An Empirical Comparison of Meta-Modeling Techniques for Robust Design Optimization
DOI10.5281/zenodo.3854910Zenodo3854910MaRDI QIDQ6690428FDOQ6690428
Dataset published at Zenodo repository.
Sibghat Ullah, Thomas Bäck, Stefan Menzel, Hao Wang, Bernhard Sendhoff
Publication date: 20 February 2020
Copyright license: Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International
This is the data and source code used in the paper below: Sibghat Ullah, Hao Wang, Stefan Menzel, Bernhard Sendhoff and Thomas Bck, An Empirical Comparison of Meta-Modeling Techniques for Robust Design Optimization, in 2019 IEEE Symposium Series on Computational Intelligence (SSCI), Xiamen, China, 6-9 December 2019, doi:10.1109/SSCI44817.2019.9002805 This research investigates the potential of using meta-modeling techniques in the context of robust optimization namely optimization under uncertainty/noise. A systematic empirical comparison is performed for evaluating and comparing different meta-modeling techniques for robust optimization. The experimental setup includes three noise levels, six meta-modeling algorithms, and six benchmark problems from the continuous optimization domain, each for three different dimensionalities. Two robustness definitions: robust regularization and robust composition, are used in the experiments. The meta-modeling techniques are evaluated and compared with respect to the modeling accuracy and the optimal function values. The results clearly show that Kriging, Support Vector Machine and Polynomial regression perform excellently as they achieve high accuracy and the optimal point on the model landscape is close to the true optimum of test functions in most cases.
This page was built for dataset: An Empirical Comparison of Meta-Modeling Techniques for Robust Design Optimization
