4.7 Article

Efficient resource allocation for genetic algorithm based multi-objective optimization with 1,000 simulations

Journal

STRUCTURAL AND MULTIDISCIPLINARY OPTIMIZATION
Volume 41, Issue 3, Pages 421-432

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00158-009-0426-9

Keywords

Multi-objective evolutionary algorithm; Crashworthiness; Population sensitivity; Resource allocation; NSGA-II; Optimization

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study pertains to practical use of the GA for industrial applications where only a limited number of simulations can be afforded. Specifically, an attempt is made to find an efficient allocation of the total simulation budget (population size and number of generations) for constrained multi-objective optimization. A study is conducted to seek improvements while restricting the number of simulations to 1,000. Parallelization is exploited using concurrent simulations for each GA generation on a HP quad-core cluster, and resulted in a significant time savings. Furthermore, the efficient distribution of computational effort to achieve the greatest improvement in performance was explored. Two analytical examples as well as an automotive crashworthiness simulation of a finite element model with 58,000 elements were used as test examples. Various population sizes and numbers of generations were tried while limiting the total number of simulations to 1,000. The optimization performance was compared with Monte-Carlo and space filling sampling methods. It was observed that using the GA, many feasible and trade-off solutions could be found. It is shown that allowing a large number of generations is beneficial to get good trade-off solutions. For the vehicle design, significant improvements in the performance were observed. This example also suggests that, for problems with a small feasible region, the number of feasible solutions can be significantly increased in the first few generations involving about 200 simulations.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available