Organizations: Infocomm Technology Cluster, Singapore Institute of Technology, Singapore 828608 · College of Smart Energy, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China · School of Computer Science and Informatics, Cardiff University, Cardiff CF24 4AG, U.K. · D-SIMLAB Technologies, Singapore
Flexible job-shop scheduling becomes resource-coupled when a scarce vehicle fleet moves jobs between stations, because the schedule sets the transport waits. BOLT (bound-oriented learning for transport-coupled scheduling) builds a lower bound from chain, machine-capacity, and fleet-capacity relaxations. The bound equals the makespan at termination, so its per-step changes form a reward that sums to a constant minus the makespan. Because it never exceeds the attainable makespan, each candidate's bound increase is a proven rise of the makespan floor, which the policy reads as a price. The root bound certifies a completed schedule's suboptimality gap without a solver. On industry-motivated 10-module prefabricated-construction instances, explicit transport coupling outperforms a transport-penalty policy in every tested cell where loaded moves occupy at least 66% of fleet time and in none at or below 56%. Across five zero-shot 50- and 80-module production batches, BOLT outperforms the best dispatching-rule pair on four and the penalty policy on the three with long moves. In the three-vehicle 80-module batch, its mean makespan is 13.0% below the best pair and 4.2% below an hour-budget constraint-programming solver whose proven gap averages 34%. BOLT decides in 2.3-5.9 ms per event on one processor core and re-plans a disruption in seconds.
Figures & tables
Work
Transport
Time lags
Destination machine at dispatch
Training signal
Moon et al. [ 17 ]
seized vehicle, empty and loaded legs
none
chosen with the vehicle, blocked from dispatch
chain estimate, no fleet term, uncertified
Li et al. [ 14 ]
AGV allocated per task
n.s.
n.s.
hand-designed (machine idle time)
Zhang et al. [ 5 ]
transfer time, no vehicle agent
n.s.
not applicable
hand-designed shaping
Wang et al. [ 15 ]
transbots serve a fixed job-machine sequence
n.s.
assigned before the move, hold n.s.
hierarchical, n.s.
Yang et al. [ 16 ]
AGV selection
n.s.
n.s.
hand-designed
Link et al. [ 23 ]
seized AGV, empty leg, anticipatory pickup
none
fixed by the route, not held
sparse terminal, bound as normalizer
TABLE I: Learned transport-aware schedulers closest to BOLT. n.s.: not specified in the published description.
Fig. 1: The three delay-semantics classes (Definition 2 ), with machine (Mch), job, and, where one is used, vehicle (Veh) lanes. Blue marks processing, hatching marks instance-fixed waits, gray marks the job waiting with no resource seized, amber marks the empty ( τe ) and loaded ( τ ) legs that seize the vehicle, and an outline marks the destination machine reserved idle until the job arrives. The vertical dashed rule marks the boundary of the class studied here.
Fig. 2: BOLT framework with one certified bound B=max(Bchain,Bmch,Bveh) and its four uses (i)–(iv). Amber marks the bound and quantities derived from it, blue the learned policy, and the dashed band optional deployment extensions.
Fig. 3: (a) Coupling-regret map: relative makespan penalty of the penalty anchor, a transport-penalty policy (one seed, half budget), against BOLT (3-seed mean; n=100 per cell, 10×25 ). The second line of each cell is the minimum loaded utilization. (b) The bound component attaining the root maximum, per cell (share of instances; blue chain, amber fleet); the machine component never attains the maximum on this grid.
Regime cell
Online dispatch
Solver reference
∣V∣
τˉ/pˉ
Best PDR a
BOLT
W/T/L b
CP-SAT c
Δ % d
1
0.3
288.3 ± 10.2
284.6 ± 7.6
62/0/38
257.4 ± 8.1
+10.5%
1
0.6
449.7 ± 23.5
422.1 ± 9.4
93/0/7
394.2 ± 9.6
+7.1%
1
1.0∗
726.1 ± 40.1
672.1 ± 17.7
90/0/10
639.7 ± 16.9
+5.1%
2
0.3
252.8 ± 8.7
248.1 ± 8.5
83/0/17
225.5 ± 8.7
+10.0%
2
0.6
309.2 ± 10.6
304.4 ± 7.9
69/0/31
274.1 ± 9.6
+11.1%
TABLE II: Makespan on the FJSP-TL-T regime grid at 10×25 (jobs × machines): hours, mean ± std ( n=100 per cell; learned arms: per-instance 3-seed means). Bold: shortest makespan in the row. Light-travel column and merged-head control: supplement.
Online
Solver reference
Cell
u
Best PDR
BOLT
CP-SAT 1800 s
CP-SAT 3600 s
50 , 2 , 0.6
76%
1113.9 ± 19.3
1061.1 ± 18.2
1034.3 ± 23.5
1029.8 ± 24.4
50 , 2 , 1.0
80%
1789.9 ± 39.5
1668.0 ± 31.9
1709.4 ± 46.7
1704.1 ± 45.6
80 , 3 , 1.0
74%
2173.7 ± 36.7
1890.8 ± 23.4
2002.0 ± 83.7
1974.2 ± 83.2
TABLE III: Makespan in hours on the 50- and 80-module production batches ( n=20 per cell; policy: per-instance 3-seed means). Bold: shortest makespan in the row. The GA comparison is in Table S-IV.
∣V∣
BOLT
Δ joint
Δ modular
Δ heuristic
3
4239 ± 284
-14.7%
-16.3%
-8.4%
6
2949 ± 166
+27.8%
+23.0%
+30.7%
9
2725 ± 172
+49.2%
+44.1%
+45.5%
12
2725 ± 173
+57.2%
+54.4%
+49.8%
15
2711 ± 158
+56.8%
+56.8%
+49.5%
18
2720 ± 162
+57.8%
+58.4%
+50.1%
TABLE IV: External benchmark (Link et al. [ 23 ] ), 15×10 , makespan in simulator units (mean ± std, n=100 ; per-instance means over 3 runs, every seed agreeing in sign). Δ : relative difference to their joint model, best modular pair, and best heuristic (negative favors BOLT; bold: the fleet size where BOLT outperforms all). All differences significant (Mann–Whitney; at ∣V∣=3 all p≤9.2×10−14 ).
Fig. 4: Validation makespan (hours) against PPO updates (line: seed mean; band: seed range; mean over the nine training cells).
Fig. 5: Merged-head (left) and factorized (right) realizations of BOLT.
Prefabricated prefinished volumetric construction moves most building work into module factories, whose production floor operates as a flexible job shop. A major complication is decisive: long post-operation time-lags caused by concrete curing, watertightness ponding tests, and paint drying, during which a module is blocked while its workstation stays free. On benchmark instances grounded in an official national prefabrication guidebook, these lags inflate even the optimal reference makespan by about 67% on average, and ignoring them at decision time, then repairing to feasibility, is worse than every dispatching rule. We adapt a state-of-the-art dual-attention deep reinforcement learning solver through three minimally invasive, individually ablatable extensions: lag-aware dynamics with an admissible reward bound, two anticipatory lag feature channels, and liveness-masked operation- and station-type embeddings. With every extension disabled the implementation reproduces the original solver exactly, so all gains are attributable to the adaptations. We release a public, guidebook-grounded benchmark generator. On held-out instances the learned policy is the strongest solver-free scheduler: it reaches within about 4% of a constraint-programming reference and beats every dispatching rule and a genetic-algorithm metaheuristic, with its advantage widening under capacity contention, and a single size-mixed policy carries this lead across the trained range of factory sizes. It needs no solver, model, or license in the loop and re-plans within seconds of a disruption; where an exact solver can be deployed, that solver remains the quality ceiling, a boundary we map explicitly.
Efficient job-shop scheduling with transportation resources is critical for high-performance manufacturing. With the rise of "decentralized factories", multi-agent reinforcement learning has emerged as a promising approach for the combined scheduling of production and transportation tasks. Prior work has largely focused on developing novel cooperative architectures while overlooking the question of when joint training is necessary. Joint training denotes the simultaneous training of job and automatic guided vehicle scheduling agents, whereas modular training involves independently training each agent followed by post-hoc integration. In this study, we systematically investigate the conditions under which joint training is essential for optimal performance in the job-shop scheduling problem with transportation resources. Through a rigorous sensitivity analysis of resource scarcity and temporal dominance, we quantify the coordination gap -- the performance difference between these two training modalities. In our evaluation, joint training outperforms the majority of dispatching rule combinations and modular training approaches. However, the coordination gap advantage diminishes in bottleneck environments, particularly under severe transport and processing constraints. These findings indicate that modular training represents a viable alternative in environments where a single scheduling task dominates. Overall, our work provides practical guidance for selecting between training modalities based on environmental conditions, enabling decision-makers to optimize reinforcement learning-based scheduling performance.
Moritz Link, Jonathan Hoss, Noah Klarmann
Faculty of Management and Engineering, University of Applied Sciences, 83024 Rosenheim, Germany
Neural solvers for the Flexible Job-Shop Scheduling Problem (FJSP) typically refresh graph representations and update feasibility after every operation--machine decision. However, only feasibility must remain exact at every step, whereas graph encoding is substantially more expensive and can potentially be refreshed less frequently. We present CoRS, which decouples them: an interval-level graph representation is reused across multiple sequential decisions, while a stepwise feasibility state is updated after every action. This two-timescale design amortizes graph encoding without parallelizing action generation or relaxing scheduling constraints. CoRS further develops a feasibility-preserving composite-interval decoding scheme with dynamic constraint tracking and boundary state synchronization, which reduces representation refresh frequency while maintaining continuous feasible schedule construction. Furthermore, to alleviate representation staleness caused by interval-level state reuse, CoRS introduces enhanced static features as a compensation mechanism. By providing more comprehensive structural information of the scheduling problem, these features improve the model's perception of overall problem characteristics. Extensive experiments on synthetic and multiple public FJSP benchmarks demonstrate that CoRS significantly reduces inference time while maintaining competitive solution quality, achieving favorable speed-quality trade-offs under tight wall-clock budgets and low-latency scenarios.
Jiang Sutong, Zhao Peng, Wu Xuan +6
College of Computer Science and Technology, Jilin University, China · College of Software, Jilin University, China · College of Computing and Data Science, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore +1