×

Robust system design with limited experimental data and an inexact simulation model. (English) Zbl 1542.68202

Summary: Computer simulations of physical systems are commonly used to improve system performance via optimizing the system design. We study the case when, in addition to the simulation, a limited amount of experimental data is collected from the real physical system. This article describes a method for selecting a conservative system design that is robust to uncertainty from the simulation parameters and simulation bias. The concept is that each potential system design is assigned a worst-case scenario in a data-driven feasible region. The conservative system design is then chosen as the best of the worst-cases. The method is shown to have good statistical properties. A case study is performed where a vehicle safety belt design is chosen to minimize the impact of vehicle crashes on a driver.

MSC:

68U07 Computer science aspects of computer-aided design
62G08 Nonparametric regression and quantile regression
62G15 Nonparametric tolerance and confidence regions
82-10 Mathematical modeling or simulation for problems pertaining to statistical mechanics
Full Text: DOI

References:

[1] M. Bayarri, J. Berger, J. Cafeo, G. Garcia-Donato, F. Liu, J. Palomo, R. Parthasarathy, R. Paulo, J. Sacks, and D. Walsh, et al., Computer model validation with functional output, Ann. Stat., 35 (2007), pp. 1874-1906. · Zbl 1144.62368
[2] E. Bektas, K. Broermann, G. Pećanac, S. Rzepka, C. Silber, and B. Wunderle, Robust design optimization: On methodology and short review, in the Proceedings of the International Conference on Thermal, Mechanical and Multi-Physics Simulation and Experiments in Microelectronics and Microsystems (EuroSimE), IEEE, 2017, pp. 1-7.
[3] X. Chen, T. Hasselman, D. Neill, X. Chen, T. Hasselman, and D. Neill, Reliability based structural design optimization for practical applications, in Proceedings of the 38th Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference, 1997, p. 1403.
[4] I. Doltsinis and Z. Kang, Robust design of structures using optimization methods, Comput. Meth. Appl. Mech. Engrg., 193 (2004), pp. 2221-2237. · Zbl 1067.74554
[5] I. Enevoldsen and J. D. Sørensen, Reliability-based optimization in structural engineering, Structural Safety, 15 (1994), pp. 169-196.
[6] R. Eppinger, E. Sun, F. Bandak, M. Haffner, N. Khaewpong, M. Maltese, S. Kuppa, T. Nguyen, E. Takhounts, and R. Tannous, et al., Development of improved injury criteria for the assessment of advanced automotive restraint systems-ii, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, (1999), pp. 1-70.
[7] J. Fan and Q. Yao, Efficient estimation of conditional variance functions in stochastic regression, Biometrika, 85 (1998), pp. 645-660. · Zbl 0918.62065
[8] B. E. Hansen, Uniform convergence rates for kernel estimation with dependent data, Econometric Theory, 24 (2008), pp. 726-748. · Zbl 1284.62252
[9] W. Härdle and M. Müller, Multivariate and semiparametric kernel regression, tech. report, Discussion Papers, Interdisciplinary Research Project 373: Quantification and Simulation of Economic Processes, 1997.
[10] D. Higdon, J. Gattiker, B. Williams, and M. Rightley, Computer model calibration using high-dimensional output, J. Amer. Stat. Assoc., 103 (2008), pp. 570-583. · Zbl 1469.62414
[11] J. Hu, K. Fischer, P. Lange, and A. Adler, Effects of Crash Pulse, Impact Angle, Occupant Size, Front Seat Location, and Restraint System on Rear Seat Occupant Protection, Technical report, SAE Technical Paper, 2015.
[12] J. Hu, J. D. Rupp, M. P. Reed, F. Kurt, P. Lange, and A. Adler, Rear Seat Restraint Optimization Considering the Needs from a Diverse Population [R], Report No. DOT HS 812 248, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, DC, 2016.
[13] J. Hu, J. Wu, K. D. Klinich, M. P. Reed, J. D. Rupp, and L. Cao, Optimizing the rear seat environment for older children, adults, and infants, Traffic Injury Prevention, 14 (2013), pp. S13-S22.
[14] P. J. Huber, Robust statistics, in International Encyclopedia of Statistical Science, Springer, 2011, pp. 1248-1251.
[15] H. A. Jensen, Structural optimization of non-linear systems under stochastic excitation, Probab. Engrg. Mech., 21 (2006), pp. 397-409.
[16] M. C. Kennedy and A. O’Hagan, Bayesian calibration of computer models, J. Roy. Stat. Soc. Ser. B Stat. Method., 63 (2001), pp. 425-464. · Zbl 1007.62021
[17] D. Kinser and F. Moses, Optimum structural design with failure probability constraints., AIAA Journal, 5 (1967), pp. 1152-1158.
[18] K.-H. Lee and G.-J. Park, Robust optimization considering tolerances of design variables, Comput. Structures, 79 (2001), pp. 77-86.
[19] E. A. Nadaraya, On estimating regression, Theory Probab. Appl., 9 (1964), pp. 141-142.
[20] M. Plumlee, Bayesian calibration of inexact computer models, J. Amer. Stat. Assoc., 112 (2017), pp. 1274-1285.
[21] D. Ruppert and M. P. Wand, Multivariate locally weighted least squares regression, Ann. Stat., (1994), pp. 1346-1370. · Zbl 0821.62020
[22] G. I. Schuëller and H. A. Jensen, Computational methods in optimization considering uncertainties-an overview, Comput. Meth. Appl. Mech. Engrg., 198 (2008), pp. 2-13. · Zbl 1194.74258
[23] G. Taguchi, Introduction to quality engineering: designing quality into products and processes, tech. report, 1986.
[24] R. Tuo, C. J. Wu, et al., Efficient calibration for imperfect computer models, Ann. Stat., 43 (2015), pp. 2331-2352. · Zbl 1326.62228
[25] M. A. Valdebenito and G. I. Schuëller, A survey on approaches for reliability-based optimization, Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 42 (2010), pp. 645-663. · Zbl 1274.90125
[26] E. H. Vanmarcke, Matrix formulation of reliability analysis and reliability-based design, Comput. Structures, 3 (1973), pp. 757-770.
[27] S. Verdu and H. Poor, On minimax robustness: A general approach and applications, IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory, 30 (1984), pp. 328-340. · Zbl 0544.93064
[28] G. S. Watson, Smooth regression analysis, Sankhyā: Indian J. Stat. Ser. A, (1964), pp. 359-372. · Zbl 0137.13002
[29] J. Wu, J. Hu, M. P. Reed, K. D. Klinich, and L. Cao, Development and validation of a parametric child anthropomorphic test device model representing 6-12-year-old children, Int. J. Crashworthiness, 17 (2012), pp. 606-620.
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. In some cases that data have been complemented/enhanced by data from zbMATH Open. This attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming completeness or a perfect matching.