Analysis of Issues for Project Scheduling by Multiple, Dispersed Schedulers (distributed Scheduling) and Requirements for Manual Protocols and Computer-based Support

Although computerized operations have significant gains realized in many areas, one area, scheduling, has enjoyed few benefits from automation. The traditional methods of industrial engineering and operations research have not proven robust enough to handle the complexities associated with the scheduling of realistic problems. To address this need, NASA has developed the computer-aided scheduling system (COMPASS), a sophisticated, interactive scheduling tool that is in wide-spread use within NASA and the contractor community. Therefore, COMPASS provides no explicit support for the large class of problems in which several people, perhaps at various locations, build separate schedules that share a common pool of resources. This research examines the issue of distributing scheduling, as applied to application domains characterized by the partial ordering of tasks, limited resources, and time restrictions. The focus of this research is on identifying issues related to distributed scheduling, locating applicable problem domains within NASA, and suggesting areas for ongoing research. The issues that this research identifies are goals, rescheduling requirements, database support, the need for communication and coordination among individual schedulers, the potential for expert system support for scheduling, and the possibility of integrating artificially intelligent schedulers into a network of human schedulers

Distributed project scheduling at NASA: Requirements for manual protocols and computer-based support

The increasing complexity of space operations and the inclusion of interorganizational and international groups in the planning and control of space missions lead to requirements for greater communication, coordination, and cooperation among mission schedulers. These schedulers must jointly allocate scarce shared resources among the various operational and mission oriented activities while adhering to all constraints. This scheduling environment is complicated by such factors as the presence of varying perspectives and conflicting objectives among the schedulers, the need for different schedulers to work in parallel, and limited communication among schedulers. Smooth interaction among schedulers requires the use of protocols that govern such issues as resource sharing, authority to update the schedule, and communication of updates. This paper addresses the development and characteristics of such protocols and their use in a distributed scheduling environment that incorporates computer-aided scheduling tools. An example problem is drawn from the domain of Space Shuttle mission planning

Sharing Englishes & Social Media

This year-long grant-funded project examined the intersection of culture and class with use of the English Language, and explored the concept of multiple Englishes rather than one, monolithic, correct version of the language

Protocols for distributive scheduling

The increasing complexity of space operations and the inclusion of interorganizational and international groups in the planning and control of space missions lead to requirements for greater communication, coordination, and cooperation among mission schedulers. These schedulers must jointly allocate scarce shared resources among the various operational and mission oriented activities while adhering to all constraints. This scheduling environment is complicated by such factors as the presence of varying perspectives and conflicting objectives among the schedulers, the need for different schedulers to work in parallel, and limited communication among schedulers. Smooth interaction among schedulers requires the use of protocols that govern such issues as resource sharing, authority to update the schedule, and communication of updates. This paper addresses the development and characteristics of such protocols and their use in a distributed scheduling environment that incorporates computer-aided scheduling tools. An example problem is drawn from the domain of space shuttle mission planning

Spatial Competition in Private Labels

Previous studies find that private labels increase retailers' bargaining power with manufacturers and allow retailers to price discriminate. We use a spatial discrete choice model to show that retailers also use store brands to create market power through store differentiation, but not as a means of building market share.Marketing,

How Does Advertising Affect Market Performance? The Case of Generic Advertising

The effect of advertising on market performance has been a long-standing debate. Advertising that increases the dispersion of consumers’ valuations for advertised goods raises the market power of firms, while advertising that decreases the dispersion of consumers’ valuations leads to narrower price-cost margins and superior performance in markets for advertised goods. Numerous challenges confound the empirical identification of advertising effects on market performance. This paper proposes a simple method that relies on the revealed preferences of firms participating in generic advertising programs. Generic advertising programs provide a unique window through which to observe advertising effects on market performance, because changes in the dispersion of consumers’ valuations systematically redistributes rents among firms according to observable characteristics on producer size. We examine producer attitudes towards generic advertising in the “Beef. It’s What’s for Dinner” campaign of the U.S. Beef Checkoff program and find the likelihood a producer favors an expansion of the advertising program increases in operating scale. This finding is consistent with advertising effects that have led to a decrease in the dispersion of consumers’ valuations for beef products and a commensurate increase in market performance.Advertising, Oligopoly, Marketing, L1, M37,

OBESITY AND HYPERBOLIC DISCOUNTING: AN EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS

Behavioral economists maintain that addictions such as alcoholism, smoking and over-eating represent examples of present-bias in decision making that is fundamentally irrational. In this article, we develop a model of present bias and apparently hyperbolic discounting that is fully consistent with rational behavior. We construct an experiment to test our hypothesis and to determine whether discount rates differ for individuals who engage in behaviors that could endanger their health. Our results show that discount functions are quasi-hyperbolic in shape, and that obesity and drinking are positively related to the discount rate. Anti-obesity policy, therefore, would be best directed to informing individuals as to the long-term implications of short-term gratification, rather than taxing foods directly.addiction, discounting, experiments, hyperbolic, obesity, time-inconsistency, Agricultural and Food Policy, Consumer/Household Economics, Demand and Price Analysis, Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety, Food Security and Poverty, Health Economics and Policy, C91, D12, D91, I18,

Obesity and Hyperbolic Discounting: An Experimental Analysis

Behavioral economists maintain that addictions such as alcoholism, smoking and over-eating represent examples of present-bias in decision making that is fundamentally irrational. In this article, we develop a model of present bias and apparently hyperbolic discounting that is fully consistent with rational behavior. We construct an experiment to test our hypothesis and to determine whether discount rates differ for individuals who engage in behaviors that could endanger their health. Our results show that discount functions are quasi-hyperbolic in shape, and that obesity and drinking are positively related to the discount rate. Anti-obesity policy, therefore, would be best directed to informing individuals as to the long-term implications of short-term gratification, rather than taxing foods directly.addiction, discounting, experiments, hyperbolic, obesity, time-inconsistency., Consumer/Household Economics, Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety, Health Economics and Policy, Institutional and Behavioral Economics, C91, D12, D91, I18.,