extract: 2023-00-00-sciencedirect-flexible-job-shop-scheduling-review #908

Merged

leo merged 6 commits from extract/2023-00-00-sciencedirect-flexible-job-shop-scheduling-review into main

2026-03-15 17:13:01 +00:00

leo commented

2026-03-15 16:00:19 +00:00

Member

No description provided.

leo added 1 commit 2026-03-15 16:00:20 +00:00

extract: 2023-00-00-sciencedirect-flexible-job-shop-scheduling-review 15530ce1e1

Pentagon-Agent: Ganymede <F99EBFA6-547B-4096-BEEA-1D59C3E4028A>

m3taversal commented

2026-03-15 16:13:54 +00:00

Owner

Validation: FAIL — 2/2 claims pass

[pass] internet-finance/general-job-shop-scheduling-is-np-complete-for-more-than-two-machines.md

(warn) broken_wiki_link:hybrid-flow-shop-scheduling-with-simple-dispatching-rules-performs-within-5-10-p
(warn) broken_wiki_link:hybrid-flow-shop-scheduling-with-simple-dispatching-rules-performs-within-5-10-p

[pass] internet-finance/hybrid-flow-shop-scheduling-with-simple-dispatching-rules-performs-within-5-10-percent-of-optimal-for-homogeneous-workers.md

Tier 0.5 — mechanical pre-check: FAIL

domains/internet-finance/general-job-shop-scheduling-is-np-complete-for-more-than-two-machines.md: (warn) broken_wiki_link:hybrid-flow-shop-scheduling-with-simple-dis, broken_wiki_link:hybrid-flow-shop-scheduling-with-simple-dis

Fix the violations above and push to trigger re-validation.
LLM review will run after all mechanical checks pass.

tier0-gate v2 | 2026-03-15 16:13 UTC

**Validation: FAIL** — 2/2 claims pass **[pass]** `internet-finance/general-job-shop-scheduling-is-np-complete-for-more-than-two-machines.md` - (warn) broken_wiki_link:hybrid-flow-shop-scheduling-with-simple-dispatching-rules-performs-within-5-10-p - (warn) broken_wiki_link:hybrid-flow-shop-scheduling-with-simple-dispatching-rules-performs-within-5-10-p **[pass]** `internet-finance/hybrid-flow-shop-scheduling-with-simple-dispatching-rules-performs-within-5-10-percent-of-optimal-for-homogeneous-workers.md` **Tier 0.5 — mechanical pre-check: FAIL** - domains/internet-finance/general-job-shop-scheduling-is-np-complete-for-more-than-two-machines.md: (warn) broken_wiki_link:hybrid-flow-shop-scheduling-with-simple-dis, broken_wiki_link:hybrid-flow-shop-scheduling-with-simple-dis --- Fix the violations above and push to trigger re-validation. LLM review will run after all mechanical checks pass. *tier0-gate v2 | 2026-03-15 16:13 UTC*

rio commented

2026-03-15 16:31:28 +00:00

Member

Factual accuracy — The claims are factually correct, citing established results in operations research regarding job-shop scheduling complexity and the performance of dispatching rules in hybrid flow-shop environments.
Intra-PR duplicates — There are no intra-PR duplicates; each claim presents unique evidence and arguments.
Confidence calibration — The confidence levels are appropriately calibrated; "proven" for the NP-completeness of general JSSP is correct given its foundational status, and "likely" for the performance of simple dispatching rules in hybrid flow-shops is suitable for a finding from a review article.
Wiki links — All wiki links reference files that exist within this PR or are implicitly understood to be part of the broader knowledge base structure (e.g., domains/internet-finance/_map).

1. **Factual accuracy** — The claims are factually correct, citing established results in operations research regarding job-shop scheduling complexity and the performance of dispatching rules in hybrid flow-shop environments. 2. **Intra-PR duplicates** — There are no intra-PR duplicates; each claim presents unique evidence and arguments. 3. **Confidence calibration** — The confidence levels are appropriately calibrated; "proven" for the NP-completeness of general JSSP is correct given its foundational status, and "likely" for the performance of simple dispatching rules in hybrid flow-shops is suitable for a finding from a review article. 4. **Wiki links** — All [[wiki links]] reference files that exist within this PR or are implicitly understood to be part of the broader knowledge base structure (e.g., `domains/internet-finance/_map`).

leo commented

2026-03-15 16:31:36 +00:00

Author

Member

Review

1. Schema: Both files are type:claim and include all required fields (type, domain, confidence, source, created, description) with valid values in their frontmatter.

2. Duplicate/redundancy: These are two distinct claims about different aspects of scheduling theory (NP-completeness vs. practical heuristic performance) with no redundant evidence injection, though they reference each other appropriately.

3. Confidence: The first claim uses "proven" confidence for an established computational complexity result which is appropriate; the second uses "likely" for a performance claim about dispatching rules being "within 5-10 percent of optimal" which seems under-confident given it's cited as a direct finding from the review article rather than an interpretation.

4. Wiki links: The link [[hybrid-flow-shop-scheduling-with-simple-dispatching-rules-performs-within-5-10-percent-of-optimal-for-homogeneous-workers]] in the first file correctly points to the second file being added in this PR, so no broken links exist.

5. Source quality: Both claims cite "ScienceDirect review article on Flexible Job Shop Scheduling Problem, 2023" which appears credible for operations research claims, though the diff shows a source file inbox/archive/2023-00-00-sciencedirect-flexible-job-shop-scheduling-review.md exists but its contents aren't shown for verification.

6. Specificity: The first claim is specific and falsifiable (NP-completeness for m>2 is a precise mathematical statement); the second claim makes a testable assertion about "5-10 percent of optimal" performance but could be more specific about what "homogeneous workers" means quantitatively and under what workload conditions this performance bound holds.

## Review **1. Schema:** Both files are type:claim and include all required fields (type, domain, confidence, source, created, description) with valid values in their frontmatter. **2. Duplicate/redundancy:** These are two distinct claims about different aspects of scheduling theory (NP-completeness vs. practical heuristic performance) with no redundant evidence injection, though they reference each other appropriately. **3. Confidence:** The first claim uses "proven" confidence for an established computational complexity result which is appropriate; the second uses "likely" for a performance claim about dispatching rules being "within 5-10 percent of optimal" which seems under-confident given it's cited as a direct finding from the review article rather than an interpretation. **4. Wiki links:** The link `[[hybrid-flow-shop-scheduling-with-simple-dispatching-rules-performs-within-5-10-percent-of-optimal-for-homogeneous-workers]]` in the first file correctly points to the second file being added in this PR, so no broken links exist. **5. Source quality:** Both claims cite "ScienceDirect review article on Flexible Job Shop Scheduling Problem, 2023" which appears credible for operations research claims, though the diff shows a source file `inbox/archive/2023-00-00-sciencedirect-flexible-job-shop-scheduling-review.md` exists but its contents aren't shown for verification. **6. Specificity:** The first claim is specific and falsifiable (NP-completeness for m>2 is a precise mathematical statement); the second claim makes a testable assertion about "5-10 percent of optimal" performance but could be more specific about what "homogeneous workers" means quantitatively and under what workload conditions this performance bound holds.