A framework of design weakness detection through machine health monitoring for the evolutionary design optimization of multi-domain systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Design of a multi-domain engineering system can be complicated due to its complex structure and dynamic coupling between domains. Ideally, designing a multi-domain system should be done in an integrated and concurrent manner, where dynamic interactions between domains in the entire system have to be considered simultaneously, throughout the design process. In recent years, researchers have made some progress in the integrated and optimal design of multi-domain systems. Dynamic modeling tools such as Bond Graphs and Linear Graphs have been considered for modeling multi-domain systems, which can facilitate the design process. In the process of design optimization, a rather challenging task is to concurrently satisfy multiple design objectives. Methods of evolutionary computing, genetic programming in particular, have received much attention in recent years for application in design optimization. These methods can be extended to evolutionary optimization, which may involve complex and non-analytic objective functions and a variety of design specifications. More recently, machine health monitoring system (MHMS) has been considered for integration into the scheme of design evolution even though no concrete developments have made in this regard. In this paper, a framework of design weakness detection through machine health monitoring for evolutionary design optimization of multi-domain system is proposed. MHMS is integrated with evolutionary design optimization to make the overall process of design evolution more effective and feasible from the practical point of view. Information form MHMS is utilized to detect the “sites” or “candidates” of design weakness, which will involve computation of a new measure that can reflect the quality of the current design. These candidates of design weakness are then provided to the process of evolutionary design optimization. On subsequent analysis, design improvements would be made only if these candidates were found to be related to design weaknesses. Otherwise, the monitoring process will continue. Supervised design weakness detection is achieved through the integrated system of MHMS and evolutionary design optimization. In addition, a Design Expert System is employed to monitor and assist both design weakness detection and isolation, and feasible design selection.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".