Learning Symbolic Formulations in Design Optimization

  • Somwrita Sarkar
  • Andy Dong
  • John S. Gero

This paper presents a learning and inference mechanism for unsupervised learning of semantic concepts from purely syntactical examples of design optimization formulation data. Symbolic design formulation is a tough problem from computational and cognitive perspectives, requiring domain and mathematical expertise. By conceptualizing the learning problem as a statistical pattern extraction problem, the algorithm uses previous design experiences to learn design concepts. It then extracts this learnt knowledge for use with new problems. The algorithm is knowledge-lean, needing only the mathematical syntax of the problem as input, and generalizes quickly over a very small training data set. We demonstrate and evaluate the method on a class of hydraulic cylinder design problems.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Papalambros PY, Wilde DJ (2000) Principles of optimal design. Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Nath G, Gero JS (2004) Learning while designing. AIEDAM 18 (4): 315–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gelsey A, Schwabacher M, Smith D (1998) Using modeling knowledge to guide design space search. Artificial Intelligence 101: 35–62MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Suwa M, Gero JS, Purcell T (2000) Unexpected discoveries and s-inventions of design requirements: important vehicles for a design process. Design Studies 21(6): 539–567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Moss J, Cagan J, Kotovsky K (2004) Learning from design experience in an agent-based system. Research in Engineering Design 15: 77–92Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Strang G (2003) Introduction to linear algebra. Wellesley-Cambridge PressGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kalman D (1996) A singularly valuable decomposition: the SVD of a matrix. The College Mathematics Journal 27 (1): 2–23CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Balachandran M, Gero JS (1987) A knowledge based approach to mathematical design modeling and optimization. Engineering Optimization 12(2): 91–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mackenzie CA, Gero JS (1987) Learning design rules from decisions and performances. Artificial Intelligence in Engineering 2(1): 2–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schwabacher M, Ellman T, Hirsh H (1998) Learning to set up numerical optimizations of engineering designs. AIEDAM 12: 173–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ellman T, Keane J, Banerjee A, Armhold G (1998) A transformation system for interactive reformulation of design optimization strategies. Research in Engineering Design 10(1): 30–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Campbell MI, Cagan J, Kotovsky K (2003) The A-design approach to managing automated design synthesis. Research in Engineering Design 14: 12–24Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Landauer T K, Dumais S T (1997) A solution to Plato's problem: The latent semantic snalysis theory of acquisition, induction and representation of knowledge. Psychological Review, 104(2): 211 – 240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dong A, Agogino AM: (1997) Text analysis for constructing design representations. Artificial Intelligence in Engineering, 11 (2): 65–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hill A, Song S, Dong A, Agogino A (2001) Identifying shared understanding in design teams using document analysis. 13th International Conference on Design Theory and Methodology, DETC2001/ DTM-21713, ASME Press, Chicago, ILGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Moss J, Kotovsky K, Cagan J (2004) Cognitive investigations into knowledge representation in engineering design. In JS Gero (ed), Design Computing and Cognition '04, Kluwer: 97–116Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Michelena N, Agogino A (1988) Multiobjective hydraulic cylinder design, Journal of Mechanisms. Transmissions and Automation in Design 110: 81–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Somwrita Sarkar
    • 1
  • Andy Dong
    • 1
  • John S. Gero
    • 2
  1. 1.University of SydneyAustralia
  2. 2.George Mason UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations