One of the few limitations of GLAS is the lack of sample tracking at the node level. Currently, this is managed at the global level by the Main Laboratory Scheduler, which is sufficient for the purposes of Swiss Cat+. A forthcoming version of GLAS will include sample tracking functionality at the node level. In the majority of laboratories, sample tracking is a mandatory requirement for compliance with regulatory standards. Such a feature would facilitate data integrity and consistency for samples handled by GLAS. Moreover, GLAS lacks the functionality to optimize workflows. At present, GLAS receives and launches tasks in a sequential manner (FIFO), but the task itself is executed on a different thread, allowing for the concurrent execution of multiple threads. The initiation of nodes within a task is contingent upon their designated workflow, occurring as soon as they become available. Consequently, operations on disparate nodes of disparate instruments may be conducted in parallel, unless a specific node is incorporated into multiple workflows. In this particular instance, the execution of a task based on one of these workflows may impede the operation of another task that utilizes the same node. It may, therefore, be of interest to consider optimizing the order in which workflows are called at the level of the Main Laboratory Scheduler, with a view to avoiding such interferences. To consider global scheduling optimization, the integration of algorithms such as those described by Itoh, T. D. et al. and Arai, Y. et al. at the level of the main laboratory scheduler would undoubtedly facilitate this process. This would require the ability to escalate all equipment status updates via the nodes and experiment progress data in order to facilitate truly optimized dynamic scheduling. The retrieval of experimental progress information is not currently a standard feature of scientific equipment. However, the optimization of workflows, particularly in the context of chemistry, can become a highly complex undertaking due to the intrinsic uncertainty associated with the timing of chemical operations. Indeed, the precise timing of reactions and analyses is frequently uncertain, thereby rendering the prediction and optimization of BM or workflows a challenging endeavor. In addition, given the time required for operations at the various stations, several minutes per sample for spectroscopy and chromatography, i.e. hours for hundreds of samples, and also hours for synthesis steps, compared to transfer times of seconds to minutes. In addition, since the transfer is physically parallelized by the use of SBS plates, it becomes clear that most of the optimization effort must be done at the instrument level and then at the BM level. In the case of Swiss Cat+, the initial reduction in