Xichao Su

Prof. Dr. Xichao Su

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

9Years (2018-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
28 December 2023 in Artificial Intelligence Review
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
XWXinwei Wang
Xinwei Wang
YWYihui Wang
Yihui Wang
XSXichao Su
Xichao Su
LWLei Wang
Lei Wang
CLChen Lu
Chen Lu
JLJie Liu
Jie Liu

24 May 2023 in Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
XGXiaohua Gao
Xiaohua Gao
LWLei Wang
Lei Wang
XYXinyong Yu
Xinyong Yu
XSXichao Su
Xichao Su
yu Dingyu Ding
yu Ding
XWXinwei Wang
Xinwei Wang

3 January 2023 in Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
XWXinwei Wang
Xinwei Wang
Bai LiBai Li
Bai Li
XSXichao Su
Xichao Su
HPHaijun Peng
Haijun Peng
LWLei Wang
Lei Wang
CWChao Wang
Chao Wang

23 October 2019 in Algorithms
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
WHWei Han
Wei Han
FGFang GUO
Fang GUO
XSXichao Su
Xichao Su
The scheduling problems in mass production, manufacturing, assembly, synthesis, and transportation, as well as internet services, can partly be attributed to a hybrid flow-shop scheduling problem (HFSP). To solve the problem, a reinforcement learning (RL) method for HFSP is studied for the first time in this paper. HFSP is described and attributed to the Markov Decision Processes (MDP), for which the special states, actions, and reward function are designed. On this basis, the MDP framework is established. The Boltzmann exploration policy is adopted to trade-off the exploration and exploitation during choosing action in RL. Compared with the first-come-first-serve strategy that is frequently adopted when coding in most of the traditional intelligent algorithms, the rule in the RL method is first-come-first-choice, which is more conducive to achieving the global optimal solution. For validation, the RL method is utilized for scheduling in a metal processing workshop of an automobile engine factory. Then, the method is applied to the sortie scheduling of carrier aircraft in continuous dispatch. The results demonstrate that the machining and support scheduling obtained by this RL method are reasonable in result quality, real-time performance and complexity, indicating that this RL method is practical for HFSP.


5 July 2022 in Complex & Intelligent Systems
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
YZYong Zhang
Yong Zhang
CLChangjiu Li
Changjiu Li
XSXichao Su
Xichao Su
RCRongwei Cui
Rongwei Cui
BWBing Wan
Bing Wan
Carrier-based aircraft maintenance tasks are conducted in time-critical, resource-constrained, and uncertain environments. Optimizing the scheduling allocation scheme of maintenance personnel and equipment, reasonably responding to uncertainty disturbances, and maintaining a high fleet availability are vital to the combat and training missions of carrier-based aircraft. The maintenance task scheduling problem for carrier-based aircraft is investigated in this study. First, a mathematical model for comprehensive carrier-based aircraft maintenance task scheduling that considers constraints such as maintenance personnel, equipment/shop, space, and parallel capacity is developed. Second, to generate the baseline scheduling scheme, an improved non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm II (I_NSGA-II) with local neighborhood search is proposed for the model optimization solution; I_NSGA-II uses the serial scheduling generation scheme mechanism to generate the time sequence scheduling scheme for maintenance personnel and equipment/workshop of different fleet sizes. Third, to cope with dynamic uncertainty disturbances, two reactive scheduling methods, i.e., complete rescheduling and partial rescheduling, are proposed to perform reactive scheduling corrections to the baseline schedule. Case simulation shows that the established mathematical model is reasonable and practical, and that the proposed I_NSGA-II is superior to the current mainstream algorithms. In addition, the decision maker can select between the two reactive scheduling methods flexibly based on the different forms and scales of disturbance.