Abstract
In this paper, the research and development project scheduling problem (RDPSP) under uncertain failure of activities is formulated where an activity’s failure results in the project’s overall failure. A scenario-based bi-objective model to maximize the expected net present value (eNPV) and to minimize the NPV’s risk by conditional value-at-risk (CVaR) measurement is presented. For this purpose, different modes of failure or success of activities have been considered as a stochastic parameter by a set of scenarios. To formulate the problem, a nonlinear model is first presented, then a mixed-integer programming (MIP) model of the problem is developed by piecewise approximation. Some valid inequalities are presented to improve the performance of the MIP model. A sequential sampling procedure is also used to approximate the solution of the MIP model with a large number of scenarios. The experimental results have shown that the sequential sampling procedure attains high-quality solutions in a reasonable CPU time.




Similar content being viewed by others
References
Agnetis, A., Benini, M., Detti, P., Hermans, B., & Pranzo, M. (2022a). Replication and sequencing of unreliable jobs on parallel machines. Computers and Operations Research, 139, 105634.
Agnetis, A., Hermans, B., Leus, R., & Rostami, S. (2022b). Time-critical testing and search problems. European Journal of Operational Research, 296(2), 440–452.
Alvarez-Valdés, R., & Tamarit, J. M. (1993). The project scheduling polyhedron: Dimension, facets and lifting theorems. European Journal of Operational Research, 67(2), 204–220.
Atakan, S., Bülbül, K., & Noyan, N. (2017). Minimizing value-at-risk in single-machine scheduling. Annals of Operations Research, 248(1–2), 25–73.
Bayraksan, G., & Morton, D. P. (2011). A sequential sampling procedure for stochastic programming. Operations Research, 59(4), 898–913.
Caron, F., Fumagalli, M., & Rigamonti, A. (2007). Engineering and contracting projects: A value at risk based approach to portfolio balancing. International Journal of Project Management, 25(6), 569–578.
Coolen, K., Wei, W., Nobibon, F. T., & Leus, R. (2014). Scheduling modular projects on a bottleneck resource. Journal of Scheduling, 17(1), 67–85.
Creemers, S. (2018a). Maximizing the expected net present value of a project with phasetype distributed activity durations: An efficient globally optimal solution procedure. European Journal of Operational Research, 267, 16–22.
Creemers, S. (2018b). Moments and distribution of the net present value of a serial project. European Journal of Operational Research, 267, 835–848.
Creemers, S., De Reyck, B., & Leus, R. (2015). Project planning with alternative technologies in uncertain environments. European Journal of Operational Research, 242(2), 465–476.
Creemers, S., Leus, R., & Lambrecht, M. (2010). Scheduling Markovian PERT networks to maximize the net present value. Operations Research Letters, 38(1), 51–56.
De Reyck, B., & Leus, R. (2008). R&D project scheduling when activities may fail. IIE Transactions, 40(4), 367–384.
Fishburn, P. C. (1977). Mean-risk analysis with risk associated with below-target returns. The American Economic Review, 67(2), 116–126.
Ghosh, B., & Sen, P. (Eds.). (1991). Handbook of sequential analysis. Marcel Dekker Inc.
Ghosh, M., Mukhopadhyay, N., & Sen, P. K. (1997). Sequential estimation. Wiley.
Hermans, B., & Leus, R. (2018). Scheduling Markovian PERT networks to maximize the net present value: New results. Operations Research Letters, 46(2), 240–244.
Huang, X., Zhao, T., & Kudratova, S. (2016). Uncertain mean-variance and mean-semivariance models for optimal project selection and scheduling. Knowledge-Based Systems, 93, 1–11.
Hwang, C. L., & Masud, A. S. M. (2012). Multiple objective decision making—methods and applications: A state-of-the-art survey (Vol. 164). Springer Science & Business Media.
Jain, V., & Grossmann, I. E. (1999). Resource-constrained scheduling of tests in new product development. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research, 38(8), 3013–3026.
Kasperski, A., & Zieliński, P. (2019). Risk-averse single machine scheduling: Complexity and approximation. Journal of Scheduling, 22(5), 567–580.
Ke, H., & Liu, B. (2005). Project scheduling problem with stochastic activity duration times. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 168(1), 342–353.
Keller, B., & Bayraksan, G. (2009). Scheduling jobs sharing multiple resources under uncertainty: A stochastic programming approach. Iie Transactions, 42(1), 16–30.
Kılıç, M., Ulusoy, G., & Şerifoğlu, F. S. (2008). A bi-objective genetic algorithm approach to risk mitigation in project scheduling. International Journal of Production Economics, 112(1), 202–216.
Markowitz, H. (1952). Portfolio selection. Journal of Finance, 7(1), 77–91.
Markowitz, H. M. (1959). Portfolio selection, efficient diversification of investments. Wiley.
Meloni, C., & Pranzo, M. (2020). Expected shortfall for the makespan in activity networks under imperfect information. Flexible Services and Manufacturing Journal, 32(3), 668–692.
Miettinen, K. (1999). Nonlinear multiobjective optimization (Vol. 12). Springer Science & Business Media.
Mohammadipour, F., & Sadjadi, S. J. (2016). Project cost–quality–risk tradeoff analysis in a time-constrained problem. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 95, 111–121.
Ranjbar, M., & Davari, M. (2013). An exact method for scheduling of the alternative technologies in R&D projects. Computers and Operations Research, 40(1), 395–405.
Rezaei, F., Najafi, A. A., & Ramezanian, R. (2020). Mean-conditional value at risk model for the stochastic project scheduling problem. Computers and Industrial Engineering, 142, 106356.
Rezaei, F., Najafi, A. A., Ramezanian, R., & Demeulemeester, E. (2021). Simulation-based priority rules for the stochastic resource-constrained net present value and risk problem. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 160, 107607.
Rockafellar, R. T., & Uryasev, S. (2000). Optimization of conditional value-at-risk. Journal of Risk, 2, 21–42.
Rostami, S., Creemers, S., Wei, W., & Leus, R. (2019). Sequential testing of n-out-of-n systems: Precedence theorems and exact methods. European Journal of Operational Research, 274(3), 876–885.
Sarin, S. C., Sherali, H. D., & Liao, L. (2014). Minimizing conditional-value-at-risk for stochastic scheduling problems. Journal of Scheduling, 17(1), 5–15.
Schmidt, C. W., & Grossmann, I. E. (1996). Optimization models for the scheduling of testing tasks in new product development. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research, 35(10), 3498–3510.
Shapiro, A. (2003). Monte Carlo sampling methods. Handbooks in Operations Research and Management Science, 10, 353–425.
Sobel, M. J., Szmerekovsky, J. G., & Tilson, V. (2009). Scheduling projects with stochastic activity duration to maximize expected net present value. European Journal of Operational Research, 198, 697–705.
Walȩdzik, K., & Mańdziuk, J. (2018). Applying hybrid Monte Carlo tree search methods to risk-aware project scheduling problem. Information Sciences, 460, 450–468.
Wiesemann, W., Kuhn, D., & Rustem, B. (2010). Maximizing the net present value of a project under uncertainty. European Journal of Operational Research, 202(3), 56–367.
Ye, S., & Tiong, R. L. (2000). NPV-at-risk method in infrastructure project investment evaluation. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 126(3), 227–233.
Zafra-Cabeza, A., Ridao, M. A., & Camacho, E. F. (2004). An algorithm for optimal scheduling and risk assessment of projects. Control Engineering Practice, 12(10), 1329–1338.
Zafra-Cabeza, A., Ridao, M. A., & Camacho, E. F. (2008). Using a risk-based approach to project scheduling: A case illustration from semiconductor manufacturing. European Journal of Operational Research, 190(3), 708–723.
Zhao, C., Ke, H., & Chen, Z. (2016). Uncertain resource-constrained project scheduling problem with net present value criterion. Journal of Uncertainty Analysis and Applications, 4(1), 12.
Zhao, W., Hall, N. G., & Liu, Z. (2020). Project evaluation and selection with task failures. Production and Operations Management, 29(2), 428–446.
Acknowledgements
The authors are sincerely thankful to Prof. Roel Leus for his valuable comments and suggestions. This work was supported by the Ministry of Science, Research and Technology of Iran.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Ethical approval
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix: Mixed integer programming model (Model M5)
Appendix: Mixed integer programming model (Model M5)
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Rezaei, F., Najafi, A.A., Demeulemeester, E. et al. A stochastic bi-objective project scheduling model under failure of activities. Ann Oper Res 338, 453–476 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-023-05600-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-023-05600-2