US5826236A
Expired / Lapsed
US
⏱️ 0.0 years remaining
Method for allocating resources and processes for design and production plan scheduling
Assignee: Toshiba Corp
•
Filing: 1995-12-08
•
Granted: 1998-10-20
•
Expires: 2015-12-08
Abstract
Abstract A scheduling computer system optimizes the match between allocation of processes and resources. To do so, the system temporarily allocates the resources to a process selected based on the attributes of the resources and the processes, as well as the processing start and desired processing end times. In doing so, the system avoids selecting processes to which resources have been already allocated. The system also determines a resulting time value and a resulting fitness value based on the temporary allocation. Using the resulting time value and the resulting fitness value, the system determines the optimum resource for a particular process and allocates the resource to the process accordingly. The system also generates a scheduling chart illustrating the resource allocation.
Inventors
- 👤 Katsumi Narimatsu
- 👤 Shoichi Kojima
Bibliographic Details
Application Number
—
Jurisdiction
US
Data Source
google_patents
Last Synchronized
2026-10-28 02:06
CPC Classifications
G; G06; G06Q; G06Q10/00; G06Q10/06; G06Q10/063; G06Q10/0631; G06Q10/06314; Y; Y02; Y02P; Y02P90/00; Y02P90/02
Claims Analysis
Total Claims: 28
Claim 1
Independent Claim
333 words
A scheduling computer system for generating a scheduling chart, the computer system comprising: resource defining means for inputting an attribute of each of a plurality of resources; process defining means for inputting an attribute of each of a plurality of processes which are processed in a predefined sequence; time setting means for inputting the processing start time and desired processing end time of each of said plurality of processes; process selecting means for sequentially selecting a process, to which a resource is to be allocated, from said plurality of processes; temporary allocating means for temporarily allocating each of said plurality of resources to the process selected by said process selecting means; first evaluating means for evaluating the end time of a sequence of said plurality of processes by finding the end time of the sequence of said plurality of processes after said temporary allocation and for defining a resulting time evaluation value as the first criterion; second evaluating means for evaluating the fitness of a resource for a process based on the attribute of the resource inputted by said resource defining means and on the attribute of the process inputted by said process defining means and for defining a resulting fitness evaluation value as the second criterion; resource determining means for calculating an evaluation value for the combination of a process and a resource by evaluating said first criterion and second criterion for each of said plurality of resources and for determining the optimum resource for the process by comparing said evaluation values of all the resources; process allocating means for sequentially allocating a resource determined by said resource determining means to a process selected by said process selecting means as a final result; and means for generating the scheduling chart illustrating the process to which the resources have been allocated by the process allocating means, wherein said process selecting means does not select processes to which resources have been already allocated by said process allocating means as objects of said temporary allocation.
Claim 2
Dependent Claim
333 words
A scheduling computer system for generating a scheduling chart, the computer system comprising: resource defining means for inputting an attribute of each of a plurality of resources; process defining means for inputting an attribute of each of a plurality of processes which are processed in a predefined sequence; time setting means for inputting the processing start time and desired processing end time of each of said plurality of processes; process selecting means for sequentially selecting a process, to which a resource is to be allocated, from said plurality of processes; temporary allocating means for temporarily allocating each of said plurality of resources to the process selected by said process selecting means; first evaluating means for evaluating the end time of a sequence of said plurality of processes by finding the end time of the sequence of said plurality of processes after said temporary allocation and for defining a resulting time evaluation value as the first criterion; second evaluating means for evaluating the fitness of a resource for a process based on the attribute of the resource inputted by said resource defining means and on the attribute of the process inputted by said process defining means and for defining a resulting fitness evaluation value as the second criterion; resource determining means for calculating an evaluation value for the combination of a process and a resource by evaluating said first criterion and second criterion for each of said plurality of resources and for determining the optimum resource for the process by comparing said evaluation values of all the resources; process allocating means for sequentially allocating a resource determined by said resource determining means to a process selected by said process selecting means as a final result; and means for generating the scheduling chart illustrating the process to which the resources have been allocated by the process allocating means, wherein said process selecting means does not select processes to which resources have been already allocated by said process allocating means as objects of said temporary allocation.
Claim 3
Dependent Claim
32 words
A scheduling computer system as claimed in claim 1, wherein said time setting means sets the processing start time and desired processing end time of a sequence of said plurality of processes.
Claim 4
Dependent Claim
32 words
A scheduling computer system as claimed in claim 1, wherein said time setting means sets a processing start time and a desired processing end time of each of said plurality of processes.
Claim 5
Dependent Claim
59 words
A scheduling computer system as claimed in claim 1, further comprising first weight setting means for setting the first weight for weighting said resource with respect to the end time of said sequence of said plurality of processes, wherein said second evaluating means uses said first weight to evaluate the fitness of the corresponding resource for the corresponding process.
Claim 6
Dependent Claim
68 words
A scheduling computer system as claimed in claim 4, further comprising weight modifying means for modifying said first weight, set by said first weight setting means, according to a change of criteria in the evaluation criteria, when the criteria in at least one of a time evaluation value, created by said first evaluating means, and a fitness evaluation value, created by said second evaluating means, must be changed.
Claim 7
Dependent Claim
52 words
A scheduling computer system as claimed in claim 5, wherein said process selecting means calculates an evaluation value, based on the time relation among said plurality of processes, by using the earliest startable time and the allowable latest end time of each process and, based on this evaluation valued, selects a process.
Claim 8
Dependent Claim
54 words
A scheduling computer system as claimed in claim 1, wherein said process selecting means calculates an evaluation value, based on the time relation among said plurality of processes, by using the earliest processing start time and the allowable latest processing end time of each process and, based on this evaluation value, selects a process.
Claim 9
Dependent Claim
72 words
A scheduling computer system as claimed in claim 1, wherein said process selecting means calculates, based on the time relation among said plurality of processes, an evaluation value by generally evaluating the earliest processing start time and the allowable latest end time of each process as well as the correlation between the allocation status of each resource and each process at that time and, based on the evaluation value, selects a process.
Claim 10
Dependent Claim
41 words
A scheduling computer system as claimed in claim 8, further comprising second weight setting means for determining how high a priority is given to the corresponding process when determining said correlation between the allocation status of each resource and each process.
Claim 11
Dependent Claim
52 words
A scheduling computer system as claimed in claim 9, further comprising weight modifying means for modifying, when criteria for evaluating said correlation between the allocation status of each resource and each process must be changed, said second weight, set by said second weight setting means, according to a change in the criteria.
Claim 12
Dependent Claim
56 words
A scheduling computer system as claimed in claim 8, wherein said process selecting means selects a particular point in time between said earliest processing start time and said latest processing time based on said correlation between the status of each resource and each process at that time and determines the evaluation value as said evaluation value.
Claim 13
Dependent Claim
29 words
A scheduling computer system as claimed in claim 8, wherein said process selecting means calculates said evaluation value using the earliest start time and the allowable latest end time.
Claim 14
Dependent Claim
58 words
A scheduling computer system as claimed in claim 1, wherein said process defining means defines an additional resource for use in each process in addition to the resources defined by said resource defining means, and said second evaluating means increases the evaluation value of said fitness when two or more processes using said additional resource are allocated consecutively.
Claim 15
Dependent Claim
72 words
A scheduling computer system as claimed in claim 13, wherein said process selecting means calculates, based on the time relation among said plurality of processes, an evaluation value by generally evaluating the earliest processing start time and the allowable latest end time of each process as well as the correlation between the allocation status of each resource and each process at that time and, based on the evaluation value, selects a process.
Claim 16
Dependent Claim
53 words
A scheduling computer system as claimed in claim 14, wherein, when a process for which the same additional resources are defined as the those defined for this process is allocated to a resource at that time, said process selecting means evaluates highly said correlation between the allocation status of resources and each process.
Claim 17
Dependent Claim
29 words
A scheduling computer system as claimed in claim 14, wherein said process selecting means calculates said evaluation value using the earliest start time and the allowable latest end time.
Claim 18
Dependent Claim
30 words
A scheduling computer system as in one of claims 1 to 16, wherein said first evaluating means finds the first criterion by performing PERT (Program Evaluation and Review Technique) calculation.
Claim 19
Dependent Claim
317 words
A computer-implemented scheduling method for generating a scheduling chart, the method comprising: a first step for inputting an attribute of each of a plurality of resources; a second step for inputting an attribute of each of a plurality of processes which are processed in a predefined sequence; a third step for inputting the processing start time and desired processing end time of each of said plurality of processes; a fourth step for sequentially selecting a process to which a resource is to be allocated, from said plurality of processes; a fifth step for temporarily allocating each of said plurality of resources to the process selected in said fourth step; a sixth step for evaluating the end time of a sequence of said plurality of processes by finding the end time of the sequence of said plurality of processes after said temporary allocation and for defining a resulting time evaluation value as the first criterion; a seventh step for evaluating the fitness of a resource for a process based on the attribute of the resource inputted in said first step and on the attribute of the process inputted in said second step and for defining a resulting fitness evaluation value as the second criterion; an eighth step for calculating an evaluation value for the combination of a process and a resource by evaluating said first criterion and second criterion for each of said plurality of resources and for determining the optimum resource for the process by comparing said evaluation values of all the resources; a ninth step for sequentially allocating a resource determined in said eight step to a process selected in said fourth step as a final result; and a tenth step for generating the scheduling chart illustrating the processes to which the resources have been allocated, wherein, in said fourth step, processes to which resources have been already allocated in said ninth step are not selected.
Claim 20
Dependent Claim
317 words
A computer-implemented scheduling method for generating a scheduling chart, the method comprising: a first step for inputting an attribute of each of a plurality of resources; a second step for inputting an attribute of each of a plurality of processes which are processed in a predefined sequence; a third step for inputting the processing start time and desired processing end time of each of said plurality of processes; a fourth step for sequentially selecting a process to which a resource is to be allocated, from said plurality of processes; a fifth step for temporarily allocating each of said plurality of resources to the process selected in said fourth step; a sixth step for evaluating the end time of a sequence of said plurality of processes by finding the end time of the sequence of said plurality of processes after said temporary allocation and for defining a resulting time evaluation value as the first criterion; a seventh step for evaluating the fitness of a resource for a process based on the attribute of the resource inputted in said first step and on the attribute of the process inputted in said second step and for defining a resulting fitness evaluation value as the second criterion; an eighth step for calculating an evaluation value for the combination of a process and a resource by evaluating said first criterion and second criterion for each of said plurality of resources and for determining the optimum resource for the process by comparing said evaluation values of all the resources; a ninth step for sequentially allocating a resource determined in said eight step to a process selected in said fourth step as a final result; and a tenth step for generating the scheduling chart illustrating the processes to which the resources have been allocated, wherein, in said fourth step, processes to which resources have been already allocated in said ninth step are not selected.
Claim 21
Dependent Claim
59 words
A computer-implemented scheduling method as claimed in claim 18, further comprising an eleventh step for setting the first weight for weighting said resource, with respect to the end time of said sequence of said plurality of processes, wherein, in said seventh step, said first weight is used to evaluate the fitness of the corresponding resource for the corresponding process.
Claim 22
Dependent Claim
64 words
A computer-implemented scheduling method as claimed in claim 19, further comprising a twelfth step for modifying said first weight, set by said eleventh step, according to a change of criteria in the evaluation criteria, when the criteria in at least one of a time evaluation value, created by said sixth step, and a fitness evaluation value, created by said seventh step, must be changed.
Claim 23
Dependent Claim
52 words
A computer-implemented scheduling method as claimed in claim 18, wherein said fourth step calculates, based on the time relation among said plurality of processes, an evaluation value by using the earliest processing start time and the allowable latest processing time of each process and, based on this evaluation value, selects a process.
Claim 24
Dependent Claim
70 words
A computer-implemented scheduling method as claimed in claim 18, wherein said fourth step calculates, based on the time relation among said plurality of processes, an evaluation value by evaluating the earliest end start time and the allowable latest processing time of each process as well as the correlation between the allocation status of each resource and each process at that time and, based on the evaluation value, selects a process.
Claim 25
Dependent Claim
40 words
A computer-implemented scheduling method as claimed in claim 22, further comprising a thirteenth step for determining how high a priority is given to the corresponding process when determining said correlation between the allocation status of each resource and each process.
Claim 26
Dependent Claim
55 words
A computer-implemented scheduling method as claimed in claim 18, wherein said second step defines an additional resource for use in each process in addition to the resources defined by said first step, and said seventh step increases the evaluation value of said fitness when two or more processes using said additional resource are allocated consecutively.
Claim 27
Dependent Claim
71 words
A computer-implemented scheduling method as claimed in claim 24, wherein said fourth step calculates, based on the time relation among said plurality of processes, an evaluation value by generally evaluating the earliest processing start time and the allowable latest end time of each process as well as the correlation between the allocation status of each resource and each process at that time and, based on the evaluation value, selects a process.
Claim 28
Dependent Claim
29 words
A computer-implemented scheduling method as in one of claims 18 to 25, wherein said sixth step finds the first criterion by performing PERT (Program Evaluation and Review Technique) calculation.
References Cited (Backward Citations)
USPTO Annuity & Maintenance Windows
| Annuity Stage | Window Opens | Payment Deadline | Surcharge Period Until | Estimated Fee | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3.5 Years (Year 4) | 2001-10-19 | 2002-04-20 | 2002-10-20 | $2000.00 | Window Closed / Lapsed |
| 7.5 Years (Year 8) | 2005-10-19 | 2006-04-20 | 2006-10-20 | $3760.00 | Window Closed / Lapsed |
| 11.5 Years (Year 12) | 2009-10-19 | 2010-04-20 | 2010-10-20 | $7700.00 | Window Closed / Lapsed |