Integrating Least Square Support Vector Regression and Mode Pursuing Sampling Optimization for Crashworthiness Design
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many metamodeling techniques have been developed in the past two decades to reduce the computational cost of design evaluation. With the increasing scale and complexity of engineering problems, popular metamodeling techniques including artificial neural network (ANN), Polynomial regression (PR), Kriging (KG), radial basis functions (RBF), and multivariate adaptive regression splines (MARS) face difficulties in solving highly nonlinear problems, such as the crashworthiness design. Therefore, in this work, we integrate the least support vector regression (LSSVR) with the mode pursuing sampling (MPS) optimization method and applied the integrated approach for crashworthiness design. The MPS is used for generating new samples which are concentrated near the current local minima at each iteration and yet still statistically cover the entire design space. The LSSVR is used for establishing a more robust metamodel from noisy data. Therefore, the proposed method integrates the advantages of both the LSSVR and MPS to more efficiently achieve reasonably accurate results. In order to verify the proposed method, well-known highly nonlinear functions are used for testing. Finally, the proposed method is applied to three typical crashworthiness optimization cases. The results demonstrate the potential capability of this method in the crashworthiness design of vehicles.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".