# An information-passing strategy for achieving Pareto optimality in the design of complex systems

- 395 Downloads
- 8 Citations

## Abstract

As engineering systems grow in complexity, it becomes more challenging to achieve system-level designs that effectively balance the trade-offs among subsystems. Lewis and others have developed a well-known, traditional game-theoretic approach for formally modeling complex systems that can locate a Nash equilibrium design with a minimum of information sharing in the form of a point design. This paper builds on Lewis’ work by proposing algorithms that are capable of converging to Pareto-optimal system-level designs by increasing cooperation among subsystems through additional passed information. This paper investigates several forms for this additional passed information, including both quadratic and eigen-based formulations. Such forms offer guidance to designers on how they should change parameter values to better suit the overall system by providing information on directionality and curvature. Strategies for representing passed information are examined in three case studies of 2- and 3-player scenarios that cover a range of system complexity. Depending on the scenario, findings suggest that passing more information generally leads to convergence to a Pareto-optimal set. However, more iterations may be required to reach the Pareto set than if using a traditional game-theoretic approach.

## Keywords

Complex system design Distributed design Design optimization Pareto optimality## Notes

### Acknowledgments

The work described in this paper was supported in part by the National Science Foundation under Award CMMI-0830134. The opinions, findings, conclusions, and recommendations expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the sponsors.

## References

- Agte J, de Weck O, Sobieski J, Arendson P, Morris A, Spieck M (2010) MDO: assessment and direction for advancement—an opinion of one international group. Struct Multidiscip Optim 40(1–6):17–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Allen TJ (1984) Managing the flow of technology: technology transfer and the dissemination of technological information. MIT, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- Allision JT, Kokkolara M, Papalambros PY (2009) Optimal partitioning and coordination decisions in decomposition-based design optimization. J Mech Des 1(8):081008–1–081008–8Google Scholar
- Avnet MS (2009) Socio-cognitive analysis of engineering systems design: shared knowledge, process, and product. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
- Azarm S, Tits A, Fan MKH (1999) Tradeoff driven optimization-based design of mechanical systems. In: 4-th AIAA/USAF/NASA/OAI symposium on multidisciplinary analysis and optimization, Cleveland, Ohio, USA, AIAA. AIAA-92-4758-CPGoogle Scholar
- Chanron V, Lewis K (2004) Convergence and stability in distributed design of large systems. In: ASME design automation conference, Salt Lake City, UtahGoogle Scholar
- Chanron V, Lewis K (2005) A study of convergence in decentralized design processes. Res Eng Design 16(3):133–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Chanron V, Lewis K, Murase Y, Izui K, Nishiwaki S, Yoshimura M (2005) Handling multiple objectives in decentralized design. In: ASME design automation conference, Long Beach, CAGoogle Scholar
- Chanron V, Singh T, Lewis K (2005) Equilibrium stability in decentralized design systems. Int J Syst Sci 36(10):651–662CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Chinchuluun A, Pardalos P (2007) A survey of recent developments in multiobjective optimization. Ann Oper Res 154(1):29–50CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Cramer EJ, Dennis JE, Frank PD, Lewis RM, Shubin GR (1993) Problem formulation for multidisciplinary optimization. Technical report, Center for Research on Parallel Computation, Rice UniversityGoogle Scholar
- Cross N (2000) Engineering design methods: strategies for product design. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Das I, Dennis JE (1997) A closer look at drawbacks of minimizing weighted sums of objectives for pareto set generation in multicriteria optimization problems. Struct Multidiscip Optim 14(1):63–69Google Scholar
- Dauer JP, Stadler W (1986) A survey of vector optimization in infinite-dimensional spaces, part 2. J Optim Theory Appl 51(2):205–241CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Ding XP, Park JY, Jung IH (2000) Existence of pareto equilibria for constrained multiobjective games in h-space. Comput Math Appl 39(9–10):125–134zbMATHGoogle Scholar
- Ding XP, Park JY, Jung IH (2003) Pareto equilibria for constrained multiobjective games in locally l-convex spaces. Comput Math Appl 46(10–11):1589–1599CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Eckart C, Young G (1936) The approximation of one matrix by another of lower rank. Psychometrika 1:211–218CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- Fernandez MG, Panchal JH, Allen JK, Mistree F (2005) An interactions protocol for collaborative decision making—concise interactions and effective management of shared design spaces. In: ASME design engineering technical conferences, Long Beach, CAGoogle Scholar
- Fliege J, Svaiter BF (2000) Steepest descent methods for multicriteria optimization. Math Methods Oper Res 51(3):479–494CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Franssen M, Bucciarelli LL (2004) On rationality in engineering design. J Mech Des 126(6):945–949CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- GarcÌa-Palomares UM, Burguillo-Rial JC, Gonzalez-Castano FJ (2008) Explicit gradient information in multiobjective optimization. Oper Res Lett 36(6):722–725CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Golinski J (1970) Optimal synthesis problems solved by means of nonlinear programming and random methods. J Mech 5Google Scholar
- Haimes Y (1973) Integrated system identification and optimization. Control Dyn Syst Adv Theory Appl 10:435–518MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Hazelrigg GA (1998) A framework for decision-based engineering design. J Mech Des 120:653–658CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Homma T, Saltelli A (1996) Importance measures in global sensitivity analysis of nonlinear models. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 52:1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Honda T, Ciucci F, Yang MC (August 2007) Achieving pareto optimality in a decentralized design environment. In: 17th international conference on engineering design (ICED). The Design SocietyGoogle Scholar
- Huang CH, Galuski J, Bloebaum CL (2007) Multi-objective pareto concurrent subspace optimization for multidisciplinary design. AIAA J 45(8):1894–1906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Jet Propulsion Laboratory (2010) Team X. ([http://jplteamx.jpl.nasa.gov/])
- Jian JB, Ju QJ, Tang CM, Zheng HY (2007) A sequential quadratically constrained quadratic programming method of feasible directions. Appl Math Optim 56(56):343–363CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Keeney RL (2009) The foundations of collaborative group decisions. Int J Collab Eng 1(1–2):4–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Kurpati A, Azarm S, Wu J (2002) Constraint handling improvements for multiobjective genetic algorithms. Struct Multidiscip Optim 23(3):204–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Laumanns M, Thiele L, Zitzler E (2006) An efficient, adaptive parameter variation scheme for metaheuristics based on the epsilon-constraint method. Eur J Oper Res 169(3):932–942CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Lewis K (1996) An algorithm for integrated subsystem embodiment and system synthesis. PhD thesis, Georgia Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
- Lewis K, Mistree F (1997) Modeling the interactions in multidisciplinary design: a game theoretic approach. AIAA J Aircraft 35:1387–1397zbMATHGoogle Scholar
- Lewis K, Mistree F (1999) Collaborative, sequential, and isolated decisions in design. ASME J Mech Des 120:643–652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Lewis K, Mistree F (2001) Modeling subsystem interactions: a game theoretic approach. J Des Manuf Autom 1:17–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Lewis, KE, Chen, W, Schmidt, LC (eds) (2006) Decision making in engineering design. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Li M, Azarm S (2007) Multiobjective collaborative robust optimization (mcro) with interval uncertainty and interdisciplinary uncertainty propagation. In: Proceedings of the ASME 2007 international design engineering technical conferences & computers and information in engineering conference IDETC/CIE 2007, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA, ASME. DETC2007-34818Google Scholar
- Lin JI (1976) Multiple-objective problems: pareto-optimal solutions by method of proper equality constrains. IEEE Trans Autom Control 21(5):641–650CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- Lu S, Kim HM (2010) Optimized sequencing of analysis components in multidisciplinary systems. J Mech Des 132(4):041005-1–041005-12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Marglin S (1967) Public investment criteria. MIT, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- Mark G (2002) Extreme collaboration. Commun ACM 45(6):89–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Marler RT, Arora JS (2004) Survey of multi-objective optimization methods for engineering. Struct Multidiscip Optim 26(6):369–395CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Mistree F, Marinopoulos S, Jackson DM, Shupe JA (1988) The design of aircraft using the decision support problem technique. Technical report NAS 1.26:4134, NASA-CR-4134, NASAGoogle Scholar
- Olesen K, Myers MD (1999) Trying to improve communication and collaboration with information technology. an action research project which failed. Inf Technol People 12(4):317–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Park GJ (2007) Analytic methods in design practice. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
- Rao JRJ, Badhrinath K, Pakala R, Mistree F (1997) A study of optimal design under conflict using models of multi-player games. Eng Optim 28:63–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- RV Tappeta, JE Renaud (1997) Multiobjective collaborative optimization. J Mech Des 119:403–411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Scott MJ (1999) Formalizing negotiation in engineering design. PhD thesis, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CAGoogle Scholar
- Scott MJ, Antonsson EK (2000) Arrow’s theorem and engineering design decision making. Res Eng Design 11(4):218–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Senge PM (1990) The fifth discipline: The art & practice of the learning organization. Crown Business, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Shaja AS, Sudhakar K (2010) Optimized sequencing of analysis components in multidisciplinary systems. Res Eng Design 21(3):173–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Shin MK, Park GJ (2005) Multidisciplinary design optimization based on independent subspaces. Int J Numer Methods Eng 64:599–617CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
- Simaan M, Cruz JB (1973) On the stackelberg strategy in nonzero-sum games. J Optim Theory Appl 11(5):533–555CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Smith J, Koenig L, Wall SD (1999) Team efficiencies within a model-driven design process. In: INCOSE symposium, Brighton, EnglandGoogle Scholar
- Sobieszczanski-Sobieski J (1988) Optimization by decomposition: A step from hierarchic to non-hierarchic systems. Technical report, NASAGoogle Scholar
- Sobieszczanski-Sobieski J, Agte JS, Sandusky RR (1998) Bi-level integrated system synthesis (bliss). In: AIAA/USAF/NASA/ISSMO symposium on multidisciplinary analysis and optimization, volume AIAA-98-4916. AIAA, pp 1543–1557Google Scholar
- Stewart GW (1993) On the early history of the singular value decomposition. SIAM Rev 35:551–566CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Tao YR, Han X, Jiang C, Guan FJ (2010) A method to improve computational efficiency for csso and bliss. Struct Multidiscip Optim. Nov.(online):1–6Google Scholar
- Tosserams S, Etman LFP, Rooda JE (2010) A micro-accelerometer mdo benchmark problem. Struct Multidiscip Optim 41(2):255–275CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Verbeeck K, Nowe A, Lenaerts T, Parent J (2002) Learning to reach the pareto optimal nash equilibrium as a team. Adv Artif Intell 2557:407–418MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Vincent TL (1983) Game theory as a design tool. J Mech Transm Autom Des 105:165–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Wang F, Zhang K (2008) A hybrid algorithm for nonlinear minimax problems. Ann Oper Res 164(1):167–191CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Ward AC (1989) A theory of quantitative inference for artifact sets, applied to a mechanical design compiler. PhD thesis, MITGoogle Scholar
- Ward AC, Lozano-Pérez T, Seering WP (1990) Extending the constraint propagation of intervals. Artif Intell Eng Des Manuf 4(1):47–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- de Weck O (2004) Multiobjective optimization: History and promise. In: The third China-Japan-Korea joint symposium on optimization of structural and mechanical systems, Kanazawa, Japan, 2004. Invited Keynote Paper, GL2-2Google Scholar
- Whitfield RI, Duffy AHB, Coates G, Hills B (2002) Distributed design coordination. Res Eng Design 13:243–252Google Scholar
- Xiao A, Zheng S, Allen JK, Rosen DW, Mistree F (2005) Collaborative multidisciplinary decision making using game theory and design capability indices. Res Eng Design 16(1–2):57–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Yi SI, Shin JK, Park GJ (2008) Comparison of mdo methods with mathematical examples. Struct Multidiscip Optim 35:391–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Yu H (2003) Weak pareto equilibria for multiobjective constrained games. Appl Math Lett 16(5):773–776CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- Zhao M, Cui W (2011) On the development of bi-level integrated system collaborative optimization. Struct Multidiscip Optim 43(1):73–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar