How to compare performance of robust design optimization algorithms, including a novel method

Abstract

This paper proposes a method to compare the performances of different methods for robust design optimization of computationally demanding models. Its intended usage is to help the engineer to choose the optimization approach when faced with a robust optimization problem. This paper demonstrates the usage of the method to find the most appropriate robust design optimization method to solve an engineering problem. Five robust design optimization methods, including a novel method, are compared in the demonstration of the comparison method. Four of the five compared methods involve surrogate models to reduce the computational cost of performing robust design optimization. The five methods are used to optimize several mathematical functions that should be similar to the engineering problem. The methods are then used to optimize the engineering problem to confirm that the most suitable optimization method was identified. The performance metrics used are the mean value and standard deviation of the robust optimum as well as an index that combines the required number of simulations of the original model with the accuracy of the obtained solution. These measures represent the accuracy, robustness, and efficiency of the compared methods. The results of the comparison show that sequential robust optimization is the method with the best balance between accuracy and number of function evaluations. This is confirmed by the optimizations of the engineering problem. The comparison also shows that the novel method is better than its predecessor is.

Developing a new hybrid soft computing technique in predicting ultimate pile bearing capacity using cone penetration test data

“…In addition, CPT is a commonly used soil exploration survey in engineering applications because it is quick, economic, and could continuously obtain physical soil parameters (Eslami, 1997; Abu-Farsakh and Titi, 2004). In recent years, some researchers developed concepts of advanced artificial intelligence (AI) in different engineering applications, such as engineering mechanics, design of energy-saving buildings, automation, and construction (Coello and Aguirre, 2002; Nariman-Zadeh et al ., 2003; Hanna, 2007; Padmini et al ., 2008; Rossi and Lanzetta, 2013; Hu et al ., 2014; Zeng et al ., 2014; Kontovourkis et al ., 2015; Salido et al ., 2015; Adeniran and El-Ferik, 2017; Persson and Ölvander, 2017; Thimmisetty et al ., 2017; Al-Refaie et al ., 2018; Keles, 2018; Lin and Huang, 2018; Mirabi and Seddighi, 2018; Zimmermann et al ., 2018). In recent years, applications of AI models have become widespread through civil engineering projects (e.g., Armaghani et al ., 2017, 2018; Koopialipoor et al ., 2018).…”

Comparative study of metamodeling and sampling design for expensive and semi-expensive simulation models under uncertainty

“…9 Six different robust optimization approaches were applied by Persson and Olvander to analyze the performance of a kriging metamodel when fitted by LHS. 10 In another study by Persson and Olvander, 11 the performances of five robust optimization methods have compared, while some of them can handle metamodels instead of an original model. In a recent review paper by Yondo et al, 12 the latest developments of metamodel-based optimization approaches including various metamodeling techniques and sampling design methods have been comprehensively reviewed, with an emphasis on aircraft aerodynamic design.…”