Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A novel metamodel-based multi-objective optimization method using adaptive multi-regional ensemble of metamodels

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The optimization of the engineering system is becoming more and more significant as time progresses, and a large number of metamodel-based multi-objective optimization methods have been proposed during the past decades. For a metamodel-based multi-objective optimization method, the accuracy of the solution is greatly influenced by the prediction accuracy of the metamodels. This study developed a novel metamodel-based multi-objective optimization method using an adaptive multi-regional ensemble of metamodels (AMEM) to get an optimization method with higher accuracy and efficiency. Two strategies were employed in this new metamodel-based multi-objective optimization method. One strategy is that several stand-alone metamodels, i.e., polynomial regression (PR), radial basis function (RBF), and Kriging (KRG) were combined into an ensemble of metamodels (EM) using the weight sum approach. The other strategy is that new design points were dynamically added into various local regions where the Pareto optimal designs are located, and each basis model and its weight factors were regenerated simultaneously, which adaptively improved the accuracy of the constructed adaptive multi-regional ensemble of metamodels. Besides, two novel approaches for selecting new design points from Pareto optimal set were proposed in this study. The performance of this novel metamodel-based multi-objective optimization method was evaluated using twelve mathematical functions and two practical engineering optimization problems. The twelve mathematical functions were typically selected from previous studies, and the two practical engineering optimization problems are crashworthiness optimization of triply periodic minimal surface (TPMS)-filled tube (one design variable) and buffer performance optimization of airbags used in the re-entry capsule (two design variables). To compare the advantages of this method, the optimization of these problems was also implemented by common metamodel-based methods. The results showed that the adaptive multi-regional ensemble of metamodels-based multi-objective optimization method is more accurate than the common methods in both mathematical functions and engineering optimization problems. In addition, the adaptive multi-regional ensemble of metamodels-based multi-objective optimization method has better efficiency than the common method, especially in practical engineering optimization problems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20
Fig. 21
Fig. 22
Fig. 23
Fig. 24
Fig. 25
Fig. 26
Fig. 27
Fig. 28
Fig. 29
Fig. 30

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abderrahmane B, Mohammed D, Lyes B (2013) A non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm-based approach for optimal machines selection in reconFigurable manufacturing environment. Comput Ind Eng 66(3):519–524

    Google Scholar 

  • AcarRais-Rohani EM (2009) Ensemble of metamodels with optimized weight factors. Struct Multidisc Optim 37:279–294

    Google Scholar 

  • Bai YC, Zhou HS, Lei F, Lei HS (2019) An improved numerically-stable equivalent static loads (ESLs) algorithm based on energy-scaling ratio for stiffness topology optimization under crash loads. Struct Multidisc Optim 59:117–130

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Bishop CM (1994) Neural networks and their applications. Rev Sci Instr 65(6):1803–1832

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonilla EV, Chai KMA, Williams CKI (2007) Multi-task Gaussian process prediction. Adv Neutral Inf Process Sys 20:153–160

  • Coello CAC, Lamont GB, Van Veldhuizen DA (2007) Evolutionary algorithms for solving multi-objective problems (2nd edition). Springer, Boston, MA, pp 1932–0167

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • De Weck OL (2004) Multi-objective optimization: History and promise. In Proc. 3rd China-Japan-Korea Joint Symp. Optimization Structural Mech. Syst. Invited Keynote Paper GL2-2, Kanazawa, Japan

  • Deb K (1999) Multi-objective genetic algorithms: problem difficulties and construction of test problems. Evolut Comput 7(3):205–230

    Google Scholar 

  • Deb K, Goel T (2001) Controlled elitist non-dominated sorting genetic algorithms for better convergence. Lect Notes Comput Sci 1993:67–81

    Google Scholar 

  • Deb K (2001) Multi-objective optimization using evolutionary algorithms. Wiley, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Deb K, Pratap A, Agarwal S, Meyarivan T (2002) A fast and elitist multi-objective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 6(2):182–197

    Google Scholar 

  • Dodgson JS, Spackman M, Pearman A, Phillips LD (2009) Multi-criteria analysis: A manual. Department of the Environment, Transport and the Region, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Dyn N, Levin D, Rippa S (1986) Numerical procedures for surface fitting of scattered data by radial basis functions. SIAM J Sci Stat Comput 7(2):639–659

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Fang H, Rais-Rohani M, Liu Z, Horstemeyer MF (2005) A comparative study of metamodeling methods for multi-objective crashworthiness optimization. Comput Struct 83:2121–2136

    Google Scholar 

  • Forrester AIJ, Keane AJ (2009) Recent advances in surrogate-based optimization. Prog Aerosp Sci 45(1–3):50–79

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferreira WG, Serpa AL (2016) Ensemble of metamodels: the augmented least squares approach. Struct Multidisc Optim 53:1019–1046

    Google Scholar 

  • Frank J, Massey JR (1951) The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test for goodness of fit. J American Stat Assoc 46(253):68–78

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman JH (1991) Multivariate adaptive regression splines. Ann stat. https://doi.org/10.1214/aos/1176347963

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Goel T, Haftka RT, Shyy W, Queipo NV (2007) Ensemble of surrogates. Struct Multidisc Optim 33(3):199–216

    Google Scholar 

  • Guangyong S, Xuanyi T, Jianguang F (2015) Dynamical bending analysis and optimization design for functionally graded thickness (FGT) tube. Int J Impact Eng 78:128–137

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunantara N (2018) A review of multi-objective optimization: methods and its applications. Cogent Eng 5(1):1502242

    Google Scholar 

  • Hagan Martin T, Demuth Howard B (1999) Neural networks for control. Proceedings of the American Control Conference 3:1642-1656

  • Huband S, Hingston P, Barone L, While L (2006) A review of multi-objective test problems and a scalable test problem toolkit. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 10(5):477–506

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Huang S, Bo W, Zhang X, Elmi A, Youmin H, Jin W (2021) Robust ensemble of metamodels based on the hybrid error measure. Front Mech Eng 16(3):623–634

    Google Scholar 

  • Holland JH (1975) Adaptation in natural and artificial systems, 2nd edn. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Jianguang F, Guangyong S (2017) On design optimization for structural crashworthiness and its state of the art. Struct Multidisc Optim 55(3):1091–1119

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Khuri AI, Conlon M (1981) Simultaneous optimization of multiple responses represented by polynomial regression functions. Technometrics 23(4):363–375

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kleijnen Jack PC (2009) Kriging metamodeling in simulation: a review. European J Oper Res 192(3):707–716

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kocijan J, Murray-Smith R, Rasmussen CE, Girard A (2004) Gaussian process model based predictive control. Proceeding of the 2004 American control conference, VOLS 1-6 3: 2214-2219

  • Lee Y, Dong-Hoon C (2014) Pointwise ensemble of metamodels using v nearest points cross-validation. Struct Multidisc Optim 50:383–394

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin C, Gao F, Bai Y (2018) An intelligent sampling approach for metamodel-based multi-objective optimization with guidance of the adaptive weighted-sum method. Struct Multidisc Optim 57:1047–1060

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Lilliefors HW (1967) On the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test for normality with mean and variance unknown. J American Stat Assoc 62(318):399–402

    Google Scholar 

  • Marler RT, Arora JS (2004) Survey of multi-objective optimization methods for engineering. Struct Multidisc Optim 26(6):369–395

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Murata T, Ishibuchi H, Tanaka H (1996) Multi-objective genetic algorithm and its applications to flowshop scheduling. Comput Ind Eng 30(4):957–968

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliverr MA, Webster (1990) Kriging: a method of interpolation for geographical information systems. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 4:313–332

    Google Scholar 

  • Park J, Sandberg IW (1991) Universal approximation using radial-basis-function networks. Neural Comput 3(2):246–257

    Google Scholar 

  • Peixoto JL (1990) A property of well-formulated polynomial regression models. American Stat 44(1):26–30

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Quanquan Y, Cun-Fa G (2010) Stress analysis of a functional graded material plate with a circular hole. Archive Appl Mech 80(8):895–907

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Rudolph G (1998) On a multi-objective evolutionary algorithm and its convergence to the Pareto set. IEEE International Conference on Evolutionary Computation Proceedings. IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence (Cat. No.98TH8360):511-516

  • Shujuan H, Qing L, Shuyao L, Xujing Y, Wei L (2008) Multi-objective optimization of multi-cell sections for the crashworthiness design. Int Impact Eng 35(11):1355–1367

    Google Scholar 

  • Smola AJ, Bernhard (2004) A tutorial on support vector regression. Stat Comp 14(3):199–222

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Univ T, Sci Inst Fluid, Aoba Ku, Sendai Miyagi (2005) Efficient global optimization (EGO) for multi-objective problem and data mining. IEEE Trans on Evolut Comput 3:2138–2145

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu CH, Wei CC, Su DC, Chang MH, Ho JM (2003) Travel-time prediction with support vector regression. IEEE Intelligent transportation systems proceedings VOLS. 1 & 2 2003,2:1438-1442

  • Wikipedia (2015) Test functions for optimization. https://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Test functions for optimization

  • Xianguang G, Guangyong S, Guangyao L, Lichen M, Qing L (2013) A comparative study on multi-objective reliable and robust optimization for crashworthiness design of vehicle structure. Struct Multidisc Optim 48(3):669–684

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin HF, Guo D, Wen G, Wu Z (2022) On bending crashworthiness of smooth-shell lattice-filled structures. Thin-Wall Struct 171:108800

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin H, Guilin W, Hongbing F, Qixiang Q, Xiangzheng K, Jiuru X, Zhibo L (2014) Multi-objective crashworthiness optimization design of functionally graded foam-filled tapered tube based on dynamic ensemble metamodel. Mater Design 55:747–757

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin HF, Wen GL, Gan NF (2011) Crashworthiness design for honeycomb structure under axial dynamic loading. Int J Comput Methods 8(4):863–877

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin HF, Hongbing F, Guilin W, Qian W, Youye X (2016) An adaptive RBF-based multi-objective optimization method for crashworthiness design of functionally graded multi-cell tube. Struct Multidisc Optim 53(1):129–144

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Yin H, Fang H, Wen G (2018) On the ensemble of metamodels with multiple regional optimized weight factors. Struct Multidisc Optim 58:245–263

    Google Scholar 

  • Yue Y (2020) Dynamic simulation of combined airbag cushion and collaborative optimization of multiple working conditions. https://doi.org/10.27135/d.cnki.ghudu.2020.003559

  • X. Zhou, Y. Ma, Z. Cheng, L. Liu, J. Wang (2010) Ensemble of metamodels with Recursive arithmetic average. The 2nd International Conference on Industrial Mechatronics and Automation pp. 178-182

  • Zhou XJ, Jiang T (2016) Metamodel selection based on stepwise regression. Struct Multidisc Optim 44(5):651–671

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Zitzler K, Deb K, Thiele L (2000) Comparison of multi-objective evolutionary algorithms: empirical results. Evol Comput 8(2):173–195

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work is supported jointly by the Hunan Natural Science Fund for Distinguished Young Scholars (No. 2021JJ10009), National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 11972153), Hunan Natural Science Foundation (No. 2020JJ4165), the Foundation for Innovative Research Groups of the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 51621004) and the Key Program of National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 11832009).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. State Key Laboratory of Advanced Design and Manufacturing for Vehicle Body, Hunan University, Changsha, 410082, Hunan, PR China

    Hanfeng Yin, Jiahui Sha, Jun Zhou & Jie Liu

  2. Key Laboratory of Advanced Design and Simulation Techniques for Special Equipment, Ministry of Education, Hunan University, Changsha, 410082, Hunan, PR China

    Hanfeng Yin, Jiahui Sha, Jun Zhou, Guilin Wen & Jie Liu

  3. College of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, Changsha University, Changsha, 410022, Hunan, China

    Xingfa Yang

Authors
  1. Hanfeng Yin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jiahui Sha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jun Zhou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Xingfa Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Guilin Wen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jie Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Guilin Wen.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Replication of results

All the data for the replication of the result are included in the paper. If the reader is interested, the author can provide additional information for the replication of the result. We believe that the results can be reproduced with limited effort. Any readers that are interested in the code are encouraged to get in touch with the author via email.

Additional information

Responsible Editor: Lei Wang.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yin, H., Sha, J., Zhou, J. et al. A novel metamodel-based multi-objective optimization method using adaptive multi-regional ensemble of metamodels. Struct Multidisc Optim 66, 95 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-023-03530-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-023-03530-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation