4.7 Article

A diversity metric based on Gaussian process model for diverse and competitive design

期刊

STRUCTURAL AND MULTIDISCIPLINARY OPTIMIZATION
卷 64, 期 5, 页码 2975-2997

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00158-021-02967-3

关键词

Diverse and competitive design; Diversity metric; Gaussian process model; Topology optimization

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [11602050, 11702053, 11821202]
  2. 111 Project [B14013]
  3. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [DUT2019TD37]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study considers the uncertainty caused by latent constraints and develops a metric named trD for optimizing diverse and competitive designs. The results demonstrate that more optimal diverse designs lead to better competitiveness, but with limitations.
With the consideration that the single global optimum may be invalid because of some uncertainties, multiple designs with diversity, and competitiveness are usually desired. In this work, the uncertainty from a latent constraint is considered. A so-called latent constraint is a constraint unknown during the optimization problem formulation and solution, and its impact on feasibility of design is only recognized in the later stage. Based on the Gaussian process model and a rough assumption, a metric named trD is proposed which maintains several desired properties for measuring the diversity, and it is nearly consistent monotonicity with the probability that all the designs fail the latent constraint. By checking various Diversity Metric (DM) in literature for different purposes against the desired properties for a proper DM in line with latent constraint, the DM proposed in this work is justified. With the developed trD, three optimization models for diverse and competitive design are investigated with the numerical tests, including mathematical function, truss structure design, and topology optimization. The results show that with the same diversity, more optimal diverse designs result in better competitiveness but with a limit.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据