6533b86efe1ef96bd12cb5f2
RESEARCH PRODUCT
Multiobjective shape design in a ventilation system with a preference-driven surrogate-assisted evolutionary algorithm
Yaochu JinTomas KratkyTinkle ChughKaisa MiettinenPekka Makonensubject
Pareto optimalitymallintaminenMathematical optimizationOptimization problemProcess (engineering)Computer sciencemedia_common.quotation_subjectmultiple criteria decision makingEvolutionary algorithmoptimal shape designpreference information0102 computer and information sciences02 engineering and technology01 natural sciencesComponent (UML)0202 electrical engineering electronic engineering information engineeringBaseline (configuration management)Function (engineering)Preference (economics)media_commonpareto-tehokkuusilmanvaihtojärjestelmätmetamodelsmonitavoiteoptimointikoneoppiminen010201 computation theory & mathematicsevolutionary multi-objective optimizationcomputational costs020201 artificial intelligence & image processingmuotodescription
We formulate and solve a real-world shape design optimization problem of an air intake ventilation system in a tractor cabin by using a preference-based surrogate-assisted evolutionary multiobjective optimization algorithm. We are motivated by practical applicability and focus on two main challenges faced by practitioners in industry: 1) meaningful formulation of the optimization problem reflecting the needs of a decision maker and 2) finding a desirable solution based on a decision maker’s preferences when solving a problem with computationally expensive function evaluations. For the first challenge, we describe the procedure of modelling a component in the air intake ventilation system with commercial simulation tools. The problem to be solved involves time consuming computational fluid dynamics simulations. Therefore, for the second challenge, we extend a recently proposed Kriging-assisted evolutionary algorithm K-RVEA to incorporate a decision maker’s preferences. Our numerical results indicate efficiency in using the computing resources available and the solutions obtained reflect the decision maker’s preferences well. Actually, two of the solutions dominate the baseline design (the design provided by the decision maker before the optimization process). The decision maker was satisfied with the results and eventually selected one as the final solution. peerReviewed
| year | journal | country | edition | language |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-07-13 | Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference |