9 views

Uploaded by IjctJournals

Task scheduling in multiprocessor systems is one of the main factors of systems performance. In this
paper, the problem of scheduling of tasks in Multiprocessor system is described as finding optimal sequence of the task (called schedule) such that makespan can be minimized. Finding the optimal solution of scheduling the
tasks into the processors is NP- Complete. Genetic Algorithm (GA) has been developed as a powerful tool for
solving constrained optimization problems. This paper presented the results of experimental comparison of six different combinations of crossover (i.e. PMX, OX and CX) and mutation (i.e. Insertion, Swap) operators and
also analyzed the effect of varying the genetic control parameters(like population size, crossover fraction, No. of generations and elite count) on objective function for considered scheduling problem.
Keywords- Multiprocessor task scheduling (MPTS), Genetic Algorithm (GA), Crossover, Mutation, Makespan,
Genetic control parameters.

save

- [IJCT-V2I1P11] Author :R.Sumangali, Dr.B.Srinivasan
- [IJCT-V2I1P17] Author : Sejal D Mello,Priyanka B. Patil,Tarannum Parveen S. Shaikh,Heena S. Shaikh,Shahnawaz M. Malik
- [IJCT-V2I1P16] Author : Prof.S.S.Chaudhari,ChaitaleeAthare,AnushriGaikwad,SnehaShegar, PranaliWakchaure
- [IJCT-V2I1P3] Author-Vijaya-R-Patil-Vaishali-Kumbhakarna-Dr-Seema-Kawathekar
- [IJCT-V2I1P13] Author : Mr. Roshan P. Helonde, Prof. M.R. Joshi
- [IJCT-V2I1P4]
- [IJCT-V2I1P18] Author :Deepika Goyal, Mr. Deepak Kumar Xaxa(Assistant Professor)
- [IJCT-V2I1P14] Author : O. O. Ajayi , O. O. Aribike
- [IJCT-V2I1P5] Author :Sonali V.Satonkar, Dr.seema Kawathekar
- [IJCT-V2I1P7] Author :Miss.Kawade Sonam P,Prof. Ubale V.S
- [IJCT-V2I1P6] Author :Miss.Thorat Ashwini Anil, Prof.Katariya S. S.
- [IJCT-V2I1P1] Author:Tejaswinee Ugale , Nikhil Patil ,Lohit Lende
- [IJCT-V2I1P9] Author :Smilly Soni,Abhilash Sharma,Ashish Jalota
- [IJCT-V2I1P8] Author :Ms. Apurva D. Dhawale, Prof. Dr. K. V. Kale
- [IJCT-V2I1P15] Author : Simranjit Kaur, Prof. Kiranjyoti
- Warehouse Layout Design
- [IJCT-V2I1P22] Authors :Chergui Meriyem, Sayouti Adil, Medromi Hicham
- Document 818
- [IJCT-V2I1P24] Author :Galal Ali Hassaan
- [IJCT-V2I1P19] Author :Hitesh Mahanand, Mr. Deepak Kumar Xaxa (Assistant Professor)
- ALGORITOMOS GENETICOS
- Tutorial EA
- [IJCT-V2I1P20] Author :N.Jeyakumar,M.Thangasivagamaselvi
- Roulette Wheel Selection Methods
- [IJCT-V2I1P21] Authors :SuraI.Mohammed, Hussien M. Sharaf, Fatma A. Omara
- [IJCT-V2I1P25] Author :Ibrahim K A Abughali, SonajhariaMinz
- [IJCT-V2I1P26] Author:G.B.Karthik Ragu, K.Supriya
- [IJCT-V2I1P23] Authors :Dinesh Babu G L , Hariharan G
- P3Permutation Encoding TSP
- 11_appendices 1 to 3
- [IJCT-V3I4P8] Authors: Mrs. Sangeetha Lakshmi .G, Ms. Arun kumari .G
- [IJCT-V3I4P9] Authors: Ms. Sivashankari .A, Mrs. Kavitha .S.K
- [IJCT-V3I4P13] Authors: Ms. Swathi G., Ms. Abarna N
- [IJCT-V3I4P17] Authors:Rachel Hannah ,Praveen Jayasankar , Prashanth Jayaraman
- [IJCT-V3I4P7] Authors:Mahalakshmi S., Kavitha S
- [IJCT-V3I4P10] Authors: Ms. Asma Banu R., Mrs. Shoba S. A.,
- [IJCT-V3I4P12] Authors: Mrs. Sandhiya V., Ms. Abarna N.,
- [IJCT-V3I4P5] Authors:S.Baskaran, V.Anita Shyni
- [IJCT-V3I4P15] Authors: K. Ravi Kumar, P. Karthik
- [IJCT-V3I4P11] Authors:Mrs. Komathi A, Mrs. Shoba. S. A
- [IJCT-V3I4P3] Authors:Markus Gerhart, Marko Boger
- [IJCT-V3I4P6] Authors: Bhavana Gujarkar , Ms.S.M.Borkar
- [IJCT-V3I4P4] Authors:N.Roja Ramani , A.Stenila
- [IJCT-V3I4P16] Authors: A.Senthil Kumar, R.Sathya
- [IJCT-V3I4P14] Authors: Mrs. Vidhya A., Ms. Abarna N.,
- [IJCT-V3I4P2] Authors: Omrani Takwa, Chibani Rhaimi Belgacem, Dallali Adel
- [IJCT-V3I2P14]
- [IJCT-V3I2P11]
- [IJCT-V3I4P1] Authors:Anusha Itnal, Sujata Umarani
- [IJCT-V3I3P9] Authors:AnumolBabu, Rose V Pattani
- IJCT-V3I2P16
- IJCT-V3I2P12.pdf
- [IJCT-V3I2P12]
- [IJCT-V3I2P13]
- [IJCT-V3I3P6] Authors: Markus Gerhart, Marko Boger
- [IJCT-V3I2P10]
- [IJCT-V3I1P9]
- [IJCT-V3I2P15]
- [IJCT-V3I2P8]
- [IJCT-V3I3P7] Authors:P. Anjaneyulu, T. Venkata Naga Jayudu

You are on page 1of 6

RESEARCH ARTICLE

OPEN ACCESS

**Comparative Study of Genetic Operators and Parameters
**

for Multiprocessor Task Scheduling

Bhawna Gupta

Department of Computer Science & Engineering

I.T.S Engineering College, Greater Noida

--------------------------------------------------************************************------------------------------------------

Abstract :

Task scheduling in multiprocessor systems is one of the main factors of systems performance. In this

paper, the problem of scheduling of tasks in Multiprocessor system is described as finding optimal sequence of

the task (called schedule) such that makespan can be minimized. Finding the optimal solution of scheduling the

tasks into the processors is NP- Complete. Genetic Algorithm (GA) has been developed as a powerful tool for

solving constrained optimization problems. This paper presented the results of experimental comparison of six

different combinations of crossover (i.e. PMX, OX and CX) and mutation (i.e. Insertion, Swap) operators and

also analyzed the effect of varying the genetic control parameters(like population size, crossover fraction, No. of

generations and elite count) on objective function for considered scheduling problem.

Keywords- Multiprocessor task scheduling (MPTS), Genetic Algorithm (GA), Crossover, Mutation, Makespan,

Genetic control parameters.

--------------------------------------------------************************************------------------------------------------

I.

**system. Makespan is the time taken for a
**

multiprocessor system to finish the last task.

INTRODUCTION

**The study of scheduling started about sixty
**

years ago, being initiated by seminal papers by

Johnson (1954) and Bellman (1956) [1].

Scheduling is defined as the assignment of all tasks

to available processors with the objective of

optimizing one or several performance measures.

Scheduling on multiprocessor system is

computationally difficult and tedious problem. The

importance of the multiprocessor task scheduling

problem led to several comparative studies. Several

heuristics & metaheuristics have been developed

for the solution of the multiprocessor task

scheduling [2].

In this paper task scheduling problems in

multiprocessor system is considered in flow-shop

environments. The permutation flow shop

scheduling problem (PFSP) is a special case of

flow shop scheduling problem where the

processing order of the jobs is same on all the

processors [3]. The precedence relation between

two jobs i and j represents the situation where job j

cannot start until job i completes. The scheduling

algorithms can be rated based on different

parameters like flowtime, communication cost,

reliability cost and makespan [4]. The scheduling

problem proposed here is a single-objective

problem i.e. minimizing the makespan of the

ISSN :2394-2231

**There are different algorithms available for
**

optimization of objective functions such

Evolutionary

Programming,

Evolutionary

Strategies, Simulated Annealing, Tabu search,

Particle swarm optimization, Ant colony search and

Genetic Algorithm[5]. In this paper genetic

algorithm is used as optimization algorithm for

tasks scheduling in multiprocessors system.

Genetic Algorithms are the heuristic search and

optimization techniques that mimic the process of

natural evolution. Genetic algorithms are powerful

methods of optimization used successfully in

different problems.

Their performance is

depending on the choice of genetic operators

especially, the selection, crossover and mutation

operators and on the different genetic control

parameters like population size, crossover fraction

and elite count etc. This paper has presented

analysis of various combinations of existing

crossover and mutation operators with different

values genetic control parameters, for minimizing

the value of makespan for multiprocessor task

scheduling problem.

II.

MULTIPROCESSOR TASK

SCHEDULING PROBLEM

http://www.ijctjournal.org

Page 69

**International Journal of Computer Techniques -– Volume 2 Issue 1, 2015
**

In the present work, a multiprocessor task

scheduling problem with ‘n’ tasks & ‘m’

processors has been considered with the objective

of optimizing the make span. The various

assumptions considered for multiprocessor task

scheduling (MPTS) are ([1], [6]):

6.

**All the tasks and processors are available at time
**

Zero.

**The encoding scheme is a key issue in any GA
**

because it can severely limit the window of

information that is observed from the system [8].

Traditionally, solutions are represented in binary as

strings of 0’s and 1’s, but other encodings are also

possible [7]. Here Permutation encoding is used.

**Pre-emption is not allowed.
**

Processors never break down.

•

•

•

•

•

**All processing time on the processors are
**

known, deterministic, finite and dependent on

sequence of the tasks to be processed.

Each processor is continuously available for

assignment.

The first processor is assumed to be ready

whichever and whatever task is to be

processed on it first.

Processors may be idle

Splitting of task or task cancellation is not

allowed

III.

GENETIC ALGORITHM

**Genetic algorithm (GA) is a technique that is
**

applied to a number of optimization problems to

obtain optimal solutions. A Genetic Algorithm

(GA) is a search heuristic that mimics the process

of natural evolution.

7.

**VERIFY If the end condition is satisfied, stop,
**

and return the best solution in current

population

ITERATE Goto step 2

A. Encoding Schemes

B. Initial Population

The initial population of candidate solutions is

usually generated randomly across the search

space. However, domain-specific knowledge or

other information can be easily incorporated [9].

The population size is typically problem dependent

and has to be determined experimentally [10].

C. Fitness Evaluation

Each chromosome contains a string, called

genes (tasks) and has an associated value called a

fitness value, which is evaluated by a fitness

function. Several optimization criteria can be

considered for the said problem. The elementary

criterion is that of minimizing the makespan, that

is, the time when processor finishes the last task

(Cj).

make span = min

{max C }

D. Selection

Basic genetic algorithm.

1.

2.

3.

4.

BEGIN

INITIALIZE Generate random population of n

chromosomes

FITNESS Evaluate the fitness f(x) of each

chromosome x in the population

NEW POPULATION Create a new population

by repeating following steps until the new

population is complete

a.

b.

c.

d.

5.

**SELECTION Select parents according to
**

their fitness

CROSSOVER Cross over the parents to

form new offspring (children).

MUTATION Mutate new offspring at

locus (position in chromosome).

ACCEPTING Place new offspring in the

new population.

**REPLACE Use new generated population for a
**

further run of the algorithm

ISSN :2394-2231

**GA uses selection operator to select the
**

superior and eliminate the inferior thus imposes the

survival-of-the-fittest mechanism. Selection of

proper couples from parent is performed according

to their fitness value. For the present work fitness

values have been evaluated for all chromosomes

and good chromosomes has been selected through

roulette wheel strategy [3].

E. Genetic search operators

The selection process and the crossover and

mutation operators establish a balance between the

exploration and exploitation of the search space

which is very adequate for a wide variety of

problems [12].

Crossover: Crossover is a mechanism that

produces new offspring that have some parts of

both parent's genetic material [11]. There are many

ways of accomplishing this mechanism but

competent performance depends on a properly

designed crossover mechanism [9]. Partially

mapped crossover(PMX), Cycle crossover(CX) and

http://www.ijctjournal.org

Page 70

**International Journal of Computer Techniques -– Volume 2 Issue 1, 2015
**

Order crossover(OX) has been implemented for the

said multiprocessor task scheduling problem.

1)

Mutation: Mutation is a genetic operator

used to maintain genetic diversity from one

generation of a population of chromosomes to next

[13]. There are many variations of mutation, but it

usually involves one or more changes being made

to an individual’s trait or traits. In other words,

mutation performs a random walk in the vicinity of

a candidate solution. Swap and insertion mutation

has been used for analysis of the said problem.

F. Termination Conditions

For the said multiprocessor task scheduling

problem if generation has reached some predefined

generation value then this process will stop and the

best chromosome will be the answer.

IV.

IMPLEMENTATION

RESULTS

**Experiments are conducted to evaluate the
**

performance of GA, in minimizing the objective

function (i.e. make span of the processor). Genetic

algorithm is as good as its operators and parameters

i.e. for improving the performance of Genetic

Algorithm optimal parameter selection are

required. In previous work the results have been

calculated for different combinations of operators

with some parameters (i.e. crossover probability,

elite count, size of population, number of

generations etc.) have been fixed. The present work

considers the optimization of different parameters

and operators of genetic algorithm for the said

multiprocessor task scheduling problem. The

different parameters and different combinations of

operators of genetic algorithm greatly determine

the degree of solution accuracy.

The efficiency of genetic algorithm is closely

related to control parameters. In the following

experiments, genetic algorithms performance have

been tested for parameters such as population size,

the crossover probability, elite count and Number

of generations with different combinations of

operators. The following combinations of operators

have been used in the experimentation:•

•

•

•

•

•

**PMX and Insertion Mutation(IM)
**

PMX and Swap Mutation(SM)

CX and Insertion Mutation

CX and Swap Mutation

OX and Insertion Mutation

OX and Swap Mutation

**GA algorithm is implemented using MATLAB at
**

command line. MPTS (in permutation flow shop

scheduling) have been implemented.

ISSN :2394-2231

**To compare statistically all the combinations of
**

operators,and to get a precise value of genetic

control parameters one value of burst time is

generated randomly and saved. Then all the

combinations of operators and some different

values of genetic control parameters are applied

one by one on the saved value.

This process is repeated for multiple values of burst

time to get more precise view about the results (i.e.

to check the accuracy of best combination). From

multiple different values of burst time one value is

shown in table I, for four processors and ten tasks,

whose results are explained below.

Table I

EXAMPLE of BURST TIME

No. of Tasks

No. of

Processors

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

22

2

12

1

13

13

13

17

3

36

3

6

32

2

6

4

5

15

25

35

21

23

21

21

14

24

14

14

18

17

18

18

29

26

9

2

6

6

4

4

**A. Effect of population size on the performance
**

of genetic algorithm

To analyse the effect of population size on the

performance of genetic algorithm following

parameter setting is done

No. of generations

Elite Count

Crossover Probability

Time Limit

Fitness Limit

Stall Generation Limit

Stall Time Limit

100

2

0.6

Infinite

-Infinite

Infinite

Infinite

Table II

REPRESENTS THE MAKESPAN VALUES OF DIFFERENT

COMBINATION ON THE VARIATION OF POPULATION

SIZE

Operators

Combinations

Population Size

50

100

150

200

250

300

PMX

&

IM

PMX

&

SM

CX

&

IM

CX

&

SM

OX

&

IM

OX

&

SM

182.6

181.3

182

181

181

180

183.3

182

180.6

181.3

180.6

180.6

184.6

182.3

182.6

182.6

182.6

183.3

183

180.3

181.3

181.3

180.6

182

183.6

181.3

182.6

181.6

180

180

182

181.6

182

182

181

180

**shows that as we increase the population size GA
**

performs better but at the cost of computation time.

So, an appropriate combination of crossover and

http://www.ijctjournal.org

Page 71

**International Journal of Computer Techniques -– Volume 2 Issue 1, 2015
**

mutation operator is also required so that we can

get best results without compromising cost. So,

after testing multiple combinations of operators for

this particular approach, it has been observed that

order crossover and insertion mutation are giving

best results for the said problem. This combination

has given good results even for less population

size. Population size is one of the most important

parameters of GA. The above table II, shows the

value of makespan with the variation in population

size and genetic operators. The value of makespan

in the above table

186

pmx_i

184

pmx_s

182

Operators

Combin

-ations

Crossov

-er

Probabi

-lity

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

PMX

&

IM

PMX

&

SM

CX

&

IM

CX

&

SM

OX

&

IM

OX

&

SM

180.6

180

180.6

180.6

181

181

182

182

184

184

183.3

183.3

182

182.6

181

180.6

181.3

183.3

183.3

184

181.3

181.3

182.6

180

181.6

181.3

181.3

180

184

182.6

180

182

182.3

180

181.3

181.3

180

182.6

183.3

183

182.6

182

180.3

180

180.3

180

180.3

181.3

182

183

182.6

182

181.3

180.6

181.6

181

182.6

182.3

182

186.3

cx_i

180

cx_s

178

ox_i

176

50

100

150

200

250

300

ox_s

Figure 1. Effect of population size on makespan

**It can be easily viewed from the above figure that
**

order crossover and insertion mutation are giving

best results even with less population size.

187

186

185

184

183

182

181

180

179

178

177

176

pmx_i

pmx_s

cx_i

cx_s

ox_i

ox_s

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

**B. Effect of Crossover probability on the
**

performance of genetic algorithm

To analyse the effect of crossover probability on

the performance of genetic algorithm following

parameter setting is done

No. of generations

Elite Count

Population Size

Time Limit

Fitness Limit

Stall Generation Limit

Stall Time Limit

**C. Effect of elite count on the performance of
**

genetic algorithm

To analyse the effect of elite count on the

performance of genetic algorithm following

parameter setting is done

100

2

100

Infinite

-Infinite

Infinite

Infinite

**Here, it is observed that crossover probability
**

affects the performance of genetic algorithm. For

the said problem, if crossover probability is set to

high value then performance degrades. It can be

easily observed from figure 2, that crossover

probability from 0.4 to 0.7 gives minimum values

of makespan. In the specified range best

performance is observed for every combination.

Optimal value of make span is obtained at

crossover probability values 0.4 and 0.6.

Table III

REPRESENTS THE MAKESPAN VALUES OF DIFFERENT

COMBINATION ON THE VARIATION OF CROSSOVER

PROBABILITY

ISSN :2394-2231

Figure 2. Effect of Crossover probability on makespan

Crossover Probability

No. of generations

Population Size

Time Limit

Fitness Limit

Stall Generation Limit

Stall Time Limit

0.6

100

100

Infinite

-Infinite

Infinite

Infinite

**It is observed from the above table that the value of
**

makespan increases with the increase in value of

elite count that means performance degrades. Elite

count value 2 is giving best results i.e. minimum

makespan.

Table IV

REPRESENTS THE MAKESPAN VALUES OF DIFFERENT

COMBINATION ON THE VARIATION OF ELITE COUNT

http://www.ijctjournal.org

Page 72

**International Journal of Computer Techniques -– Volume 2 Issue 1, 2015
**

Operators

combin

-ations

elite

count

1

PMX

&

IM

PMX

&

SM

CX

&

IM

CX

&

SM

OX

&

IM

OX

&

SM

180

184

182

185.3

183.3

183.6

2

181.3

180.6

184.6

182

180

180

3

183

181.6

183

182.6

181.3

180

4

182

182

182

181.6

182.6

181.3

5

182.6

182.6

182.6

182

180

181.3

6

182

182.6

182

180.6

182.6

183

**This best value is associated with six different
**

combination of crossover and mutation operator,

and from all the different combinations, order

crossover and insertion mutation are giving best

results. It can also be observed from the

experiments that, setting Elite count to a high value

causes the fittest individuals to dominate the

population, which can make the search less

effective.

186

pmx_i

184

pmx_s

182

cx_i

180

cx_s

178

ox_i

176

1

2

3

4

5

6

ox_s

Figure 3. Effect of number of generations on makespan

**D. Effect of number of generations on the
**

performance of genetic algorithm

To analyse the effect of number of generations on

the performance of genetic algorithm following

parameter setting is done

Crossover Probability

Elite Count

Population Size

Time Limit

Fitness Limit

Stall Generation Limit

Stall Time Limit

0.6

2

100

Infinite

-Infinite

Infinite

Infinite

Table V

REPRESENTS THE MAKESPAN VALUES OF DIFFERENT

COMBINATION ON THE VARIATION OF NUMBER OF

GENERATIONS

Operat

-ors

Combinations

No. of

Genera

-tions

50

70

100

130

150

200

220

300

500

PMX

&

IM

PMX

&

SM

CX

&

IM

CX

&

SM

OX

&

IM

OX

&

SM

182

182

181.3

182.6

181.3

181.3

180.6

181.3

181.3

180.6

181.3

181.3

181.3

181.3

181.3

183.3

181.3

181

182.6

182.6

183

183.6

181.3

181.3

182.6

181.6

181.3

183.3

181.3

181.3

182.6

182

182.6

181.3

180

180

180.6

182.3

180

180.6

181.3

180

180

180

180

182.6

182.6

180

182.3

181.3

182.6

184

180.3

180.3

**It can be observed from Table V, that as the
**

number of generations increases, GA performs

better (i.e. value of make span decreases) or some

time remains same. So for given MPTS problem

the value 500 for number of generations is showing

minimum makespan for all combination of

operators. But choosing this value for number of

generations will increase the computation time. So

the value for number of generations has been

chosen in such a way that the objective function is

minimized

without

compromising

the

computational time. This can be done by choosing

a combination of operators which is minimizing the

objective function even with lesser number of

generations. So order crossover and insertion

mutation is the appropriate choice.

Figure 4. Effect of number of generations on makespan

E. CONCLUSIONS

In this paper, a genetic algorithm for MPTS in

permutation flow shop scheduling environment has

been implemented. The solution of genetic

185

184

183

182

181

180

179

178

pmx_i

pmx_s

cx_i

cx_s

ox_i

50

70 100 130 150 200 220 300 500

ox_s

**algorithm mainly depends on its different operators
**

and parameters like type of crossover, mutation;

crossover probability etc. and every problem have

specific GA parameters. The performance of the GA

has been evaluated with the variation of

combinations of genetic operators along with the

ISSN :2394-2231

http://www.ijctjournal.org

Page 73

**International Journal of Computer Techniques -– Volume 2 Issue 1, 2015
**

variation in genetic control parameters. It has been

concluded that:

•

•

•

•

**Genetic algorithm performs better with the
**

increase in population size. Order

crossover

and

insertion

mutation

outperformes even with less population

size.

For the said problem an even mixture of

crossover and mutation children gives

better results instead of any of them alone.

Small value of elite count makes the

search more efficient.

Increasing the number of generations

enables the genetic algorithm to explore

the search space and thereby obtaining

better results. Order crossover and

insertion mutation is giving best results

even with lesser number of generations

which other combinations has not given

even with higher number of generations.

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

F. REFERENCES

[1]

Johnson, S.M. “Optimal two- and threestage production schedules with setup

times included”, Naval Research Logistics

Quarterly 1, 1954, 61–68.

[2]

Dhingra S., Bal Gupta S.B., Biswas R.

“Genetic

Algorithm

Parameters

Optimization

for

Bi-Criteria

Multiprocessor Task Scheduling Using

Design of Experiments”, World Academy

of Science, Engineering and Technology

International Journal of Computer,

Information, Systems and Control

Engineering Vol:8 No:4, 2014

[3]

Verma R. and Dhingra S. (2011), “Genetic

Algorithm For Multiprocessor Task

Scheduling” IJCSMS International Journal

of Computer Science and Management

Studies, Vol. 11, Issue 02, ISSN (Online):

2231-5268.

[4]

Devi M.R. and Anju A. “Multiprocessor

Scheduling of Dependent Tasks to

Minimize Makespan and Reliability Cost

Using NSGA-II” , International Journal in

Foundations of Computer Science &

Technology (IJFCST), Vol.4, No.2, March

2014

[5]

Patel F.M., Panchal N.B. “The Matlab

Solution of Mathematic Equation Using

ISSN :2394-2231

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

**Genetic Algorithm for Optimum Result”,
**

GJRA - Global Journal For Research

Analysis, Volume:3, Issue : 1, ISSN No

2277 – 8160, Jan 2014.

Dhingra A. & Chandna P., “Hybrid

Genetic Algorithm for Multicriteria

Scheduling with Sequence Dependent Set

up Time,” International Journal of

Engineering (IJE), Volume (3): Issue (5),

2009.

Panwar P., Chauhan S., “Optimization of

Multiprocessor Scheduling using Genetic

Algorithm”, International Journal of

Computer Applications (0975 – 8887)

Volume 78 – No.4, September 2013.

Koza J.R., “Genetic Programming: A

Paradigm for Genetically Breeding

Populations of Computer Programs to

Solve Problems,” Report No. STAN- CS90-13 14, Stmdford University, 1990.

Vishwanath A., Vulavala R., Prabhu S.U.,

“Task Scheduling in Homogeneous

Multiprocessor

Systems

Using

Evolutionary Techniques”, International

Journal of Emerging Technology and

Advanced Engineering, ISSN 2250-2459,

ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume

4, Issue 2, February 2014.

Harsora V. and Dr. Shah A., “A Modified

Genetic Algorithm for Process Scheduling

in Distributed System,” IJCA Special

Issue

on

“Artificial

Intelligence

Techniques - Novel Approaches &

Practical Applications” AIT, 2011.

Gupta S., Agarwal G., and Kumar V., “An

Efficient and Robust Genetic Algorithm

for Multiprocessor Task Scheduling”,

International Journal of Computer Theory

and Engineering, Vol. 5, No. 2, April

2013.

Ortiz-Boyer D., “A Crossover Operator

for Evolutionary Algorithms Based on

Population Features,” Journal of Artificial

Intelligence Research 24 1-48, 2005.

Garg R., mittal S., “Optimization by

Genetic Algorithm”, International Journal

of Advanced Research in Computer

Science and Software Engineering,

Volume 4, Issue 4, April 2014.

http://www.ijctjournal.org

Page 74

- [IJCT-V2I1P11] Author :R.Sumangali, Dr.B.SrinivasanUploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V2I1P17] Author : Sejal D Mello,Priyanka B. Patil,Tarannum Parveen S. Shaikh,Heena S. Shaikh,Shahnawaz M. MalikUploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V2I1P16] Author : Prof.S.S.Chaudhari,ChaitaleeAthare,AnushriGaikwad,SnehaShegar, PranaliWakchaureUploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V2I1P3] Author-Vijaya-R-Patil-Vaishali-Kumbhakarna-Dr-Seema-KawathekarUploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V2I1P13] Author : Mr. Roshan P. Helonde, Prof. M.R. JoshiUploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V2I1P4]Uploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V2I1P18] Author :Deepika Goyal, Mr. Deepak Kumar Xaxa(Assistant Professor)Uploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V2I1P14] Author : O. O. Ajayi , O. O. AribikeUploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V2I1P5] Author :Sonali V.Satonkar, Dr.seema KawathekarUploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V2I1P7] Author :Miss.Kawade Sonam P,Prof. Ubale V.SUploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V2I1P6] Author :Miss.Thorat Ashwini Anil, Prof.Katariya S. S.Uploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V2I1P1] Author:Tejaswinee Ugale , Nikhil Patil ,Lohit LendeUploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V2I1P9] Author :Smilly Soni,Abhilash Sharma,Ashish JalotaUploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V2I1P8] Author :Ms. Apurva D. Dhawale, Prof. Dr. K. V. KaleUploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V2I1P15] Author : Simranjit Kaur, Prof. KiranjyotiUploaded byIjctJournals
- Warehouse Layout DesignUploaded byarkanist
- [IJCT-V2I1P22] Authors :Chergui Meriyem, Sayouti Adil, Medromi HichamUploaded byIjctJournals
- Document 818Uploaded bykinfegeta
- [IJCT-V2I1P24] Author :Galal Ali HassaanUploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V2I1P19] Author :Hitesh Mahanand, Mr. Deepak Kumar Xaxa (Assistant Professor)Uploaded byIjctJournals
- ALGORITOMOS GENETICOSUploaded byjean pierre
- Tutorial EAUploaded byabhas
- [IJCT-V2I1P20] Author :N.Jeyakumar,M.ThangasivagamaselviUploaded byIjctJournals
- Roulette Wheel Selection MethodsUploaded byMohammed Siddique
- [IJCT-V2I1P21] Authors :SuraI.Mohammed, Hussien M. Sharaf, Fatma A. OmaraUploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V2I1P25] Author :Ibrahim K A Abughali, SonajhariaMinzUploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V2I1P26] Author:G.B.Karthik Ragu, K.SupriyaUploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V2I1P23] Authors :Dinesh Babu G L , Hariharan GUploaded byIjctJournals
- P3Permutation Encoding TSPUploaded byWissal Abid
- 11_appendices 1 to 3Uploaded byJimmy Alexander Barus

- [IJCT-V3I4P8] Authors: Mrs. Sangeetha Lakshmi .G, Ms. Arun kumari .GUploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V3I4P9] Authors: Ms. Sivashankari .A, Mrs. Kavitha .S.KUploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V3I4P13] Authors: Ms. Swathi G., Ms. Abarna NUploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V3I4P17] Authors:Rachel Hannah ,Praveen Jayasankar , Prashanth JayaramanUploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V3I4P7] Authors:Mahalakshmi S., Kavitha SUploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V3I4P10] Authors: Ms. Asma Banu R., Mrs. Shoba S. A.,Uploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V3I4P12] Authors: Mrs. Sandhiya V., Ms. Abarna N.,Uploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V3I4P5] Authors:S.Baskaran, V.Anita ShyniUploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V3I4P15] Authors: K. Ravi Kumar, P. KarthikUploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V3I4P11] Authors:Mrs. Komathi A, Mrs. Shoba. S. AUploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V3I4P3] Authors:Markus Gerhart, Marko BogerUploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V3I4P6] Authors: Bhavana Gujarkar , Ms.S.M.BorkarUploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V3I4P4] Authors:N.Roja Ramani , A.StenilaUploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V3I4P16] Authors: A.Senthil Kumar, R.SathyaUploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V3I4P14] Authors: Mrs. Vidhya A., Ms. Abarna N.,Uploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V3I4P2] Authors: Omrani Takwa, Chibani Rhaimi Belgacem, Dallali AdelUploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V3I2P14]Uploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V3I2P11]Uploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V3I4P1] Authors:Anusha Itnal, Sujata UmaraniUploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V3I3P9] Authors:AnumolBabu, Rose V PattaniUploaded byIjctJournals
- IJCT-V3I2P16Uploaded byIjctJournals
- IJCT-V3I2P12.pdfUploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V3I2P12]Uploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V3I2P13]Uploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V3I3P6] Authors: Markus Gerhart, Marko BogerUploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V3I2P10]Uploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V3I1P9]Uploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V3I2P15]Uploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V3I2P8]Uploaded byIjctJournals
- [IJCT-V3I3P7] Authors:P. Anjaneyulu, T. Venkata Naga JayuduUploaded byIjctJournals