheduling. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technologies, 58, 727-740.
Métayer, C., Abrial, J.R. & Voisin, L. (2005). Event-B language. Rodin deliverable 3.2. EU Project IST-511599-RODIN.
Mu, Ch. (2013). On information flow control in Event-B and refinement. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Software Engineering. Birmingham, UK. 225-232.
Neely et al. (2002). Strategy and Performance: Getting the Measure of Your Business. Cambridge, MA, USA: Cambridge University Press.
Noonan, J. & Wallace, M. (2006). Improved Optimisation through advanced relationship planning. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 11, 483-490.
Nyhuis, P. & Wiendahl, H.P. (2009). Fundamentals of production logistics: Theory, tools and applications. Berlin, Germany: Springer Publishing.
Šulová, D. (2009). Methods of planning and scheduling in enterprise information systems and their application in a production process management. Zlín, Czech Republic: Tomas Bata University in Zlín.
Vidová, H. (2009). Logistics Controlling. Bratislava, Slovakia: STU.
Weiss, S.M. (1988). Empirical analysis and refinement of expert system knowledge bases in selected topics in medical artificial intelligence. New York, NY, USA: Springer Publishing.
The Author wishes to submit the Work to SJM for publication. To enable SJM to publish the Work and to give effect to the parties’ intention set forth herein, they have agreed to cede the first right to publication and republication in the SJM Journal.
Cession
The Author hereby cedes to SJM, who accepts the cession, to the copyright in and to the paper.
The purpose of the cession is to enable SJM to publish the Work, as first publisher world-wide, and for republication in the SJM Journal, and to grant the right to others to publish the Work world-wide, for so long as such copyright subsists;
SJM shall be entitled to edit the work before publication, as it deems fit, subject to the Authors approval
The Author warrants to SJM that:
- the Author is the owner of the copyright in the Work, whether as author or as reassigned from the Author’s employee and that the Author is entitled to cede the copyright to SJM;
- the paper (or any of its part) is not submitted or accepted for publication in any other Journal;
- the Work is an original work created by the Author;
- the Author has not transferred, ceded, or assigned the copyright, or any part thereof, to any third party; or granted any third party a licence or other right to the copyright, which may affect or detract from the rights granted to SJM in terms of this agreement.
The Author hereby indemnifies the SJM as a body and its individual members, to the fullest extent permitted in law, against all or any claims which may arise consequent to the warranties set forth.
No monetary consideration shall be payable by SJM to the Author for the cession, but SJM shall clearly identify the Author as having produced the Work and ensure that due recognition is given to the Author in any publication of the Work.
Should SJM, in its sole discretion, elect not to publish the Work within 1 year after the date of this agreement, the cession shall lapse and be of no further effect. In such event the copyright shall revert to the Author and SJM shall not publish the Work, or any part thereof, without the Author’s prior written consent.