MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980799771 · doi:10.1115/detc2007-35566

Diagonal Quadratic Approximation for Parallelization of Analytical Target Cascading

2007· article· en· W1980799771 on OpenAlexaff
Yanjing Li, Zhaosong Lu, Jeremy J. Michalek

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering Design
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematical optimizationComputer scienceQuadratic equationCoordinate descentDiagonalConvergence (economics)Separable spaceBlock (permutation group theory)AlgorithmParallel computingMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Analytical Target Cascading (ATC) is an effective decomposition approach used for engineering design optimization problems that have hierarchical structures. With ATC, the overall system is split into subsystems, which are solved separately and coordinated via target/response consistency constraints. As parallel computing becomes more common, it is desirable to have separable subproblems in ATC so that each subproblem can be solved concurrently to increase computational throughput. In this paper, we first examine existing ATC methods, providing an alternative to existing nested coordination schemes by using the block coordinate descent method (BCD). Then we apply diagonal quadratic approximation (DQA) by linearizing the cross term of the augmented Lagrangian function to create separable subproblems. Local and global convergence proofs are described for this method. To further reduce overall computational cost, we introduce the truncated DQA (TDQA) method that limits the number of inner loop iterations of DQA. These two new methods are empirically compared to existing methods using test problems from the literature. Results show that computational cost of nested loop methods is reduced by using BCD and generally the computational cost of the truncated methods, TDQA and ALAD, are superior to other nested loop methods with lower overall computational cost than the best previously reported results.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.118
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.262 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations72
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering DesignFrench-language works237,207