An Empirical Comparison of Meta-Modeling Techniques for Robust Design Optimization

This research investigates the potential of using meta-modeling techniques in the context of robust optimization namely optimization under uncertainty/noise. A systematic empirical comparison is performed for evaluating and comparing different meta-modeling techniques for robust optimization. The ex...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in2019 IEEE Symposium Series on Computational Intelligence (SSCI) pp. 819 - 828
Main Authors Ullah, Sibghat, Wang, Hao, Menzel, Stefan, Sendhoff, Bernhard, Back, Thomas
Format Conference Proceeding
LanguageEnglish
Published IEEE 01.12.2019
Subjects
Design optimization
Linear programming
machine learning
meta-modeling
Metamodeling
Noise measurement
quality engineering
robust optimization
Robustness
surrogate-assisted optimization
Uncertainty
Online AccessGet full text
DOI10.1109/SSCI44817.2019.9002805

Cover

More Information
Summary:This research investigates the potential of using meta-modeling techniques in the context of robust optimization namely optimization under uncertainty/noise. A systematic empirical comparison is performed for evaluating and comparing different meta-modeling techniques for robust optimization. The experimental setup includes three noise levels, six meta-modeling algorithms, and six benchmark problems from the continuous optimization domain, each for three different dimensionalities. Two robustness definitions: robust regularization and robust composition, are used in the experiments. The meta-modeling techniques are evaluated and compared with respect to the modeling accuracy and the optimal function values. The results clearly show that Kriging, Support Vector Machine and Polynomial regression perform excellently as they achieve high accuracy and the optimal point on the model landscape is close to the true optimum of test functions in most cases.
DOI:10.1109/SSCI44817.2019.9002805