Abstract
Approximation methods have found an increasing use in the optimization of complex engineering systems. The approximation method provides a 'surrogate' model which, once constructed, can be called instead of the original expensive model for the purposes of optimization. Sensitivity information on the response of interest may be cheaply available in many applications, for example, through a pertubation analysis in a finite element model or through the use of adjoint methods in CFD. This information is included here within the approximation and two strategies for optimization are described. The first involves simply resampling at the best predicted point, the second is based on an expected improvement approach. Further, the use of lower fidelity models together with approximation methods throughout the optimization process is finding increasing popularity. Some of these strategies are noted here and these are extended to include any information which may be available through sensitivities. Encouraging initial results are obtained.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alexandrov, N.M., Dennis Jr, J.E., Lewis R.M. and Torczon, V. (1998), A trust-region framework for managing the use of approximation models in optimization, Structural Optimization, 15, 16–23.
Bakr, M.H., Bandler, J.W., Biernacki, R.M., Chen, S.H. and Madsen K. (1998), A trust region aggressive space mapping algorithm for EM optimization, IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques, 46, 2412–2425.
Bakr, M.H., Bandler, J.W., Georgieva, N. and Madsen, K. (1999), A hybrid aggressive space mapping algorithmfor EM optimization, IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques, 47, 2440–2449.
Balabanov, V., Haftka, R.T., Grossman, B., Mason, W.H. and Watson, L.T. (1998), Multifidelity response surface model for HSCT wing bending material weight, 7th AIAA/USAF/NASA/ISSMO Symposium on Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization, St. Louis, MO, AIAA Paper 98-4804, pp. 778–788.
Bandler, J.W., Biernacki, R.M., Chen, S.H., Grobelny, P.A. and Hemmers, R.H. (1994), Space mapping technique for electromagnetic optimization, IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques, 42, 2536–2544.
Chang, K.J., Haftka, R.T., Giles, G.L. and Kao, P.-J. (1993), Sensitivity-based scaling for approximating structural response, Journal of Aircraft, 30, 283–287.
Dixon, L.C.W. and Szego, G.P. (1978), The global optimization problem: an introduction, In: Dixon, L.C.W. and Szego, G.P. (eds.), Towards Global Optimization, Vol. 2, North Holland, Amsterdam, 1–15.
Fox, R.L., (1971), Optimization Methods for Engineering Design, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Hutchinson, M.G., Unger, E.R., Mason, W.H., Grossman, B. and Haftka, R.T. (1994), Variablecomplexity aerodynamic optimization of a high speed civil transport wing, Journal of Aircraft, 31, 110–116.
Jones, D.R., Schonlau, M. and Welch, W.J. (1998), Efficient global optimization of expensive black-box functions, Journal of Global Optimization, 13, 455–492.
Kushner H.J., (1964), A new method of locating the maximum point of an arbitrary multipeak curve in the presence of noise, Transactions of the ASME. series D Journal of Basic Engineering, 86, 97–106.
Leary, S.J., Bhaskar, A. and Keane, A.J. A constraint mapping approach to the structural optimization of an expensive model using surrogates, Optimization and Engineering, to appear.
Leary, S.J., Bhaskar, A. and Keane, A.J. A knowledge-based approach to response surface modelling in multifidelity optimization, Journal of Global Optimization, submitted for review.
Mackay, M.D., Beckman, R.J. and Conover, W.J. (1979), A comparison of three methods for selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output froma computer code, Technometrics, 21, 239–245.
Mead, R. (1988), The Design of Experiments, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Mockus, J., Tiesis, V. and Zilinskas, A. (1978), The application of Bayesian methods for seeking the extremum. In: Dixon, L.C.W. and Szego, G.P. (eds.), Towards Global Optimization, Vol. 2, North Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 117–129.
Morris, M.D., Mitchell, T.J. and Ylvisaker, D. (1993), Bayesian design and analysis of computer experiments: use of derivatives in surface prediction, Technometrics, 35, 243–255.
Myers, R.H. and Montgomery, D.C. (1995), Response Surface Methodology: Process and Product Optimization using Designed Experiments, John Wiley and Sons, New York.
Sacks, J., Welch, W.J., Mitchell, T.J. and Wynn, H.P. (1989), Design and analysis of computer experiments (with discussion), Statistical Science, 4, 409–435.
Sobol, I. M., (1979), On the systematic search in a hypercube, SIAM Journal of Numerical Analysis, 16, 790–793.
Vitali, R., Haftka, R.T. and Sankar, B.V. (1999), Multifidelity design of a stiffened composite panel with a crack, 4th World Congress of Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, Buffalo, NY.
Wang, F. and Zhang, Q. (1997), Knowledge-based neural models for microwave design, IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques, 45, 2333–2343.
Watson, P.M. and Gupta, K.C. (1996), EM-ANN models for microstrip vias and interconnects in dataset circuits, IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques, 44, 2495–2503.
White, H., Gallant, A.R., Kornik, K., Stinchcombe, M. and Wooldridge, J. (1992), Artificial Neural Networks: Approximation and Learning Theory, Blackwell, Oxford.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Leary, S.J., Bhaskar, A. & Keane, A.J. A Derivative Based Surrogate Model for Approximating and Optimizing the Output of an Expensive Computer Simulation. Journal of Global Optimization 30, 39–58 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JOGO.0000049094.73665.7e
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JOGO.0000049094.73665.7e