Competencias de los estudiantes de educación en TIC según modelo UNESCO

One of the main challenges of this research is to determine if we can replace the manual scheduling method with an automated scheduling method, and to determine what the differ- ences are between manual and automated scheduling. Therefore, we validate our model and the schedules resulting from our solution. During development, we regularly look critically

at the schedules we create in order to verify that those schedules are realistic. Furthermore we aim to validate our solution by comparing the schedules we create on a department level with the schedules created manually at PAT on a department level. However, due to the num- ber of assumptions we have to make regarding our data (see Section 6.2), we are unable to statistically validate our model using the data that is currently available. Unfortunately, the quality of the input data must improve drastically to enable automated optimization of schedules at PAT. All the same, for the present research, we run small experiments (Data- set: Day 1; Aggregation level: Local (Sint-Annaparochie, Zwolle, Breda, Zaandam, and Geldermalsen); SA: Constrained; Cost: Set A; Initial operator settings), resulting in five schedules for five local departments. We present the results of those experiments to the planners at PAT, who we ask to assess the solutions (experts opinion) by filling in a small questionnaire (see Appendix I), containing 7 open (scaled -2 (Disagree) to 2 (Agree)) and 4 closed questions. We give a summary of the results in Table 6.7.

Based on these results, we conclude that the planners reasonably satisfied with our present planning as a base planning. However they mention some concerns and challenges for improvement, which we point out below. Each of the points mentioned by the planners is followed by our comments.

• Different shift lengths and long shifts: We agree that there are differences in shift lengths between individual drivers. The main objective of our model is however to schedule at low cost. In relation to the longshifts, our model and solution take legal working-hour-regulations into account, which are assessed to be properly accounted for. Our model does not contain othershift length related constraints. Therefore, we conclude that the comments related to shift length are due to the choices we made in our model. Incorporating secondary objectives such as equal shift lengths in the model, involves making considerations between two objectives that might be contra- dictory. The complexity of the model will increase.

• Preloading and execution are falsely independently scheduled: We agree that preload- ing and execution of atripshould be done by the sameresources. In our input, these actually consists of twotripswhich are unrelated in the Transplan TMS. Therefore, we also see theseactivitiesas separatetrips and our model allows them to be scheduled on differentresources. The simplest solution for this problem is to include preload- ingactivities within thetrip it belongs to, without having any model consequences. Another options is to add constraints to the model that require related trips to be scheduled on the sameresources.

• Improvevehicle usage: Again, the main objective of our model is to schedule at low cost. There might be cases where the assignment ofvehiclesseems illogical, however, this might result in lower cost. Smoothing out the usage ofvehiclesis not an objective or constraint of our model. Again, incorporating secondary objectives increases the complexity of the model.

• Location andtrip knowledge: We agree that there might be somedrivers scheduled ontripsthat they have no knowledge of. These are however not part of our model and are therefore not taken into account. The main implication of these constraints is that the data should be properly captured. Adding the corresponding constraints to the model is relatively easy.

• Exchange of Rented resources and Chartered resource-groups: We agree that the amount ofRented resourcesis relatively high and that sometimes charters can be used for those trips. This would however result in higher costs, which is against our main objective. Solutions for this problem are increasing the costs ofRented resources, or limiting the number of availableRented resources and/or charters, which has limited impact on the model.

Question Score Interpretation Summary of comments 1. The planning is of a high qual-

ity level

0.8 Neutral/Slightly agree

Can’t find large mistakes / Shift length differs / Given conditions are met / Preloading and execution should be accomplished with same resources / Vehicle and drivers are scheduled obeying legal rules and regulations.

2. Break scheduling is sufficient 1.0 Slightly agree Breaks seem to be scheduled in line with the collective labor agreement / Even the night’s rest are scheduled / Legal driving time rules are respected.

3. The planning is realistic 1.4 Slightly agree/Agree

This planning can be executed / Resources are employed multiple times per day, that is okay / Some details might be improved or done differently / The planning seems realistic as far that we can see / We don’t see extremely long shifts or things that are not possible.

4. The available vehicles are effi- ciently deployed

0.6 Neutral/Slightly agree

Less vehicles might be used / Exchanges between departments might be possible / Some shifts might be combined on the vehicle level / There are some large waiting gaps between trips, which we want to avoid.

5. The available drivers are effi- ciently deployed

0.8 Neutral/Slightly agree

Shifts are sometimes very long, shorter shifts might be desirable for some drivers / Location and trip knowledge is not incorporated.

6. Charters and rented resources are efficiently deployed

1.0 Slightly Agree Short trips are assigned to charters, that principle is all right / No irregularities / Some rented vehicles and charters could be exchanged.

7. The plan contains major errors -0.8 Neutral/Slightly Disagree

We don’t see major errors, however we see possible refinements / We are concerned about the amount of employment hours of the drivers / As a basis, a very neat planning is presented. A. What points can be found weak

in this planning?

There are no major weaknesses / Some improvements regarding the employment of drivers and vehicles could be preferable.

B. What points you will recom- mend for the improvement of this planning?

Vehicle employment percentage / Own vehicles should have the longest trips

C. What points would you improve this schedule?

Improving the length of the driver shifts, and increase the employment of vehicles / Multiple employment of charters (lower cost and operational load) / Incorporate driver knowledge / Combining with other departments.

D. Do you have any further re- marks?

Cool that this planning is generated by a computer / We see potential for detailing and refine- ment / Cool that automated planning is possible, are we going to use this?

Table 6.7:Validation results