Multi Objective Optimization MOOP with iSIGHT 9'0 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 22
About This Presentation
Title:

Multi Objective Optimization MOOP with iSIGHT 9'0

Description:

Be able to directly use with no programming and in some cases with iSIGHT ... A good sunroof design in a car could aim to minimize the noise the driver hears ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:304
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 23
Provided by: davidjp1
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Multi Objective Optimization MOOP with iSIGHT 9'0


1
Multi Objective Optimization (MOOP) with iSIGHT
9.0
  • David J. Powell, PhD
  • dpowell2_at_elon.edu

2
Goals
  • Be able to directly use with no programming and
    in some cases with iSIGHT programming Multiple
    Objective Optimization in iSIGHT (both classical
    and evolutionary)
  • Classical Numerical Approaches
  • Understand iSIGHT flexibility to help you
    generate multiple points or a single point on
    pareto optimal front.
  • Techniques are valid for any iSIGHT optimization
    technique.
  • Understand iSIGHT tools for data analysis of
    pareto front.
  • Understand new Genetic Algorithm approaches for
    MOOP

3
Examples of MOOP
  • In bridge construction, a good design is
    characterized by low total mass and high
    stiffness.
  • Aircraft design requires simultaneously
    optimization of fuel efficiency, payload and
    weight.
  • A good sunroof design in a car could aim to
    minimize the noise the driver hears and maximize
    the ventilation.
  • The traditional portfolio optimization problem
    attempts to simultaneously minimize the risk and
    maximize the return.
  • (info from http//www-fp.mcs.anl.gov/otc/Guide/Opt
    Web/multiobj/ )

4
Primary References
  • Anderson, J. (2001), Multiobjective Optimization
    in Engineering Design, Linkoping University,
    Technical Report 675.
  • Deb, K. (2001), Multi-Objective Optimization
    using Evolutionary Algorithms, John Wiley Sons.
  • Osyczka, A. (1985). Multicriteria Optimization
    for Engineering Design, In Design Optimization,
    pp 193-225.
  • Sen, P. (1998). Multiple Criteria Decision
    Support in Engineering, Springer-Verlag

5
MOOP General Form
Minimize fm(x), m
1,2,,M Subject to gj(x) lt 0,
j 1,2,.,J hk(x) 0,
k 1,2,.,K
xi(L) lt xi lt xi(U) , i 1,2, , n
where Xi Rn
continuous variables
Xi In
integer variables Xi (Xi1,
Xi2, ) discrete variables
6
Ideal or Utopian Solution Vector
  • For each of the M objectives, there exists one
    different optimal solution.
  • An objective vector constructed with these
    individual optimal objective values constitutes
    the ideal objective vector or utopian vector.
  • In general, this is never obtainable
  • What is its use
  • Individual optimal objective values used for
    normalization
  • Used by some classical techniques as solutions
    closer to ideal are better.

7
Utopian Objective Vector
Nadir upperbound of eachobjective
Utopia lowest value of each objective
Figure from Deb p. 27
8
Domination
  • A solution x(1) is said to dominate the other
    solution x(2), if following 2 conditions are
    true
  • The solution x(1) is no worse than x(2) in all
    objectives for j 1, 2, , M
  • The solution x(1) is strictly better than x(2) in
    at least one objective

9
Domination Example
1 dominates 25 dominates 1
Figure from Deb page 29
10
Pareto Optimal
  • Globally Pareto-optimal set. The non-dominated
    set of the entire feasible search space S is the
    globally Pareto-optimal set.

11
Pareto Optimal Front
Figure from Anderson
12
Pareto Optimal Fronts
Figure from Deb p. 32
13
Classification of MOO Techniques
  • No articulation of preference information
  • Global criterion (SC)
  • MinMax (SN)
  • Benson (SN)
  • Prior
  • Weighted Sum (1) (C)
  • Goal Programming (S)
  • Lexicographic (S)
  • Posterior
  • Weighted Sum (2) (C)
  • eConstraint (N)
  • Genetic Algorithm (N)
  • Weighted MinMax (2) (SN)
  • Weighted Goal Programming (2)
  • Progressive
  • Satisficing Tradeoff Analysis (not covered. Mimic
    with other methods)

For clarity I will present in category order but
deviate on individual techniques
Simple programming required S Convex
objective space C Nonconvex
objective space N
14
IBeam Example
Figure from Osyczka p 196
15
IBeam MOOP
Minimize Cross Section Area Minimize Static
Deflection Subject to g1(x) lt 16 (strength
constraint) 10 lt x1 lt 80 10
lt x2 lt 50 0.9 lt x3 lt 5
0.9 lt x4 lt 5 Starting design x0 75, 45,
2, 2 Cross Section Area 322 Static Deflection
0.01669 g1 5.605
16
IBeam Calculation
17
Starting Point Problem Formulation Utopia
CrossSectionArea
18
Calculate Utopia Cross Section Area
19
Starting Point for Utopia Static Deflection
20
Calculate Utopian Static Deflection
21
Start of Standard Tradeoff Curve
22
How about others?
  • NLPJOB by Schittkowski
  • Weighted sum
  • Lexicographic
  • eConstraint on Tradeoff Method
  • Global Criterion p 1, p 2
  • MinMax
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com