Abstract
The ensemble of surrogate models has attracted more and more attention due to their more stable performance than individual models. This work proposes a novel adaptive ensemble of surrogate models based on the minimum screening index. Constructing the screening index to realize the definition and elimination of a global poor model to further update the model library. Compared with the cross-validation error, this index presents better reliability in the model library update. The baseline model is determined by the minimum screening index to further propose a new weight calculation strategy based on this baseline model; 35 test functions are used to evaluate the performance of the proposed model. The results show that this model presents better accuracy and robustness than the individual surrogates and the other ensemble of surrogate models. More importantly, in engineering applications, the same results are also obtained, indicating that the proposed model has a higher priority than the other ensemble of surrogate models. This effective model gives a new way for the design of engineering problems.
Issue Section:
Design Automation
References
1.
Qian
, J. C.
, Yi
, J. X.
, Cheng
, Y. S.
, Liu
, J.
, and Zhou
, Q.
, 2020
, “A Sequential Constraints Updating Approach for Kriging Surrogate Model-Assisted Engineering Optimization Design Problem
,” Eng. Comput.
, 36
(3
), pp. 993
–1009
. 2.
Jung
, Y. S.
, Kang
, K.
, Cho
, H.
, and Lee
, I.
, 2021
, “Confidence-Based Design Optimization for a More Conservative Optimum Under Surrogate Model Uncertainty Caused by Gaussian Process
,” ASME J. Mech. Des.
, 143
(9
), p. 091701
. 3.
Jiang
, C.
, Qiu
, H. B.
, Yang
, Z.
, Chen
, L. M.
, Gao
, L.
, and Li
, P. G.
, 2019
, “A General Failure-Pursuing Sampling Framework for Surrogate-Based Reliability Analysis
,” Reliab. Eng. Syst. Safe.
, 183
, pp. 47
–59
. 4.
Hariri-Ardebili
, M. A.
, 2018
, “MCS-Based Response Surface Metamodels and Optimal Design of Experiments for Gravity Dams
,” Struct. Infrastruct. Eng.
, 14
(12
), pp. 1641
–1663
. 5.
Chatterjee
, T.
, Chakraborty
, S.
, and Chowdhury
, R.
, 2019
, “A Critical Review of Surrogate Assisted Robust Design Optimization
,” Arch. Comput. Methods Eng.
, 26
(1
), pp. 245
–274
. 6.
Assari
, P.
, and Dehghan
, M.
, 2017
, “The Numerical Solution of Two-Dimensional Logarithmic Integral Equations on Normal Domains Using Radial Basis Functions With Polynomial Precision
,” Eng. Comput.
, 33
(4
), pp. 853
–870
. 7.
Liu
, X.
, Liu
, X.
, Zhou
, Z. H.
, and Hu
, L.
, 2021
, “An Efficient Multi-objective Optimization Method Based on the Adaptive Approximation Model of the Radial Basis Function
,” Struct. Multidiscip. Optim.
, 63
(3
), pp. 1385
–1403
. 8.
Urquhart
, M.
, Ljungskog
, E.
, and Sebben
, S.
, 2020
, “Surrogate-Based Optimisation Using Adaptively Scaled Radial Basis Functions
,” Appl. Soft Comput.
, 88
, p. 106050
. 9.
Bouhlel
, M. A.
, and Martins
, J. R. R. A.
, 2019
, “Gradient-Enhanced Kriging for High-Dimensional Problems
,” Eng. Comput.
, 35
(1
), pp. 157
–173
. 10.
Chen
, Z.
, Peng
, S.
, Li
, X.
, Qiu
, H.
, Xiong
, H.
, Gao
, L.
, and Li
, P.
, 2015
, “An Important Boundary Sampling Method for Reliability-Based Design Optimization Using Kriging Model
,” Struct. Multidiscip. Optim.
, 52
(1
), pp. 55
–70
. 11.
Jiang
, P.
, Zhang
, Y. H.
, Zhou
, Q.
, Shao
, X. Y.
, Hu
, J. X.
, and Shu
, L. S.
, 2018
, “An Adaptive Sampling Strategy for Kriging Metamodel Based on Delaunay Triangulation and TOPSIS
,” Appl. Intell.
, 48
(6
), pp. 1644
–1656
. 12.
Clarke
, S. M.
, Griebsch
, J. H.
, and Simpson
, T. W.
, 2004
, “Analysis of Support Vector Regression for Approximation of Complex Engineering Analyses
,” ASME J. Mech. Des.
, 127
(6
), pp. 1077
–1087
. 13.
Jiang
, C.
, Cai
, X. W.
, Qiu
, H. B.
, Gao
, L.
, and Li
, P. G.
, 2018
, “A Two-Stage Support Vector Regression Assisted Sequential Sampling Approach for Global Metamodeling
,” Struct. Multidiscip. Optim.
, 58
(4
), pp. 1657
–1672
. 14.
Prado
, D. R.
, López-Fernández
, J. A.
, Arrebola
, M.
, and Goussetis
, G.
, 2020
, “On the Use of the Angle of Incidence in Support Vector Regression Surrogate Models for Practical Reflectarray Design
,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag.
, 69
(3
), pp. 1787
–1792
. 15.
Bhattacharjee
, K. S.
, Singh
, H. K.
, and Ray
, T.
, 2018
, “Multiple Surrogate-Assisted Many-Objective Optimization for Computationally Expensive Engineering Design
,” ASME J. Mech. Des.
, 140
(5
), p. 051403
. 16.
Lye
, K. O.
, Mishra
, S.
, Ray
, D.
, and Chandrashekar
, P.
, 2021
, “Iterative Surrogate Model Optimization (ISMO): An Active Learning Algorithm for PDE Constrained Optimization With Deep Neural Networks
,” Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng.
, 374
, p. 113575
. 17.
Lim
, D.
, Ong
, Y. S.
, Jin
, Y.
, and Sendhoff
, B.
, 2007
, “A Study on Metamodeling Techniques, Ensembles, and Multi-surrogates in Evolutionary Computation
,” Proceedings of the 9th Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation
, Boston, MA
, July 9–13
, pp. 1288
–1295
.18.
Cheng
, K.
, and Lu
, Z.
, 2020
, “Structural Reliability Analysis Based on Ensemble Learning of Surrogate Models
,” Struct. Saf.
, 83
, p. 101905
. 19.
Zhao
, Y.
, Sun
, C. L.
, Zeng
, J. C.
, Tan
, Y.
, and Zhang
, G. C.
, 2021
, “A Surrogate-Ensemble Assisted Expensive Many-Objective Optimization
,” Knowl.-Based Syst.
, 211
, p. 106520
. 20.
Goel
, T.
, Haftka
, R. T.
, Shyy
, W.
, and Queipo
, N. V.
, 2007
, “Ensemble of Surrogates
,” Struct. Multidiscip. Optim.
, 33
(3
), pp. 199
–216
. 21.
Zerpa
, L. E.
, Queipo
, N. V.
, Pintos
, S.
, and Salager
, J. L.
, 2005
, “An Optimization Methodology of Alkaline–Surfactant–Polymer Flooding Processes Using Field Scale Numerical Simulation and Multiple Surrogates
,” J. Petrol. Sci. Eng.
, 47
(3–4
), pp. 197
–208
. 22.
Viana
, F. A. C.
, Haftka
, R. T.
, and Steffen
, V.
, 2009
, “Multiple Surrogates: How Cross-validation Errors Can Help Us to Obtain the Best Predictor
,” Struct. Multidiscip. Optim.
, 39
(4
), pp. 439
–457
. 23.
Acar
, E.
, and Rais-Rohani
, M.
, 2009
, “Ensemble of Metamodels With Optimized Weight Factors
,” Struct. Multidiscip. Optim.
, 37
(3
), pp. 279
–294
. 24.
Ferreira
, W. G.
, and Serpa
, A. L.
, 2016
, “Ensemble of Metamodels: The Augmented Least Squares Approach
,” Struct. Multidiscip. Optim.
, 53
(5
), pp. 1019
–1046
. 25.
Liu
, H.
, Xu
, S.
, Wang
, X.
, Meng
, J.
, and Yang
, S.
, 2016
, “Optimal Weighted Pointwise Ensemble of Radial Basis Functions With Different Basis Functions
,” AIAA J.
, 54
(10
), pp. 3117
–3133
. 26.
Pang
, Y.
, Wang
, Y. T.
, Sun
, W.
, and Song
, X. G.
, 2021
, “OTL-PEM: An Optimization-Based Two-Layer Pointwise Ensemble of Surrogate Models
,” ASME J. Mech. Des.
, 144
(5
), p. 051702
. 27.
Lee
, Y.
, and Choi
, D. H.
, 2014
, “Pointwise Ensemble of Meta-models Using v Nearest Points Cross-validation
,” Struct. Multidiscip. Optim.
, 50
(3
), pp. 383
–394
. 28.
Zhang
, J.
, Yue
, X. X.
, Qiu
, J. J.
, Zhang
, M. Y.
, and Wang
, X. M.
, 2021
, “A Unified Ensemble of Surrogates With Global and Local Measures for Global Metamodeling
,” Eng. Optimiz.
, 53
(3
), pp. 474
–495
. 29.
Zhang
, J.
, Chowdhury
, S.
, and Messac
, A.
, 2012
, “An Adaptive Hybrid Surrogate Model
,” Struct. Multidiscip. Optim.
, 46
(2
), pp. 223
–238
. 30.
Song
, X. G.
, Lv
, L. Y.
, Li
, J.
, Sun
, W.
, and Zhang
, J.
, 2018
, “An Advanced and Robust Ensemble Surrogate Model: Extended Adaptive Hybrid Functions
,” ASME J. Mech. Des.
, 140
(4
), p. 041402
. 31.
Ye
, Y.
, Wang
, Z.
, and Zhang
, X.
, 2020
, “An Optimal Pointwise Weighted Ensemble of Surrogates Based on Minimization of Local Mean Square Error
,” Struct. Multidiscip. Optim.
, 62
(2
), pp. 529
–542
. 32.
Acar
, E.
, 2010
, “Various Approaches for Constructing an Ensemble of Metamodels Using Local Measures
,” Struct. Multidiscip. Optim.
, 42
(6
), pp. 879
–896
. 33.
Arlot
, S.
, and Celisse
, A.
, 2010
, “A Survey of Cross-validation Procedures for Model Selection
,” Stat. Surv.
, 4
, pp. 40
–79
. 34.
Kaminsky
, A. L.
, Wang
, Y.
, and Pant
, K.
, 2021
, “An Efficient Batch K-Fold Cross-validation Voronoi Adaptive Sampling Technique for Global Surrogate Modeling
,” ASME J. Mech. Des.
, 143
(1
), p. 011706
. 35.
Viana
, F. A. C.
, 2010
, SURROGATES Toolbox User’s Guide
, Gainesville, FL
.36.
Talgorn
, B.
, Kokkolaras
, M.
, and Digabel
, S. L.
, 2015
, “Statistical Surrogate Formulations for Simulation-Based Design Optimization
,” ASME J. Mech. Des.
, 137
(2
), p. 021405
. 37.
Gramacy
, R. B.
, and Lee
, H. K. H.
, 2012
, “Cases for the Nugget in Modeling Computer Experiments
,” Stat. Comput.
, 22
(3
), pp. 713
–722
. 38.
Mullur
, A. A.
, and Messac
, A.
, 2006
, “Metamodeling Using Extended Radial Basis Functions: A Comparative Approach
,” Eng. Comput.
, 21
(3
), pp. 203
–217
. 39.
Park
, J. S.
, 1994
, “Optimal Latin-Hypercube Designs for Computer Experiments
,” J. Stat. Plan. Infer.
, 39
(1
), pp. 95
–111
. 40.
Jones
, D. R.
, Schonlau
, M.
, and Welch
, W. J.
, 1998
, “Efficient Global Optimization of Expensive Black-Box Functions
,” J. Glob. Optim.
, 13
(4
), p. 455
–492
. Copyright © 2022 by ASME
You do not currently have access to this content.
