Industrial Process Scheduling via Simulation-Based State Transitions

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Scheduling optimization in process industries is challenging due to complexity in modeling systems with both continuous and discrete variables, leading to scalability issues and computational challenges, especially in generalizing approaches across various domains.

Innovation Solution

A domain-agnostic method for scheduling resources in industrial processes is developed, involving the generation of a model that simulates the process by determining initial and updated states based on allowable actions, and evaluating these states using a predefined evaluation function.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Manufacturing precision

If traditional optimization approaches with continuous and discrete variables are used, then scheduling precision can be achieved, but device complexity and computational load increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvescheduling precisionVSAvoidmodeling complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces traditional mathematical optimization models (continuous/discrete variables, linear programming) with a simulation-based approach using discrete event simulation and reinforcement learning. This substitution transforms the complex analytical modeling problem into a computational simulation problem, reducing the theoretical complexity while maintaining scheduling precision through iterative learning and evaluation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent changes the fundamental parameters of the scheduling approach by transitioning from fixed mathematical formulations to dynamic simulation models that can adapt to different process conditions. The simulation model incorporates state transitions, event sequences, and learning-based decision-making, allowing the system to handle complexity through parameter adaptation rather than rigid mathematical constraints.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Manufacturing precision

If complex process optimization models are formulated, then scheduling accuracy improves, but scalability deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvescheduling accuracyVSAvoidscalability
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The patent creates a universal simulation framework that can model multiple types of industrial processes (chemical, pharmaceutical, food processing) using common constructs like resources, operations, state transitions, and events. This multi-functional model structure allows the same framework to scale across different domains while maintaining scheduling accuracy, as the simulation approach adapts to various process types without requiring fundamentally different mathematical formulations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent introduces dynamics into the scheduling model through simulation-based state transitions and time-varying parameters. Instead of static optimization models, the system uses dynamic simulation that can capture changing process conditions, resource availability, and operational constraints over time. This dynamic approach improves scalability by allowing the model to adapt to different process scales and complexities while maintaining consistent accuracy through the simulation engine.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

3Adaptability or versatility

If reinforcement learning approaches are used, then adaptability improves, but ease of operation deteriorates due to modeling complexity

Engineering Contradiction:
ImproveadaptabilityVSAvoidease of operation
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The patent introduces an intermediary simulation environment that bridges the gap between complex reinforcement learning algorithms and user-friendly operation. The simulation model acts as a mediator, translating real-world process complexity into a controlled virtual environment where reinforcement learning can operate effectively. This intermediary layer handles the modeling complexity internally while presenting simplified interfaces and configurations to operators, thus improving ease of operation without sacrificing adaptability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements self-service capabilities through the reinforcement learning agent that automatically learns optimal scheduling policies from simulation data. The system performs self-training and self-optimization within the simulation environment, reducing the need for manual configuration and expert intervention. This self-service approach improves ease of operation by allowing the system to adapt automatically while the simulation framework manages the underlying complexity autonomously.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Data Source

PatentUS20250155880A1Method of Scheduling Resources in an Industrial Process, Computer-Implemented Scheduling System, and Computer Program Product
Publication Date: 2025.05.15 ABB (SCHWEIZ) AG
  • US20250155880A1 patent drawing
  • US20250155880A1 patent drawing
  • US20250155880A1 patent drawing

AI summary

A method for scheduling resources in an industrial process includes generating a model of the industrial process, and simulating the industrial process in the model. Simulating the industrial process in the model includes operations a) through e): a) determining an initial state as the current state of the industrial process model; b) selecting an allowable action from a group of possible actions for a resource; c) determining an updated state based on the selected action, and setting the current state as the updated state; d) repeating operations b) through c) until a final state is reached; and e) evaluating the updated states and/or the final state according to a predefined evaluation function.