Schedule job shops and factory operations, with proofs of optimality where they are found. It is a newer Garmo Solvers module from the October 2026 benchmark campaign, outside the 1.0.2 release. Results are checked against the original input; the measured result below states where it is ahead and where it is not.
BUILT FOR
Manufacturing, operations and planning teams with job-shop and machine-scheduling workloads.
CHALLENGES → PRODUCT RESPONSE
The problem you face. What the product changes.
YOUR CHALLENGEWITH SCHEDULING
01
The problem needs the right operation
A job-shop instance in the standard Taillard or job-shop format.
Schedule job shops and factory operations, with proofs of optimality where they are found.
02
A result must answer the original question
An answer detached from its original constraints or input is difficult to rely on.
The suite rechecks the answer against the original input and identifies the applicable result state.
03
The comparison needs a defined scope
A capability or benchmark result is not a universal promise for a different workload.
Evaluate the selected input, resource budget, complete cost and required certificate against your baseline.
WHAT YOU GET
A defined capability. A useful result.
01
Selected solving capability
Schedule job shops and factory operations, with proofs of optimality where they are found.
02
Original-input result
A schedule and its makespan, re-checked independently, with an optimality proof when one is found in the budget.
03
Access by setup scope
Python API with headless execution today. garmo CLI and garmo-mcp setup is scoped on request; this publication does not invent executable commands or MCP tool names.
04
Checked result
Every schedule is re-checked against the original precedence and machine constraints.
GARMO SOLVERS / MEASURED RESULT
Measured: 70/0/10 vs CP-SAT on Taillard
On all 80 Taillard job-shop instances at 60 s on one thread: better than CP-SAT on 70 and worse on 10, with a mean gap to the best known of 2.78% against 9.55%; CP-SAT wins only the 15x15 set (ta01 to ta10). On 40 generated schedules at 20 s it proves 39 optimal against CP-SAT's 20.
Source: Garmo Labs benchmark campaign, October 2026. Results apply to the stated inputs, hardware and conditions; they are not universal competitor rankings.
A customer has a supported model and wants an accepted result without adopting every other module.
Illustrative customer use—not a new benchmark or completed customer deployment.
01→
Provide the original input and define the useful outcome.
02→
Run the selected module under its supported resource and interface scope.
03→
Review the returned answer, original-input checks and completion state.
FIT & ACCEPTANCE
Start with the task. Agree the useful outcome.
What you bring
A job-shop instance in the standard Taillard or job-shop format.
What a useful evaluation measures
+Accepted original-model result
+Appropriate certificate or disclosed uncertified state
+Total time, memory and operating cost
Delivery
License the selected capability, commission an implementation, or agree an operated service. Infrastructure and additional engineering are specified separately.
QUESTIONS BEFORE BUYING
A clear scope. A clear relationship.
What is the important boundary?−
A schedule found in the budget is not an optimality proof unless the proof is reported; CP-SAT is ahead on the 15x15 Taillard set.
How is it priced?+
$60,000 per year for the standalone module licence, for a named scope. The platform plans cover development use across the catalog; production rights for this module are part of the order.
How do we get access?+
Python API with headless execution today. garmo CLI and garmo-mcp setup is scoped on request; this publication does not invent executable commands or MCP tool names.
PUT THE PRODUCT TO WORK
Tell us what needs to improve.
Bring a task, an accepted outcome and the environment in which the product needs to work.
Select the capability you need directly or include its compatible role in a qualified platform workflow. Production scope identifies release, environment, capacity and support; a product count is not an entitlement.
