[rules-users] SimpleScoreCalculator
André Fróes
arfmoraes at gmail.com
Thu Feb 21 06:54:09 EST 2013
Sure. My sorting by worktime and skills is partially working, if I do my
planning with a certain number of engineers/workorders that fits in each
other, it works perfectly, If i overcome that, it breaks the planning, it
keeps showing the data that shouldn't be displayed and, in consequence,
breaks the optimal solution.
Example:
Engineer Andre, WT(8 hours), Skills ABC1, ABC2
Workorder 1, required WT(2), required Skills ABC2
Workorder 2, required WT(3), required Skills ABC2
Workorder 3, required WT(1), required Skills ABC1
with these 3 WO it should work perfectly, results:
ID: 104[Skills: ABC 2,] - Andre(8)[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,] ------
Feasible(0)
ID: 105[Skills: ABC 2,] - Andre(8)[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,] ------
Feasible(0)
ID: 106[Skills: ABC 1,] - Andre(8)[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,] ------
Feasible(0)
Adding this workorder that exceed in time and skill
Workorder 1, required WT(5), required Skills ABC2, ABC3
this is the outcome:
ID: 104[Skills: ABC 2,] - Andre(8)[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,] ------
Feasible(0)
ID: 105[Skills: ABC 2,] - Andre(8)[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,] ------
Feasible(0)
ID: 107[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 3,] - Andre(8)[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,] ------
Broken(1)
ID: 106[Skills: ABC 1,] - Andre(8)[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,] ------
Feasible(0)
it shows all not excluding the workorder that is not to be assigned to
engineer. I did it by simplescorecalculator:
public HardAndSoftScore calculateScore(Distributor distributor) {
int hardScore = 0;
int softScore = 0;
for (Engineer e : distributor.getEngineerList()) {
int requiredWorktime = 0;
List<Skill> requiredSkillList = new ArrayList<Skill>();
for (WorkOrder o : distributor.getWorkOrderList()) {
if (e.equals(o.getEngineer())) {
requiredWorktime += o.getRequiredWorktime();
for (SkillWorkOrder swo : o.getRequiredSkills()) {
requiredSkillList.add(swo.getSkill());
}
}
}
int engineerAvailableTime = e.getWorktime() - requiredWorktime;
if (engineerAvailableTime < 0) {
hardScore += engineerAvailableTime;
}
List<Skill> tempEngSkillList = new ArrayList<Skill>();
for (SkillEngineer se : e.getSkillEngineerList()){
tempEngSkillList.add(se.getSkill());
}
if (tempEngSkillList.containsAll(requiredSkillList)){
hardScore += 1;
}
}
return DefaultHardAndSoftScore.valueOf(hardScore, softScore);
}
that's the problem happening, after that i'll start working on priority by
the tip you provided in the previous post, but i'll try by
simplescorecalculator to, i'm not getting along (yet) with drools rules
system (drl), it's a bit harder to use it with planner.
thanks for the help Geoffrey!
2013/2/21 Geoffrey De Smet <ge0ffrey.spam at gmail.com>
> This thread is a bit long, could you summarize the open problems?
>
> Op 20-02-13 19:22, André Fróes schreef:
>
> I added another variable to check if it would still show the broken
> constraint and break the planner, and it still happens, I added this:
>
> WorkOrder wo33 = new WorkOrder(103l, 8, Priority.P1, Nature.CORRECTIVE);
> SkillWorkOrder swo333 = new SkillWorkOrder(20333l, wo33, ABC1);
> SkillWorkOrder swo3332 = new SkillWorkOrder(203332l, wo33, ABC2);
> SkillWorkOrder swo3333 = new SkillWorkOrder(203333l, wo33, ABC3);
> SkillWorkOrder swo3334 = new SkillWorkOrder(203334l, wo33, ABC4);
> List<SkillWorkOrder> lswo33 = new ArrayList<SkillWorkOrder>();
> lswo33.add(swo333);
> lswo33.add(swo3332);
> lswo33.add(swo3333);
> lswo33.add(swo3334);
> wo33.setRequiredSkills(lswo33);
>
> it breaks in worktime and required skill, and even so, it shows there in
> the result breaking everything T.T
>
>
> 2013/2/20 André Fróes <arfmoraes at gmail.com>
>
>> Problem solved (still I think so):
>>
>> It was simpler (if i'm right):
>> --------
>> List<Skill> tempEngSkillList = new ArrayList<Skill>();
>> for (SkillEngineer se : e.getSkillEngineerList()){
>> tempEngSkillList.add(se.getSkill());
>> }
>> if (tempEngSkillList.containsAll(requiredSkillList)){
>> hardScore += 1;
>> }
>> --------
>>
>> the result:
>>
>> Solved distribution with 10 work orders and 4 engineers:
>> ID: 104[Skills: ABC 2,] - Andre(8)[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,] ------
>> Feasible(0)
>> ID: 103[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,ABC 3,ABC 4,] - Denny(8)[Skills: ABC
>> 2,ABC 1,ABC 3,ABC 4,] ------ Feasible(0)
>> ID: 105[Skills: ABC 2,] - Andre(8)[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,] ------
>> Feasible(0)
>> ID: 102[Skills: ABC 2,] - Andre(8)[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,] ------
>> Feasible(0)
>> ID: 101[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,ABC 4,] - Richard(8)[Skills: ABC 1,ABC
>> 2,ABC 4,] ------ Feasible(0)
>> ID: 107[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 3,] - Fabio(8)[Skills: ABC 3,ABC 1,] ------
>> Feasible(0)
>> ID: 106[Skills: ABC 1,] - Fabio(8)[Skills: ABC 3,ABC 1,] ------
>> Feasible(0)
>> ID: 108[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 4,] - Richard(8)[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,ABC
>> 4,] ------ Feasible(0)
>> ID: 109[Skills: ABC 3,] - Fabio(8)[Skills: ABC 3,ABC 1,] ------
>> Feasible(0)
>> ID: 110[Skills: ABC 1,] - Andre(8)[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,] ------
>> Feasible(0)
>>
>>
>> 2013/2/20 André Fróes <arfmoraes at gmail.com>
>>
>>> Not fixed, i threw it on excel and make a comparison with expected
>>> results and there are 2 broken there. This is how it would be (feasible
>>> solution):
>>>
>>> ID 101 - Engineer Richard
>>> ID 102 - Engineer Andre
>>> ID 103 - Engineer Denny
>>> ID 104 - Engineer Andre
>>> ID 105 - Engineer Andre
>>> ID 106 - Engineer Andre
>>> ID 107 - Engineer Fabio
>>> ID 108 - Engineer Richard
>>> ID 109 - Engineer Fabio
>>> ID 110 - Engineer Fabio
>>>
>>> this was the result:
>>>
>>> Solved distribution with 10 work orders and 4 engineers:
>>> ID: 104[Skills: ABC 2,] - Richard(8)[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,ABC 4,]
>>> ------ Feasible(0)
>>> ID: 103[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,ABC 3,ABC 4,] - Denny(8)[Skills: ABC
>>> 2,ABC 1,ABC 3,ABC 4,] ------ Feasible(0)
>>> ID: 105[Skills: ABC 2,] - Fabio(8)[Skills: ABC 3,ABC 1,] ------
>>> Broken(1)
>>> ID: 102[Skills: ABC 2,] - Andre(8)[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,] ------
>>> Feasible(0)
>>> ID: 101[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,ABC 4,] - Richard(8)[Skills: ABC 1,ABC
>>> 2,ABC 4,] ------ Feasible(0)
>>> ID: 107[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 3,] - Fabio(8)[Skills: ABC 3,ABC 1,]
>>> ------ Feasible(0)
>>> ID: 106[Skills: ABC 1,] - Andre(8)[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,] ------
>>> Feasible(0)
>>> ID: 108[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 4,] - Andre(8)[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,]
>>> ------ Broken(1)
>>> ID: 109[Skills: ABC 3,] - Andre(8)[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,] ------
>>> Broken(1)
>>> ID: 110[Skills: ABC 1,] - Andre(8)[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,] ------
>>> Feasible(0)
>>>
>>> Still working on it, I accept any tips :D
>>>
>>>
>>> 2013/2/20 André Fróes <arfmoraes at gmail.com>
>>>
>>>> I think I fixed it, but the broken constraint is still showing, i don't
>>>> know how to remove it. I did this:
>>>>
>>>> verified if the engineer skill list had the same size or bigger than
>>>> the requiredSkillList, iterate to check skills between both counting the
>>>> matches and then, if the match was 100% to other, give the workorder
>>>>
>>>> if (e.getSkillEngineerList().size() >= requiredSkillList.size()) {
>>>> int temp = 0;
>>>> for (SkillEngineer se : e.getSkillEngineerList()) {
>>>> for (Skill s : requiredSkillList) {
>>>> if (se.getSkill().getId() == s.getId()) {
>>>> temp++;
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>> if (temp == requiredSkillList.size()) {
>>>> hardScore += 1;
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2013/2/20 André Fróes <arfmoraes at gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>>> After some workaround I noticed that the workorders are not being 100%
>>>>> corretly distributed to, i've changed the scorecalculator to this:
>>>>>
>>>>> int commonSkillCount = 0;
>>>>> for (Skill s : requiredSkillList){
>>>>> for (SkillEngineer se : e.getSkillEngineerList()){
>>>>> if (se.getSkill().getId() == s.getId()){
>>>>> commonSkillCount++;
>>>>> }
>>>>> }
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> if ((commonSkillCount - e.getSkillEngineerList().size()) <= 0){
>>>>> hardScore += commonSkillCount;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> and I got the result
>>>>>
>>>>> ID: 104[Skills: ABC 2,] - Trewq(8)[Skills: ABC 3,ABC 2,] ------
>>>>> Feasible(0)
>>>>> ID: 103[Skills: ABC 3,] - Trewq(8)[Skills: ABC 3,ABC 2,] ------
>>>>> Feasible(0)
>>>>> ID: 105[Skills: ABC 4,ABC 3,] - Poiuy(8)[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,ABC
>>>>> 3,ABC 4,] ------ Feasible(0)
>>>>> ID: 102[Skills: ABC 2,ABC 1,ABC 4,] - Qwert(8)[Skills: ABC 2,ABC
>>>>> 4,] ------ Broken(1)
>>>>> ID: 101[Skills: ABC 1,] - Lkjhg(8)[Skills: ABC 4,ABC 1,] ------
>>>>> Feasible(0)
>>>>> ID: 107[Skills: ABC 4,] - Lkjhg(8)[Skills: ABC 4,ABC 1,] ------
>>>>> Feasible(0)
>>>>> ID: 106[Skills: ABC 1,] - Qwert(8)[Skills: ABC 2,ABC 4,] ------
>>>>> Broken(1)
>>>>> ID: 108[Skills: ABC 3,ABC 2,] - Poiuy(8)[Skills: ABC 1,ABC 2,ABC
>>>>> 3,ABC 4,] ------ Feasible(0)
>>>>>
>>>>> there's a workorder that woud be disconsidered because no engineer
>>>>> have the required skill to complete it
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 2013/2/19 André Fróes <arfmoraes at gmail.com>
>>>>>
>>>>>> I forgot to post the code:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> public HardAndSoftScore calculateScore(Distributor distributor) {
>>>>>> int hardScore = 0;
>>>>>> int softScore = 0;
>>>>>> for (Engineer e : distributor.getEngineerList()){
>>>>>> long skill = e.getSkillEngineerList().get(0).getSkill().getId();
>>>>>> int requiredWorktime = 0;
>>>>>> List<Skill> requiredSkillList = new ArrayList<Skill>();
>>>>>> for (WorkOrder o : distributor.getWorkOrderList()){
>>>>>> if (e.equals(o.getEngineer())){
>>>>>> requiredWorktime += o.getRequiredWorktime();
>>>>>> for (SkillWorkOrder swo : o.getRequiredSkills()){
>>>>>> requiredSkillList.add(swo.getSkill());
>>>>>> }
>>>>>> }
>>>>>> }
>>>>>> int engineerAvailableTime = e.getWorktime() - requiredWorktime;
>>>>>> if (engineerAvailableTime < 0 ){
>>>>>> hardScore += engineerAvailableTime;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>> int commonSkillCount = 0;
>>>>>> for (SkillEngineer se : e.getSkillEngineerList()){
>>>>>> for (Skill s : requiredSkillList){
>>>>>> if (se.getSkill().getId() == s.getId()){
>>>>>> commonSkillCount++;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>> }
>>>>>> }
>>>>>> if (commonSkillCount != 0){
>>>>>> hardScore += commonSkillCount;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> return DefaultHardAndSoftScore.valueOf(hardScore, softScore);
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ( but i still want to try to create this in dsl rule after this
>>>>>> work :D )
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2013/2/19 André Fróes <arfmoraes at gmail.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I managed solving that problem even when there's more than one skill
>>>>>>> involved, but now my hard constraint of worktime breaks if I add more
>>>>>>> worktime than the sum of engineers worktime.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (8) is the worktime, my workorders all have a worktime of 4 hours,
>>>>>>> so, I got 32 available hours and 32 hours of workorders to be assigned
>>>>>>> right? When I stick to this plan, it works:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ----Compilation Result----
>>>>>>> Solved distribution with 8 work orders and 4 engineers:
>>>>>>> ID: 104[Skills: (1002) ABC 2] - Qwert(8)[Skills: (1002) ABC 2]
>>>>>>> ID: 103[Skills: (1003) ABC 3] - Trewq(8)[Skills: (1003) ABC 3]
>>>>>>> ID: 105[Skills: (1004) ABC 4] - Lkjhg(8)[Skills: (1004) ABC 4]
>>>>>>> ID: 102[Skills: (1002) ABC 2] - Qwert(8)[Skills: (1002) ABC 2]
>>>>>>> ID: 101[Skills: (1001) ABC 1] - Poiuy(8)[Skills: (1001) ABC 1]
>>>>>>> ID: 107[Skills: (1004) ABC 4] - Lkjhg(8)[Skills: (1004) ABC 4]
>>>>>>> ID: 106[Skills: (1001) ABC 1] - Poiuy(8)[Skills: (1001) ABC 1]
>>>>>>> ID: 108[Skills: (1003) ABC 3] - Trewq(8)[Skills: (1003) ABC 3]
>>>>>>> ---------------
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So, if I add another worktime with 4 hours, it messes everything,
>>>>>>> this is the outcome:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Solved distribution with 9 work orders and 4 engineers:
>>>>>>> ID: 104[Skills: (1002) ABC 2] - Qwert(8)[Skills: (1002) ABC 2]
>>>>>>> ID: 103[Skills: (1003) ABC 3] - Trewq(8)[Skills: (1003) ABC 3]
>>>>>>> ID: 105[Skills: (1004) ABC 4] - Lkjhg(8)[Skills: (1004) ABC 4]
>>>>>>> ID: 102[Skills: (1002) ABC 2] - Qwert(8)[Skills: (1002) ABC 2]
>>>>>>> ID: 101[Skills: (1001) ABC 1] - Poiuy(8)[Skills: (1001) ABC 1]
>>>>>>> ID: 107[Skills: (1004) ABC 4] - Lkjhg(8)[Skills: (1004) ABC 4]
>>>>>>> ID: 106[Skills: (1001) ABC 1] - Poiuy(8)[Skills: (1001) ABC 1]
>>>>>>> ID: 108[Skills: (1003) ABC 3] - Trewq(8)[Skills: (1003) ABC 3]
>>>>>>> ID: 109[Skills: (1003) ABC 3] - Trewq(8)[Skills: (1003) ABC 3]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ------------
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> to be precise, i don't know if it is because of worktime or skill
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2013/2/19 André Fróes <arfmoraes at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Just one correction, it is sorting correctly when there's one
>>>>>>>> workorder with a skill, if there's another workorder with same skill, it
>>>>>>>> doesn't sort that workorder to that skill.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This is what is happening:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Workorder skill ABC1 ------------ Engineer skill ABC1
>>>>>>>> Workorder skill ABC2 ------------ Engineer skill ABC2
>>>>>>>> Workorder skill ABC1 ------------ Engineer skill ABC2
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> but if there's only one workorder with one skill it works:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Workorder skill ABC1 ------------ Engineer skill ABC1
>>>>>>>> Workorder skill ABC2 ------------ Engineer skill ABC2
>>>>>>>> Workorder skill ABC3 ------------ Engineer skill ABC3
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> so, from the second workorder on, with a repeated required skill,
>>>>>>>> it doesn't sort properly
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2013/2/19 André Fróes <arfmoraes at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hello, since i'm not moving a step from where I am at dsl rule,
>>>>>>>>> I'm trying to do it with SimpleScoreCalculator, but the same is happening.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ------------
>>>>>>>>> public HardAndSoftScore calculateScore(Distributor distributor) {
>>>>>>>>> int hardScore = 0;
>>>>>>>>> int softScore = 0;
>>>>>>>>> for (Engineer e : distributor.getEngineerList()){
>>>>>>>>> long skill = e.getSkillEngineerList().get(0).getSkill().getId();
>>>>>>>>> int requiredWorktime = 0;
>>>>>>>>> long requiredSkill = 0l;
>>>>>>>>> for (WorkOrder o : distributor.getWorkOrderList()){
>>>>>>>>> if (e.equals(o.getEngineer())){
>>>>>>>>> requiredWorktime += o.getRequiredWorktime();
>>>>>>>>> requiredSkill = o.getRequiredSkills().get(0).getSkill().getId();
>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>> int engineerAvailableTime = e.getWorktime() - requiredWorktime;
>>>>>>>>> if (engineerAvailableTime < 0 ){
>>>>>>>>> hardScore += engineerAvailableTime;
>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>> if (requiredSkill == skill){
>>>>>>>>> softScore += requiredSkill;
>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>> return DefaultHardAndSoftScore.valueOf(hardScore, softScore);
>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>> ------------
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> wouldn't that have to fit since i'm comparing the 1st attribute
>>>>>>>>> of each skill list from engineers and workorders? And how can I weight
>>>>>>>>> which engineer would be better to a determined workorder if the workorder
>>>>>>>>> have more skills and so does the engineer?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing listrules-users at lists.jboss.orghttps://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-users/attachments/20130221/868e9dfe/attachment-0001.html
More information about the rules-users
mailing list