A new efficient convergence criterion for reducing computational expense in topology optimization: reducible design variable method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SUMMARY A new efficient convergence criterion, named the reducible design variable method (RDVM), is proposed to save computational expense in topology optimization. There are two types of computational costs: one is to calculate the governing equations, and the other is to update the design variables. In conventional topology optimization, the number of design variables is usually fixed during the optimization procedure. Thus, the computational expense linearly increases with respect to the iteration number. Some design variables, however, quickly converge and some other design variables slowly converge. The idea of the proposed method is to adaptively reduce the number of design variables on the basis of the history of each design variable during optimization. Using the RDVM, those design variables that quickly converge are not considered as design variables for the next iterations. This means that the number of design variables can be reduced to save the computational costs of updating design variables. Then, the iteration will repeat until the number of design variables becomes 0. In addition, the proposed method can lead to faster convergence of the optimization procedure, which indeed is a more significant time saving. It is also revealed that the RDVM gives identical optimal solutions as those by conventional methods. We confirmed the numerical efficiency and solution effectiveness of the RDVM with respect to two types of optimization: static linear elastic minimization, and linear vibration problems with the first eigenvalue as the objective function for maximization. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".