processes
Article
Research on Green Reentrant Hybrid Flow Shop Scheduling
Problem Based on Improved Moth-Flame
Optimization Algorithm
Feng Xu 1 , Hongtao Tang 2, * , Qining Xun 1 , Hongyi Lan 2 , Xia Liu 1 , Wenfang Xing 1 , Tianyi Zhu 1 , Lei Wang 2
and Shibao Pang 2, *
Citation: Xu, F.; Tang, H.; Xun, Q.;
Lan, H.; Liu, X.; Xing, W.; Zhu, T.;
Wang, L.; Pang, S. Research on Green
Reentrant Hybrid Flow Shop
Scheduling Problem Based on
Improved Moth-Flame Optimization
Algorithm. Processes 2022, 10, 2475.
https://doi.org/10.3390/pr10122475
Academic Editor: Danyu Bai
Received: 18 September 2022
Accepted: 16 November 2022
Published: 22 November 2022
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Processes 2022, 10, 2475. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr10122475
1 The Sixth Scientific Research Department, Shandong Institute of Nonmetallic Materials, Jinan 250000, China
2 School of Mechanical and Electronic Engineering, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan430070, China
* Correspondence: tanghongtaozc@163.com (H.T.); pangshibao@whut.edu.cn (S.P.)
Abstract: To address the green reentrant hybrid flow shop-scheduling problem (GRHFSP), we
performed lifecycle assessments for evaluating the comprehensive impact of resources and the
environment. An optimization model was established to minimize the maximum completion time
and reduce the comprehensive impact of resources and the environment, and an improved moth-
flame optimization algorithm was developed. A coding scheme based on the number of reentry
layers, stations, and machines was designed, and a hybrid population initialization strategy was
developed, according to a situation wherein the same types of nonequivalent parallel machines were
used. Two different update strategies were designed for updating the coding methods of processes
and machines. The population evolution strategy was adopted to improve the local search ability
of the proposed algorithm and the quality of the solution. Through simulation experiments based
on different datasets, the effectiveness of the proposed algorithm was verified, and comparative
evaluations revealed that the proposed algorithm could solve the GRHFSP more effectively than
other well-known algorithms.
Keywords: reentrant hybrid flow shop scheduling; green scheduling; moth-flame optimization
algorithm; lifecycle assessment
1. Introduction
The reentrant scheduling problem was first studied by Graves et al. [1] in 1983. The
underlying assumption of the traditional scheduling problem is that each workpiece can be
processed on one machine at most once. However, during actual production, a workpiece
may be processed on the same machine multiple times. For example, in semiconductor
or wafer manufacturing, each component must be machined one or more times to ensure
reliability. This presents the reentrant scheduling problem.
Lifecycle assessment (LCA) is an evaluation technique for environmental attributes [2];
it is widely used for quantitative analysis and obtaining evaluation characteristics, so it
is applied in various fields. First, the energy consumption and environmental release
throughout the lifecycle of a product are quantified. Then the environmental impact of
such consumption and release is evaluated. Finally, opportunities to reduce such impacts
are identified and evaluated. In this study, LCA was applied to the green reentrant hybrid
flow shop-scheduling problem (GRHFSP) to construct an environmental impact assessment
model for resource scheduling and to analyze the impact of pollutant discharge during
production on the environment. Recently, the problem of reentry shop scheduling has
attracted considerable attention from scholars worldwide. To simultaneously improve the
green performance indices and economic performance indices of enterprises, we examined
the GRHFSP.
The main contributions of this study are as follows:
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/processes
Processes 2022, 10, 2475 2 of 16

(1) By combining the LCA with reentrant flow shop production, an environmental impact
assessment model for a reentrant flow shop was constructed and weighted with stan-
dardized environmental impact types. Thus, we obtained the lifecycle environmental
emission inventory of the reentrant flow shop.
(2) We constructed a GRHFSP model based on the LCA.
(3) We developed an improved moth-flame optimization (MFO) algorithm to solve the
GRHFSP.
(4) For ten benchmark problems, the proposed algorithm was compared with four classi-
cal multi-objective optimization algorithms, and the effectiveness and superiority of
the proposed algorithm were proved.
This remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 presents a literature
review. Section 3 discusses related problems and mathematical models proposed to solve
the considered problem. Section 4 introduces the original MFO algorithm and the design of
an improved MFO (IMFO) algorithm. In Section 5, the feasibility and effectiveness of the
IMFO algorithm are verified through simulations. Section 6 presents the conclusions of the
study and suggestions for future research.

2. Literature Review
We present a literature review from three perspectives: the GRHFSP, LCA, and algo-
rithms.

2.1. GRHFSP
When solving the reentrant scheduling problem, Dugardin et al. [3], Ying et al. [4],
and Geng et al. [5] studied the multi-objective reentrant mixed-flow shop-scheduling
problem, and the optimization objectives were to minimize the maximum completion
time, maximize the utilization rate of bottleneck equipment, minimize the number of
delays, and minimize the idle power consumption. To increase the production rate and
improve the service quality, Rifai et al. [6] studied distributed reentrant permutation
flow shop scheduling. Chamnanlor [7] studied the reentrant mixed-flow shop-scheduling
problem with time-interval constraints. However, the environment has been irreversibly
damaged owing to economic development, and recent studies have failed to consider such
environmental impacts. Therefore, the concept of green manufacturing has been proposed
to achieve economic growth while reducing the negative impact on the environment [8].
Most scholars who have studied reentrant scheduling did not consider the problem of green
manufacturing. Therefore, this paper proposes a method for achieving green scheduling
and solving the reentrant scheduling problem simultaneously.
With the development of the manufacturing industry, problems such as environmental
pollution and resource shortages have emerged. Thus, green shop-scheduling problems
have been proposed [9], and in recent years, scholars worldwide have conducted several
studies on green shop-scheduling. Guo et al. [10] proposed a novel ultra-low idle state
for machine tools, which is realized by switching off a part of the power load in an idle
status. Accordingly, an energy-efficient model for a flow shop was developed considering
three machine-tool statuses. In addition, a hybrid genetic algorithm (GA) was proposed
to solve this problem. Dong et al. [11] developed a distributed two-stage reentrant hybrid
flow shop-bilevel-scheduling model that considered the makespan, total carbon emissions,
and total energy consumption costs as the optimization objectives. An improved hybrid
salp swarm algorithm and nondominated sorting GA II (NSGA-III) have also been pro-
posed, and these algorithms have been proven to have significant advantages in solving
such problems. Ghorbani et al. [12] considered the permutation flow shop-scheduling
problem and aimed to minimize the total tardiness and total carbon emissions. Xiuli
et al. [13] considered a multi-objective flexible flow shop-scheduling problem with vari-
able processing times. Subsequently, a hybrid nondominated sorting GA with variable
local search was proposed to solve the problem. Lu et al. [14] were the first to study this
distributed permutation flow shop problem with limited buffers, with the objectives of
Processes 2022, 10, 2475 3 of 16

minimizing the makespan and total energy consumption. They proposed a Pareto-based
collaborative multi-objective optimization algorithm and designed a speed-scaling strategy
based on the problem. Experimental results indicated that the algorithm could be used
to solve this problem. Mansouri et al. [15] weighed the relationship between the energy
consumption and the maximum completion time for the green flow job shop-scheduling
problem and investigated the energy-saving potential in the manufacturing industry by
using different speeds of machining operations to produce different energy-consumption
levels. Tang et al. [16] studied energy-saving flexible job shop-scheduling under uncertain
conditions and designed an improved particle swarm optimization algorithm to solve this
problem. Relevant research results for batch processing problems [17,18] and the carbon
efficiency optimization scheduling of an assembly shop have also been reported [19,20].
Yin et al. [21] proposed a low-carbon mathematical scheduling model that could optimize
the production efficiency, energy efficiency, and noise for a flexible job shop environment
and proposed a multi-objective GA to efficiently solve this mixed-integer programming
model. In the present study, LCA was used to evaluate the environmental impact of the
job shop-scheduling process, determine the primary environmental impact types of the
process, and establish a green scheduling model based on the green indicator.

2.2. LCA
LCA is widely used in the agricultural and industrial food industries [22], in the
building energy sector [23], and for offshore wind turbines [24]. It is also applied to
research on green manufacturing-related problems. Basbagill et al. [25] proposed a method
for performing LCA during early decision-making to significantly reduce the implied
carbon footprint. Loiseau et al. [26] developed a green economy framework based on LCA
and cost effectiveness. In the present study, LCA was applied to the GRHFSP.

2.3. Algorithms
The GRHFSP is an NP-hard problem, and exact methods and heuristics are unsuit-
able for large-scale complex problems. By contrast, metaheuristics can be used to obtain
near-optimal solutions within a certain time. In recent years, various metaheuristics have
been developed and applied to shop floor scheduling problems. Common metaheuristics
include GAs [27], the gray wolf optimizer [28], the artificial bee colony algorithm [29], the
MFO algorithm [30], particle swarm optimization [31], the imperialist competitive algo-
rithm [32], and variable neighborhood search [33]. The MFO algorithm is a bionic algorithm.
Mirjalili et al. [34] proposed the basic MFO algorithm in 2015, tested 29 basic functions and
7 practical engineering problems, and verified its rationality. Since its introduction, the
MFO algorithm has been widely used in power scheduling [35], economic scheduling [36],
agricultural production [37], and surgical scheduling [38] and has achieved good results. It
can appropriately coordinate the global search and local search processes and avoid falling
into a local optimum. In addition, it has the advantages of fast convergence, a high search
accuracy, and strong robustness. Therefore, in this study, the MFO algorithm was used to
solve the GRHFSP.

3. Problem Description and Mathematical Modeling

3.1. Problem Description
3.1.1. GRHFSP
The GRHFSP can be explained as follows: N workpieces are processed at S stations.
There are mi (mi ≥ 1) unequal parallel machines at station i, and each workpiece goes
through all the stations in the same order. Any machine belonging to a station can be
selected for processing. After each workpiece visits the last station of the current layer, it
revisits the first station to start the processing of the next layer, and this process is repeated L
times until the workpiece processing is complete. Figure 1 presents a schematic of reentrant
machining with N workpieces and S stations, where each station has mi parallel machines.

Processes 2022, 10, 2475
through all the stations in the same order. Any machine belonging to a station can be
selected for processing. After each workpiece visits the last station of the current layer, it
revisits the first station to start the processing of the next layer, and this process is repeated
L times until the workpiece processing is complete. Figure 1 presents a schematic of reen-
trant machining with N workpieces and S stations, where each station has mi parallel4 of ma-
16
chines.

Station 1 Station 2 Station 3 Station S

Job 1 Machine 1 Machine 1 Machine 1 Machine 1

Job 2 Machine 2 Machine 2 Machine2 ... Machine 2

End
. . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . .

Job N Machine m1 Machine m2 Machinem3 Machine ms

Figure 1.
Figure 1. Reentrant
Reentrant machining.
machining.

The scheduling
The scheduling problem
problem hashas the
the following
following basic
basic assumptions:
assumptions:
(1)
(1) The
The machine
machine is available
available at time zero, and all workpieces can be machined at time
zero.
(2)
(2) Special circumstances, such as machine failures, are not considered.
(3)
(3) A workpiece
workpiece cancanbe
beprocessed
processedatat most
most on on a single
a single machine
machine at time.
at any any time. The work-
The workpieces
pieces
do not do noteach
affect affectother.
each other.
(4)
(4) The number of reentrant layers per workpiece, processing time of the sequence, and
specific energy consumption of the machine are known and constant.
(5)
(5) The buffer zone of each station is infinite.
(6)
(6) The processing time and path of the workpiece are deterministic.

3.1.2.
3.1.2. LCA for Environmental
Environmental Impact
Impact
In
In this study, the followingfour
this study, the following impact
four categories
impact were
categories considered
were in the
considered in LCA: climate
the LCA: cli-
change, atmospheric acidification, photochemical smog, and resource consumption.
mate change, atmospheric acidification, photochemical smog, and resource consumption. The en-
Processes 2022, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW
vironmental impact assessment model formodel
the lifecycle 5 of 18
The environmental impact assessment for theoflifecycle
a reentrant
of aworkshop
reentrantproduction
workshop
process
productionis depicted
processin
is Figure 2. in Figure 2.
depicted

Wafer
preparation
Carbon
Coal
dioxide Climate change
Wafer
manufacturing
Raw Carbon
Reentrant material monoxide Atmospheric
shop acidification
production Wafer test
process
Sulfur
lifecycle Electricity Photochemical
dioxide
smog
Chip packaging

Water Resource
consumption
Ultimate test

Figure 2. Environmental impact assessment model.

Figure 2. Environmental impact assessment model.

After classifying the impact of each emission substance, the environmental load in-
dex method was used to determine the contributions of various substances to the same
environmental impact type and to determine the comprehensive environmental load of
each impact type. The total amount of emissions resulting from each substance was thus
obtained. According to factory data, the standard values for global warming, acidification,
Processes 2022, 10, 2475 5 of 16

After classifying the impact of each emission substance, the environmental load
index method was used to determine the contributions of various substances to the same
environmental impact type and to determine the comprehensive environmental load of
each impact type. The total amount of emissions resulting from each substance was thus
obtained. According to factory data, the standard values for global warming, acidification,
photochemical pollution, and resource consumption are 2.902, 3.268, 0.048, and 5.903,
respectively. Therefore, climate change, acidification, and resource consumption were
deemed to be the main sources of the pollution caused by reentrant workshops.

3.2. Mathematical Model

3.2.1. Variable Definitions
(1) Indices and collection
I: Station serial number, i ∈ {1, 2, . . . . . . , S}
j: Workpiece serial number, j ∈ {1, 2, . . . . . . , N }
q: Machine code, q ∈ {1, 2, . . . . . . , M}
a: Machine serial number at station i, a ∈ {1, 2, . . . . . . , mi }
k: Process number of workpiece j, a ∈ {1, 2, . . . . . . , mi }
Ojk : kth process of workpiece j
Ui : Set of all operations processed at station i
Lj : Lj th -layer operation of workpiece j
(2) Parameters
S: Total number of workstations
N: Total number of workpieces
M: Total number of machines
mi : Number of parallel machines in station i, mi = 1, 2, 3, . . . . . . .
Nj : Total number of operations of workpiece j
L: Number of reentrant layers
We : Theoretical weight of workpiece j
Pjk : Processing time of operation Ojk
Tjq (Lj ): Machining time of the Lj th -layer operation of workpiece j on machine q
Wqj : Machining power of machine q for processing workpiece j
Wp : Startup energy consumption of machine q
Ws : Idling power of machine q
tsj : Idling time after machine q completes the processing of workpiece j
EIe: Resources and environmental impact of electricity generation (unit: (KWh)−1 )
EIr: Resources and environmental impact of raw materials (unit: (kg)−1 )
EIp: Resources and environmental impact of thermal processing (unit: (kg)−1 )
A: Sufficiently large positive number
(3) Decision variables
Yqt : If machine q is in the processing state at processing time t, it is 1; otherwise, it is 0.
rijka : If operation Ojk is processed on the ath machine at station i, it is 1; otherwise, it is 0.
Hjkj’k’ : If Ojk is processed before Oj’k’ , it is 1; otherwise, it is 0.
Sjk : Processing start time of operation Ojk
Ejk : Machining end time of operation Ojk
Cj : Completion time of workpiece j
Cmax : Completion time
EIL: Comprehensive resource and environmental impact

3.2.2. Model Building

According to the characteristics of the GRHFSP problem examined in this study,
minimizing the makespan and minimizing the comprehensive resource and environmental
impacts were selected as the targets.
Processes 2022, 10, 2475 6 of 16

(1) Minimizing the makespan: The time at which the last workpiece is processed is
referred to as the maximum completion time of the entire process.
f 1 = minCmax = maxCj (1)

(2) Minimizing the comprehensive resource and environmental impacts: These include
the impacts of raw material lifecycle emissions, the environmental impacts of elec-
tricity consumption, and the environmental impacts of resources in the production
process. The minimization of the comprehensive resource and environmental impacts
is a measure of the impact of resource consumption during the entire production
process and pollutant discharge on environmental resources and can be expressed as
f 2 = minEIL (2)
Among these impacts, the resource and environmental impact of raw materials f EIr is
as follows:
N
f EIr = EIr · ∑ We j (3)
j =1

The resource and environmental impact of thermal processing f EI p is

S
f EI p = EI p· ∑ Wei (4)
i =1

The effects of energy consumption cover the machine state, idling state, and energy
consumption at startup. The resource and environmental impact of electricity consumption
f EIe is expressed as follows:

Cmax N M Nj L+1

∑ ∑∑∑∑




f EIe = EIe· Wqj Tjq L j ·Yqt r jika + Wp + Ws tsj 1 − Yqt 1 − r jika (5)
t =0 j =1 q =1 k =1 l =1

Therefore, the comprehensive resource and environmental impact, i.e., EIL, is ex-
pressed as
EIL = f EIr + f EI p + f EIe (6)
Hence,
mi mi 0
∑ ∑ ri0 j(k+1)a Sj(k+1) ; ∀i, j0 ,


rijka S jk + Pjk ≤ j, k (7)
a =1 a =1
mi
∑ rijka = 1; ∀i, j, Ojk ∈ Ui (8)
a =1




A 2 − rijka − rij0 k0 a + A 1 − Hjkj0 k0 + S j0 k0 − S jk ≥ Pjk
(9)
∀i, j < j0 , a, O jk ∈ Ui , O j0 k0 ∈ Ui



A 2 − rijka − rij0 k0 a + AHjkj0 k0 + S j0 k0 − S jk ≥ Pjk
(10)
∀i, j < j0 , a, O jk ∈ Ui , O j0 k0 ∈ Ui



A 2 − rijka − rij0 k0 a + S jk0 − S jk ≥ Pjk
(11)
∀i, j < k0 , a, O jk ∈ Ui , O jk0 ∈ Ui
Ejk = S jk + Pjk ; S jk > 0; ∀ j, k (12)
S mi
∑ ∑ rijNj a


Cj = S jNj + PjNj ; ∀ j (13)
i =1 a =1

Cj ≤ Cmax ; ∀ j (14)
Constraint (7) ensures that the start processing time of operation Oj(k+1) is not earlier than
the processing completion time of operation Ojk . Constraint (8) ensures that each process can
Processes 2022, 10, 2475 7 of 16

be processed on only one machine at the corresponding station. Constraints (9)–(11) ensure
that each machine can simultaneously process at most one process. Constraint (12) specifies
the start and finish times of operation Ojk . Constraints (13) and (14) express the maximum
makespan.

4. Algorithm Design
4.1. Principle of MFO Algorithm
The MFO algorithm is based on the lateral positioning of moths flying at night and
uses a position update mechanism based on the flame population. The flame population
represents excellent individuals among the moth population, which are generated according
to the fitness values of the excellent individuals. During the renewal process, the moth
population uses its corresponding flame population to update its position. As the iteration
proceeds, the flame population decreases linearly until only the optimal individual remains.
In the process of population position renewal, moths exceeding the number of flame
populations move around the worst flame. The sets of moths and flames are represented
by matrices as follows:
m11 m12 . . . m1d
m21 m22 . . . m2d
M= . . .. .. (15)
.. .. . .
mn1 mn2 ... mnd
F11 F12 ... F1d
F21 F22 ... F2d
F= . .. .. .. (16)
.. . . .
Fn1 Fn2 ... Fnd
where n represents the number of moths, d denotes the dimension of a variable, mnd
represents the position of the nth moth, and Fnd represents the position of the nth flame.

4.2. Design of IMFO Algorithm

4.2.1. Encoding and Decoding
The MFO algorithm is often used for the optimization of continuous-function problems
but is rarely used for the optimization of discrete problems. However, the GRHFSP is a
typical discrete problem that involves multiple processing instances of workpieces, multiple
stations, and multiple machine selections. Therefore, in this study, we designed a coding
rule based on the number of reentrant layers, stations, and machines. For example, let
X = [Xp | Xm ] represent a feasible solution to the scheduling problem. Herein, the vector
Xp represents process ordering based on the number of reentrant layers, the vector Xm
represents machine selection, and a one-to-one correspondence exists between each vector.
A problem with two workpieces and two stations is considered as an example. Herein,
the number of reentrant layers per workpiece is three, and the number of nonequivalent
parallel machines at each station is two. The specific coding steps are as follows:
Step 1: Process-layer coding. The coding of the process ordering layer adopts process-
based integer coding rules; the element in the Xp vector represents the workpiece number,
and the total number of occurrences of this element is equal to the product of the number of
stations S and the number of reentrant layers L. Each occurrence of S represents a layer of
operations, and the order in which the elements appear in any layer of operations indicates
to the process and station of the workpiece. Herein, Xp = [1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 1, 1, 2, 1, 2, 2, 2], as
shown in Figure 3. Considering Workpiece 1 as an example, the “1” in the first position
indicates that Process 1 of the first layer operation of Workpiece 1 is performed on a certain
machine at Station 1. The “1” in the second position indicates that Process 2 of the first layer
operation of Workpiece 1 is performed on a certain machine at Station 2. After Process 2
is performed, the first layer operation of Workpiece 1 terminates. The value of “1” in the
third position indicates that the second operation of Workpiece 1 is processed on a certain
 as shown in Figure 3. Considering Workpiece 1 as an example, the “1” in the first position
indicates that Process 1 of the first layer operation of Workpiece 1 is performed on a cer-
tain machine at Station 1. The “1” in the second position indicates that Process 2 of the
first layer operation of Workpiece 1 is performed on a certain machine at Station 2. After
Processes 2022, 10, 2475 8 of 16
Process 2 is performed, the first layer operation of Workpiece 1 terminates. The value of
“1” in the third position indicates that the second operation of Workpiece 1 is processed
on a certain machine at Station 1. The “1” in the sixth position indicates that Process 2 of
machine at Station 1. The “1” in the sixth position indicates that Process 2 of the third layer
the third layer operation of Workpiece 1 is performed on a certain machine at Station 2.
operation of Workpiece 1 is performed on a certain machine at Station 2.

Figure 3. Encoding
Figure andand
3. Encoding decoding schematic.
decoding schematic.

Step Step 2: Machine-layer

2: Machine-layer encoding.
encoding. TheThe element
element in in
thethe machine-selectionlayer
machine-selection layer XXmm de-
denotes the machine number of the processing machine at the corresponding
notes the machine number of the processing machine at the corresponding station station of the
of the
corresponding process of Xp . Elements 1 and 2 represent Machines 1 and 2, respectively. As
corresponding process of Xp. Elements 1 and 2 represent Machines 1 and 2, respectively.
shown in Figure 3, the first element of the vector Xm = [1, 2, 1, 2, 2, 1, 1, 2, 1, 2, 1, 2] represents
As shown
Machinein 1Figure 3, the
at Station 1. first element
The second of therepresents
element vector XmMachine
= [1, 2, 1, 2,Station
2 at 2, 1, 1,2,2,and
1, 2,the
1, 2]
represents Machine
third element 1 at Station
represents 1. The
Machine 1 atsecond
Station element
1. The lastrepresents MachineMachine
element represents 2 at Station
2 at 2,
and the third
Station 2. element represents Machine 1 at Station 1. The last element represents Ma-
chine 2 atAccording
Station 2. to the above coding process, a feasible solution can be obtained as
X = [1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 1, 1, 2, 1, 2, 2, 2|1, 2, 1, 2, 2, 1, 1, 2, 1, 2, 1, 2]. The decoding of X
involves the inverse process of encoding Xp and Xm , and Ojkd represents the kth process of
workpiece j for the dth layer.

4.2.2. Population Initialization

The GRHFSP has a large space for generating solutions during population initializa-
tion. To ensure the speed and quality of the algorithm, we used a combination of random
generation and strategy selection to generate the initial solutions. Specifically, 50% of the
initial population was randomly generated, and the remaining 50% was generated using
the strategy-selection method based on the optimized completion time. In addition, the
M and F matrices must be initialized. First, an M matrix containing n moths is randomly
generated. Thereafter, the position elements of each moth and the process layer elements
of each initial solution are sequentially obtained. The fitness value of each individual is
determined, and nondominated sorting is performed. The position element of the moth
corresponding to the individual with the best fitness value is placed in the first row of ma-
trix F. The position element of the moth corresponding to the individual with a suboptimal
fitness value is placed in the second row of matrix F. By the time the position element of
the moth corresponding to the individual with the worst fitness value is placed in the last
row of matrix F, a complete initial F matrix is generated.
Processes 2022, 10, 2475 9 of 16

4.2.3. Moth Location Update Strategy

In the MFO algorithm, updating the moth position significantly affects the feasible
solution. Herein, both the moth and flame can be considered feasible solutions. The
difference between them lies in the manner in which they are processed and updated in
each iteration. The moth constitutes the main body of the actual search, moving in the
search space, and the flame denotes the best position reached by the moth. Flames can be
considered markers discarded by moths while searching the search space, and each moth
updates the flame when it finds a better solution. According to this mechanism, the moth
cannot miss its best solution.
A logarithmic spiral is selected to update the operating mechanism of moths and is
defined as follows:
Mi = Di ·ebt · cos(2πt) + Fj (17)

where Mi represents the ith moth, Fj represents the jth flame, b is the logarithmic spiral
shape constant, t represents a random number in the range [–1, 1], and Di represents the
distance between the ith and jth flames.
 
Di =  Fj − Mi  (18)

Equation (17) describes the spiral flight path of the moths and determines the next
position of the moth relative to the flame. The parameter t indicates the closeness of the
moth’s next position to the flame (t = −1 indicates the position where the moth is closest to
the flame, and t = 1 indicates the position where the moth is farthest from the flame.)
As different coding methods were used in the process ordering layer and machine-
selection layer, to avoid the use of the same update method for both and to avoid producing
inferior solutions, in this study, different update strategies were selected for updating
according to the above coding rules. For the process sorting layer, the process sorting was
changed by updating the M matrix in an ascending order. The machine-selection layer was
updated using swaps and transformations.
Step 1: Equation (17) is used to update the matrix M. If this is the first iteration, the
initial matrices M and F are used. Each successive iteration then uses the updated matrices
M and F after the previous iteration to calculate the distance between the moth and the
flame.
Step 2: For the process layer in the individual, the position of the smallest random
number in the position element of the moth is recorded and marked. The value of this
position in the offspring individual is equal to the value of the first position in the parent
individual. The value at the position of the child, where the second-smallest random
number appears in the moth position element, is equal to the value at the second position
of the parent. Sequential updates are performed until the process layer in the offspring
is updated. As shown in Figure 4, for the machine layer in the individual, exchange and
deformation operations are used between parent individuals to generate the machine
layer of the child individual. The specific operation is illustrated in Figure 5. First, two
machine parent individuals from the population are selected randomly and denoted as
Xm1 and Xm2. Thereafter, machine = {1, 2, 3} is randomly assigned to two nonempty and
complementary sets MachineSet1 = {1} and MachineSet2 = {2, 3}. Finally, the machine serial
number contained in MachineSet1 is selected from parent Xm1 ; the order is maintained,
and it is copied into child Xm1 . The machine number contained in MachineSet2 is selected
from parent Xm2 and then inserted sequentially into the vacant position in child Xm . After
the exchange operation, a deformation operation is performed on the generated offspring
Xm , which can increase the diversity of the population.

Processes 2022, 10, 2475
complementary sets MachineSet1 = {1} and MachineSet2 = {2, 3}. Finally, the machin
complementary sets MachineSet1 = {1} and MachineSet2 = {2, 3}. Finally, the machine serial
number contained in MachineSet1 is selected from parent Xm1; the order is main
number contained in MachineSet1 is selected from parent Xm1; the order is maintained,
and it is copied into child Xm1. The machine number contained in MachineSet2 is s
and it is copied into child Xm1. The machine number contained in MachineSet2 is selected
from parent Xm2 and then inserted sequentially into the vacant position in child X
from parent Xm2 and then inserted sequentially into the vacant position in child Xm. After
the exchange operation, a deformation operation is performed on the generated of
the exchange operation, a deformation operation is performed on the generated offspring
10 of 16
Xm, which can increase the diversity of the population.
Xm, which can increase the diversity of the population.

Figure 4. Process Figure

level update.
4. Process level update.
Figure 4. Process level update.
MachineSet1={1}
MachineSet1={1}
MachineSet2={2,3}
MachineSet2={2,3}

3 2 1 1 2 3 1 3 2 2 1 3
ParentX m1 3 2ParentX
1 m1 1 2 3 1 3 2 2 1 3

OffspringX 2 3 1 1 3 2 1 2 3 3 1 2
OffspringX m 2 3 1 m 1 3 2 1 2 3 3 1 2

1 2 3 3 1 2 2 3 1 3Deformation
1 2 Deformation
1 OffspringX
2 3 m2 3 1 2 2 3 1 3 1 2
OffspringX m2

2 3 1 3 3 2 1 2 1 3 1 2
2 3 1 3 3 2 1 2 1 3 1 2

Figure 5. Swap Figure

and 5. Swap and
deformation deformation diagram.
diagram.
Figure 5. Swap and deformation diagram.

Step 3: The fitness value of the offspring individuals is calculated, and the fitness
values of the offspring and parent individuals are sorted. The fitness values of the offspring
and parent are Pareto nondominated. If they belong to the same Pareto rank, they are
sorted according to the crowding distance [39].
Step 4: According to the sorting results, n individuals with the best fitness values are
selected to create a new population. To arrange the population in accordance with the
rules, the position element of the moth corresponding to the individual with the best fitness
value is placed in the first row of the matrix F, and the position element corresponding to
the moth with the second-best fitness value is placed in the second row of the matrix F. A
new matrix F is thus generated, as the position element of the moth corresponding to the
individual with the worst fitness value is placed in the last row of F.
Step 5: Next, it is determined whether the system has reached the maximum number
of iterations. If this is true, updating is terminated, and the optimal solution is output.
Otherwise, Steps 1–4 are repeated until the maximum number of iterations is reached.

4.2.4. Flame Number Update

In the moth update mechanism, moths are only allowed to move in the direction of the
flame, which causes the MFO algorithm to fall quickly into a local optimum. To avoid this
situation, each moth can only use one flame in Equation (17) to update its position, after
which the moths are sorted according to the fitness values of the corresponding individuals,
 Processes 2022, 10, 2475 11 of 16

and the positions of the moths are updated relative to their corresponding flames. Allowing
them to move around different flames improves the update efficiency of moths in the search
space and reduces the local optimal stagnation rate.
Consequently, moths are required to update their positions around different flames,
which facilitates global exploration. However, this is not conducive to the development of
an optimal solution. To solve this problem, Equation (19) is used to reduce the number of
flames in the iterative process, and moths that exceed the number of flames must update
their positions relative to the last flame.

N−1
 
f lame no = round N − l ∗ (19)
T

Here, l represents the number of current iterations, N represents the maximum number
of flames, and T represents the maximum number of iterations.

Processes 2022, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW

4.2.5. IMFO Algorithm Flowchart 12 of 18
According to the above description, a flowchart of the IMFO algorithm used in this
study is presented in Figure 6.

Reduce the number of flames

Start Record the optimal in the F matrix according to the
solution set flame update formula
First half of the
parent population
Initialization
gene
parameters
Calculate the distance from the
Determine whether the No
moth to the flame and update
Initialize the M termination condition is the M matrix
matrix met

Yes
Calculate population fitness Update the first half genes of Generate a new
value the population according to the offspring
Output optimal
solution set updated M matrix population

Sort the population for non-

dominated solutions and End Second half
determine the F matrix of the parent
population
gene Recombination
Mutation operation
operation with
with mutation
recombination
probability
probability

Figure IMFOalgorithm
Figure6.6.IMFO algorithmflowchart.
flowchart.

5.5.Experiments
Experimentsand
andDiscussion
Discussion
5.1.Parameter
5.1. ParameterSettings
Settings
Toaddress
To address the reentrant
reentrant mixed-flow
mixed-flowworkshop-scheduling
workshop-scheduling problem,
problem,10 examples
10 examples of stan-
of
dard gas gas
standard manufacturing
manufacturing plants werewere
plants introduced for testing.
introduced The parameters
for testing. of the tests
The parameters are
of the
presented
tests in Table 1,inand
are presented the names
Table 1, and of thenames
the examples consist
of the of letters
examples and numbers.
consist of lettersFor
andexample,
num-
“L2i10j20-2”
bers. indicates
For example, that the number
“L2i10j20-2” of reentrant
indicates layers is 2,
that the number ofthe numberlayers
reentrant of locations is num-
is 2, the 10, the
number of jobs is 20, each station has two processing machines, and the processing
ber of locations is 10, the number of jobs is 20, each station has two processing machines, time is a
random number that obeys the discrete uniform distribution of [1, 10] [40].
and the processing time is a random number that obeys the discrete uniform distribution
of [1, 10] [40].
Processes 2022, 10, 2475 12 of 16

Table 1. Study parameters.

Example Number of Location Number of Number of Processing

Name Reentrant Layers Number Jobs Machines Time
L2i10j20-2 2 10 20 2 [1, 10]
L2i6j14-2 2 6 14 2 [1, 10]
L2i8j12-2 2 8 12 2 [1, 10]
L2i6j16-2 2 6 16 2 [1, 10]
L2i8j16-2 2 8 16 2 [1, 10]
L6i6j30-4 6 6 30 4 [1, 10]
L6i6j40-4 6 6 40 4 [1, 10]
L6i14j44-4 6 14 44 4 [1, 10]
L6i13j25-4 6 13 25 4 [1, 10]
L6i14j29-4 6 14 29 4 [1, 10]

For multi-objective problems, three evaluation criteria are used to evaluate the quality
and diversity of nondominated solutions. The specific methods are as follows.
(1) Convergence index: The approximation degree between the obtained Pareto front and
the optimal Pareto front is evaluated. A smaller value indicates better convergence of
the algorithm and better diversity of noninferior solutions.

∑ N d
j
j =1
γ= (20)
N
(2) Diffusion of nondominant solutions, SNS: When quantifying the diversity of nondom-
inant solutions, a larger SNS value corresponds to richer diversity of nondominant
solutions and better quality of the solutions.
v
u N
1
∑
u
2
SNS = t γ − dj (21)
N − 1 j =1

(3) The dominance rate POD quantifies the ability of an algorithm to dominate other
algorithms. A higher POD value corresponds to better performance of the algorithm.
  
{ xki ∈ Xi }∃ xkj ∈ X j , i ∈ j : xki < xkj 
  
POD ( X1 , X2 , · · · , Xn ) =  
Xj  (22)

5.2. Discussion
To verify the effectiveness of the IMFO algorithm, it was compared with the improved
gray wolf optimization algorithm, improved NSGA-II, multi-objective particle swarm
optimization, and discrete artificial bee colony algorithm. To ensure the validity of the com-
parisons, the operating environment for all experiments comprised a 2.7-GHz CPU, 8 GB of
random access memory, and a 64-bit Windows 7 system computer, and the programming
environment was MATLAB 2016. To avoid the chance of an experiment, each algorithm was
run 20 times independently, and the mean values of the three aforementioned evaluation
indicators were calculated to verify the quality of the nondominated solution obtained
by the algorithm. In this paper, the optimal value of each index is marked in bold. As
indicated by Table 2, the IMFO algorithm is superior to the other algorithms with regard to
index analysis, as indicated by its better convergence and diversity of noninferior solutions.
From the perspective of the SNS index, the IMFO algorithm achieved better results than the
other algorithms for most examples, indicating that the nondominated solutions obtained
by the IMFO algorithm were more diverse. Regarding the POD index, the dominant power
of the nondominant solution obtained by the IMFO algorithm was the best in most cases. In
general, as shown in Table 2, the γ, SNS, and POD parameters of the IMFO algorithm were
Processes 2022, 10, 2475 13 of 16

better than those of the other four algorithms. This indicates that the IMFO algorithm is
highly competitive with regard to the convergence, diversity, and quality of the solutions.

Table 2. Comparison of the results for examples of different scales.

Numerical IMFO IGWO DABC NSGA-II MOPSO

Example γ SNS POD γ SNS POD γ SNS POD γ SNS POD γ SNS POD
L2i10j20-2 60.87 67.47 52.09 66.48 34.76 45.54 181.87 46.46 54.38 90.94 35.17 45.54 149.24 40.30 47.56
L2i6j14-2 44.29 72.36 35.4 67.79 68.86 28.61 82.15 14.80 27.77 76.92 18.37 30.57 148.84 13.26 17.97
L2i8j12-2 25.72 58.06 68.77 96.34 48.44 67.25 82.28 64.97 29.06 61.36 57.11 40.83 53.90 53.31 57.51
L2i6j16-2 86.26 68.27 83.18 99.35 48.95 40.83 209.22 51.63 24.73 157.96 77.31 40.11 187.81 67.94 43.45
L2i8j16-2 83.28 51.79 52.00 55.23 26.28 34.64 163.00 45.83 15.60 146.22 35.87 48.58 116.38 39.31 51.91
L6i6j30-4 71.81 60.85 78.47 51.50 25.92 74.07 225.54 48.36 61.09 125.36 53.61 74.12 204.51 44.31 27.57
L6i6j40-4 47.87 72.75 66.26 115.26 55.29 47.45 135.54 48.07 48.95 97.09 70.36 47.45 83.25 58.08 42.39
L6i14j44-4 104.90 80.78 83.73 126.74 52.76 57.00 263.16 45.01 63.05 178.42 79.97 69.43 195.56 64.66 23.89
L6i13j25-4 122.47 82.15 74.84 162.12 28.12 67.72 282.19 72.05 30.43 225.13 63.05 57.00 148.10 62.13 37.47
L6i14j29-4 91.52 83.36 86.77 89.25 77.99 61.69 386.25 77.07 44.31 273.81 67.19 67.72 289.01 73.35 31.86

For the calculation example L2i6j14-2, the Pareto nondominated solution of a ball
obtained via the above five algorithms is depicted in Figure 7. From the distribution quality
Processes 2022, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 15 of 18
of the solutions in the figure, it can be inferred that the nondominated solutions obtained
by the IMFO algorithm are distributed on the side closer to the minimum coordinate value,
and the quality of the solutions is better than that for the other algorithms.

7. Pareto first frontier

Figure 7. frontier distribution
distribution map.
map.

For L2I6J14-2, the green

green reentry
reentry mixed-flow
mixed-flow shop-scheduling
shop-scheduling problem was solvedsolved
using
using the
the IMFO
IMFO algorithm. The solution
algorithm. The solution obtained
obtained isis presented
presented in
in Figure
Figure 8.
8. Herein,
Herein, the
the
abscissa indicates the processing time, and the ordinate indicates the processing station,
abscissa indicates the processing time, and the ordinate indicates the processing station,
wherein
wherein numbers
numbers 1–6
1–6 correspond
correspond toto the
the first
first process
process and
and 6–12
6–12 correspond
correspond to
to the
the second
second
process. The processing time for obtaining the solution was 518
process. The processing time for obtaining the solution was 518 h. h.
Processes 2022, 10, 2475
x FOR PEER REVIEW 1614of
of 18
16

Figure 8. Scheduling-scheme Gantt chart.

Figure 8. Scheduling-scheme Gantt chart.

6. Conclusions and Future Prospects

6. Conclusions and Future Prospects
An IMFO algorithm was developed to solve the reentrant hybrid flow shop-schedul-
An IMFO algorithm was developed to solve the reentrant hybrid flow shop-scheduling
ing problem. First, the problem was evaluated, and a GRHFSP model was constructed
problem. First, the problem was evaluated, and a GRHFSP model was constructed with the
with the objective of minimizing the maximum completion time and the combined impact
objective of minimizing the maximum completion time and the combined impact of the
of the resources and environment. Subsequently, the MFO algorithm was improved by
resources and environment. Subsequently, the MFO algorithm was improved by applying
applying the characteristics of the model; this included (1) designing a new coding
the characteristics of the model; this included (1) designing a new coding scheme, (2) chang-
scheme, (2) changing the strategy of population initialization, and (3) revising the update
ing the strategy of population initialization, and (3) revising the update mechanism and
mechanism and evolution strategy. Finally, the feasibility and efficiency of the proposed
evolution strategy. Finally, the feasibility and efficiency of the proposed IMFO algorithm
IMFO algorithm
were verified were verified
via simulation via simulation
experiments experimentstest
on different-scale on examples.
different-scale test exam-
ples. In the future, we aim to extend our analysis in the following three aspects: (1) the
In of
results thethis
future,
studywecan
aimbetoused
extendto our analysis
address in thedisturbance
dynamic following threeeventsaspects: (1) the
occurring in
results
actual production processes that interfere with normal production; (2) to conduct a in
of this study can be used to address dynamic disturbance events occurring ac-
more
tual productionanalysis
comprehensive processes thatenvironmental
of the interfere withimpact
normalofproduction;
manufacturing (2) to conduct aa more
enterprises, more
comprehensive analysis of the environmental impact of manufacturing
specific LCA model covering the entire process from the extraction of raw materials enterprises,
to thea
more specific LCA
abandonment model covering
of products the entireand
can be developed; process from
(3) the IMFO the algorithm
extraction can
of raw materials
be compared
to therecently
with abandonment
developedof products can be
metaheuristic developed;
algorithms, and
such as (3)
thethe
redIMFO algorithm[41]
deer algorithm canand
be
compared with recently developed
the lion optimization algorithm [42]. metaheuristic algorithms, such as the red deer algo-
rithm [41] and the lion optimization algorithm [42].
Author Contributions: Conceptualization L.W.; methodology Q.X.; software, H.L. and T.Z.; vali-
Author Contributions:
dation, X.L.; Conceptualization
writing—original L.W.; methodology
draft preparation, Q.X.; software,
F.X.; writing—review and H.L. andF.X.
editing, T.Z.;and
valida-
S.P.;
tion, X.L.; writing—original
supervision, draft preparation,
W.X.; project administration, H.T.; F.X.; writing—review
funding andAll
acquisition, H.T. editing, F.X.
authors andread
have S.P.;and
su-
pervision, W.X.;
agreed to the project version
published administration, H.T.; funding acquisition, H.T.. All authors have read and
of the manuscript.
agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research is financially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China
Funding:
under GrantThis(No.research is financially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of
51905396).
China under Grant (No. 51905396).
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this
Data Availability
published article. Statement: All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this
published article.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Processes 2022, 10, 2475 15 of 16

References
1. Graves, S.C.; Meal, H.C.; Stefek, D.; Zeghmi, A.H. Scheduling of re-entrant flow shops. J. Oper. Manag. 1983, 3, 197–207. [CrossRef]
2. Chowdhury, Z.; Ahmed, T.; Antunes, A. Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of Leather Processing Industry: A Case Study of
Bangladesh. J. Soc. Leather Technol. Chem. 2018, 102, 18–26.
3. Dugardin, F.; Yalaoui, F.; Amodeo, L. New multi-objective method to solve reentrant hybrid flow shop scheduling problem. Eur. J.
Oper. Res. 2010, 203, 22–31. [CrossRef]
4. Ying, K.; Lin, S.; Wan, S. Bi-objective reentrant hybrid flowshop scheduling: An iterated Pareto greedy algorithm. Int. J. Prod. Res.
2014, 52, 5735–5747. [CrossRef]
5. Geng, K.F.; Ye, C.M.; Cao, L.; Liu, L. Multi-Objective Reentrant Hybrid Flowshop Scheduling with Machines Turning on and off
Control Strategy Using Improved Multi-Verse Optimizer Algorithm. Math. Probl. Eng. 2019, 2019, 2573873. [CrossRef]
6. Rifai, A.P.; Nguyen, H.T.; Dawal, S. Multi-objective adaptive large neighborhood search for distributed reentrant permutation
flow shop scheduling. Appl. Soft Comput. 2016, 40, 42–57. [CrossRef]
7. Chamnanlor, C.; Sethanan, K.; Gen, M.; Chien, C.-F. Embedding ant system in genetic algorithm for re-entrant hybrid flow shop
scheduling problems with time window constraints. J. Intell. Manuf. 2017, 28, 1915–1931. [CrossRef]
8. Luo, H.; Du, B.; Huang, G.Q.; Chen, H.; Li, X. Hybrid flow shop scheduling considering machine electricity consumption cost. Int.
J. Prod. Econ. 2013, 146, 423–439. [CrossRef]
9. Li, M.; Wang, G. A review of green shop scheduling problem. Inf. Sci. 2022, 589, 478–496. [CrossRef]
10. Guo, J.; Wang, L.; Kong, L.; Lv, X. Energy-efficient flow-shop scheduling with the strategy of switching the power statuses of
machines. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 2022, 53, 102649. [CrossRef]
11. Dong, J.; Ye, C. Green scheduling of distributed two-stage reentrant hybrid flow shop considering distributed energy resources
and energy storage system. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2022, 169, 108146. [CrossRef]
12. Ghorbani Saber, R.; Ranjbar, M. Minimizing the total tardiness and the total carbon emissions in the permutation flow shop
scheduling problem. Comput. Oper. Res. 2022, 138, 105604. [CrossRef]
13. Xiuli, W.; Xianli, S.; Qi, C. Multi-Objective Flexible Flow Shop Scheduling Problem Considering Variable Processing Time due to
Renewable Energy. Sustainability 2018, 10, 841.
14. Lu, C.; Huang, Y.; Meng, L.; Gao, L.; Zhang, B.; Zhou, J. A Pareto-based collaborative multi-objective optimization algorithm for
energy-efficient scheduling of distributed permutation flow-shop with limited buffers. Robot. Comput.-Integr. Manuf. 2022, 74,
102277. [CrossRef]
15. Mansouri, S.A.; Aktas, E.; Besikci, U. Green scheduling of a two-machine flowshop: Trade-off between makespan and energy
consumption. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2016, 248, 772–788. [CrossRef]
16. Tang, D.; Dai, M.; Salido, M.A.; Giret, A. Energy-efficient dynamic scheduling for a flexible flow shop using an improved particle
swarm optimization. Comput. Ind. 2016, 81, 82–95. [CrossRef]
17. Masmoudi, O.; Yalaoui, A.; Ouazene, Y.; Chehade, H. Multi-item capacitated lot-sizing problem in a flow-shop system with
energy consideration. IFAC-Pap. 2016, 49, 301–306. [CrossRef]
18. Giglio, D.; Paolucci, M.; Roshani, A. Integrated lot sizing and energy-efficient job shop scheduling problem in manufactur-
ing/remanufacturing systems. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 148, 624–641. [CrossRef]
19. Nilakantan, M.J.; Ponnambalam, S.G.; Jawahar, N. Design of energy efficient RAL system using evolutionary algorithms. Eng.
Comput. 2016, 33. [CrossRef]
20. Li, Z.; Tang, Q.; Zhang, L. Minimizing energy consumption and cycle time in two-sided robotic assembly line systems using
restarted simulated annealing algorithm. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 135, 508–522. [CrossRef]
21. Yin, L.; Li, X.; Gao, L.; Lu, C.; Zhang, Z. A novel mathematical model and multi-objective method for the low-carbon flexible job
shop scheduling problem. Sustain. Comput. Inform. Syst. 2017, 13, 15–30. [CrossRef]
22. Roy, P.; Nei, D.; Orikasa, T.; Xu, Q.; Okadome, H.; Nakamura, N.; Shiina, T. A review of life cycle assessment (LCA) on some food
products. J. Food Eng. 2009, 90, 1–10. [CrossRef]
23. Zheng, G.; Jing, Y.; Huang, H.; Zhang, X.; Gao, Y. Application of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and extenics theory for building
energy conservation assessment. Energy 2009, 34, 1870–1879. [CrossRef]
24. Ren, Z.; Verma, A.S.; Li, Y.; Teuwen, J.J.; Jiang, Z. Offshore wind turbine operations and maintenance: A state-of-the-art review.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 144, 110886. [CrossRef]
25. Basbagill, J.; Flager, F.; Lepech, M.; Fischer, M. Application of life-cycle assessment to early stage building design for reduced
embodied environmental impacts. Build. Environ. 2013, 60, 81–92. [CrossRef]
26. Loiseau, E.; Saikku, L.; Antikainen, R.; Droste, N.; Hansjürgens, B.; Pitkänen, K.; Leskinen, P.; Kuikman, P.; Thomsen, M. Green
economy and related concepts: An overview. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 139, 361–371. [CrossRef]
27. Chen, C.; Ji, Z.C.; Wang, Y. NSGA-II applied to dynamic flexible job shop scheduling problems with machine breakdown. Mod.
Phys. Lett. B 2018, 32, 18401115. [CrossRef]
28. Komaki, G.M.; Kayvanfar, V. Grey Wolf Optimizer algorithm for the two-stage assembly flow shop scheduling problem with
release time. J. Comput. Sci. 2015, 8, 109–120. [CrossRef]
29. Li, J.Q.; Song, M.X.; Wang, L.; Duan, P.Y.; Han, Y.Y.; Sang, H.Y.; Pan, Q.K. Hybrid Artificial Bee Colony Algorithm for a Parallel
Batching Distributed Flow-Shop Problem with Deteriorating Jobs. IEEE Trans. Cybern. 2020, 50, 2425–2439. [CrossRef]
Processes 2022, 10, 2475 16 of 16

30. Ji, B.; Yuan, X.H.; Yuan, Y.B. A Hybrid Intelligent Approach for Co-Scheduling of Cascaded Locks With Multiple Chambers. IEEE
Trans. Cybern. 2019, 49, 1236–1248. [CrossRef]
31. Nouiri, M.; Bekrar, A.; Jemai, A.; Niar, S.; Ammari, A.C. An effective and distributed particle swarm optimization algorithm for
flexible job-shop scheduling problem. J. Intell. Manuf. 2018, 29, 603–615. [CrossRef]
32. Yazdani, M.; Aleti, A.; Khalili, S.M.; Jolai, F. Optimizing the sum of maximum earliness and tardiness of the job shop scheduling
problem. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2017, 107, 12–24. [CrossRef]
33. Yazdani, M.; Khalili, S.M.; Babagolzadeh, M.; Jolai, F. A single-machine scheduling problem with multiple unavailability
constraints: A mathematical model and an enhanced variable neighborhood search approach. J. Comput. Des. Eng. 2017, 4, 46–59.
[CrossRef]
34. Mirjalili, S. Moth-flame optimization algorithm: A novel nature-inspired heuristic paradigm. Knowl.-Based Syst. 2015, 89, 228–249.
[CrossRef]
35. Ebrahim, M.A.; Becherif, M.; Abdelaziz, A.Y. Dynamic performance enhancement for wind energy conversion system using
Moth-Flame Optimization based blade pitch controller. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 2018, 27, 206–212. [CrossRef]
36. Elsakaan, A.A.; El-Sehiemy, R.A.; Kaddah, S.S.; Elsaid, M.I. An enhanced moth-flame optimizer for solving non-smooth economic
dispatch problems with emissions. Energy 2018, 157, 1063–1078. [CrossRef]
37. Hassanien, A.E.; Gaber, T.; Mokhtar, U.; Hefny, H. An improved moth flame optimization algorithm based on rough sets for
tomato diseases detection. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2017, 136, 86–96. [CrossRef]
38. Wang, M.; Chen, H.; Yang, B.; Zhao, X.; Hu, L.; Cai, Z.; Huang, H.; Tong, C. Toward an optimal kernel extreme learning machine
using a chaotic moth-flame optimization strategy with applications in medical diagnoses. Neurocomputing 2017, 267, 69–84.
[CrossRef]
39. Shen, J.N.; Wang, L.; Deng, J. A Pareto-Based Discrete Harmony Search Algorithm for Bi-objective Reentrant Hybrid Flowshop
Scheduling Problem. Harmon. Search Algorithm 2016, 382, 435–445.
40. Cho, H.M.; Bae, S.J.; Kim, J.; Jeong, I.J. Bi-objective scheduling for reentrant hybrid flow shop using Pareto genetic algorithm.
Comput. Ind. Eng 2011, 61, 529–541. [CrossRef]
41. Bektaş, Y.; Karaca, H. Red deer algorithm based selective harmonic elimination for renewable energy application with unequal
DC sources. Energy Rep. 2022, 8, 588–596. [CrossRef]
42. Yazdani, M.; Jolai, F. Lion Optimization Algorithm (LOA): A nature-inspired metaheuristic algorithm. J. Comput. Des. Eng. 2016,
3, 24–36. [CrossRef]