Response Surface Approximations for Engineering Optimization

  • A. J. G. Schoofs
  • J. J. M. Rijpkema
Conference paper
Part of the International Centre for Mechanical Sciences book series (CISM, volume 425)


In these lecture notes attention is focused on the use of Response Surface Models as approximation models in engineering optimization. Common strategies are discussed for efficient model construction, based on principles from statistical experimental design theory. Furthermore, modifications of the experimental design theory will be treated, which are necessary and useful on behalf of numerical experimental designs. Finally, guidelines are presented for building and application of response surface models, based on numerical computations.


Regression Model Design Variable Structural Optimization Design Point Multivariate Adaptive Regression Spline 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Atkinson, A.C., and Donev, A.N. (1992). Optimum Experimental Designs. Oxford University Press, Oxford.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. Bishop, C.M. (1995). Neural Networks for Pattern Recognition. Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  3. Box, G.E.P., and Draper, N.R. (1987). Emperical Model Building and Response Surfaces. John Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  4. Box, G.E.P., Hunter, W.G., and Hunter, J.S. (1978). Statistics for Experimenters. John Wiley, New York.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. Draper, N.R., and Smith, H. (1998). Applied Regression Analysis. 3td ed., John Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  6. Fedorov, V.V. (1972). Theory of Optimal Experiments. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  7. Friedman, J.H. (1991). Multivariate Adaptive Regression Splines. The Annals of Statistics, 19: 1–141MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. Giunta, A., Watson, L.T., Koehler, J. (1998). A Comparison of Approximation Modeling Techniques: Polynomial versus Interpolating Models. 7th AIAA/USAF/NASA/ISSMO Symposium on Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization, paper AIAA-98–4758.Google Scholar
  9. Haftka, R.T., and Gürdal, Z. (1992). Elements of Structural Optimization. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. Jin, R., Chen, W., Simpson, T.W. (2000). Comparative Studies of Metamodeling Techniques under Multiple Modeling Criteria. 8th AIAA/USAF/NASA/ISSMO Symposium on Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization, paper AIAA-2000–4801.Google Scholar
  11. Kiefer, J., and Wolfowitz, J. (1959). Optimum Designs in Regression Problems. Canadian Journal of Mathematics, 12: 363–366.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Koehler, J.R., Owen, A.B. (1996). Computer Experiments. In: Handbook of Statistics, vol.13 (eds. Ghosh, S., Rao, C.R. ), Elsevier Science, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  13. Lancaster, P., Salkauskas, K. (1986). Curve and Surface Fitting: an Introduction. Academic Press, London.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. Marquardt, D.W. (1970). Generalized Inverses, Ridge Regression, Biased Linear Estimation, and Nonlinear Estimation. Technometrics, 12: 591–612.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. Mitchell, T.J. (1974). An Algorithm for the Construction of D-optimal Experimental Designs. Technometrics, 16: 203–210.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. Montgomery, D.C., and Peck, E.A. (1992). Introduction to Linear Regression Analysis. 2 °d ed., John Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  17. Montgomery, D.C. (1996). Design and Analysis of Experiments, 4t° ed. John Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  18. Myers, R.H., Montgomery, D.C. (1995). Response Surface Methodology: Process and Product Optimization using Designed Experiments. J. Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  19. Nagtegaal, R. (1987). Computer Aided Design of Experiments. A program for experimental design and model building. (in Dutch). Report WFW 87.005, Eindhoven University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Powell, M.J.D. (1987). Radial Basis Functions for Multivariable Interpolation: a Review. in: Algorithms for Approximation (eds. Mason, J.C., Cox, M.G.) Oxford University Press, London.Google Scholar
  21. Sacks, J., Welch, W.J., Mitchell, T.J., Wynn, H.P. (1989). Design and Analysis of Computer Experiments. Statistical Science, 4: 409–435.Google Scholar
  22. Schoofs, A.J.G., Klink, M.B.M., van Campen, D.H. (1992). Approximation of structural optimization problems by means of designed numerical experiments. Structural Optimization, 4: 206–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Schoofs, A.J.G., Houten, M.H. van, Etman, L.F.P., Campen, D.H. van (1997). Global and Mid-Range Function Approximation for Engineering Optimization. Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, 46:.335–359.Google Scholar
  24. Smith, K. (1918). On the Standard Deviations of Adjusted and Interpolated Values of an Observed Polynomial Function and its Constants and the Guidance They Give Towards a Proper Choice of the Distribution of Observations. Biometrica, 12: 1–85.Google Scholar
  25. Welch, W.J. (1982). Branch and Bound Search for Experimental Designs Based on D-Optimality and Other Criteria. Technometrics, 24: 41–48MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. Welch, W.J. (1983). A Mean Squared Error Criterion for the Design of Experiments. Biometrica, 70: 205–223.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Wien 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. J. G. Schoofs
    • 1
  • J. J. M. Rijpkema
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringEindhoven University of TechnologyThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations