MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2322937294 · doi:10.2514/6.2008-2287

Structural Topology Optimization for Multiple Load Cases While Avoiding Local Minima

2008· article· en· W2322937294 on OpenAlexafffund
Kai A. James, J. S. Hansen, Joaquim R. R. A. Martins

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTopology Optimization in Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsMaxima and minimaTopology optimizationTopology (electrical circuits)Computer scienceMathematical optimizationMathematicsStructural engineeringEngineeringCombinatoricsFinite element methodMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new method for performing topology optimization while considering multiple load cases is presented. The technique is demonstrated using two classes of problems, the first of which seeks to minimize the maximum deflection under a series of fixed, point loads subject to a material volume constraint. The second is a classical weight minimization problem subject to constraints on the maximum deflection caused by each load case. Because the topology optimization problem involving SIMP materials is inherently non-convex, the optimized solution is highly sensitive to the starting point and search path followed during the optimization. Therefore, the proposed technique calls for the use of a composite objective function, which is defined as the Kreisselmeier–Steinhauser aggregate of the individual objectives corresponding to the different load cases. The technique is also applied to the weight minimization problem, in which case the KS function is used to construct an aggregate constraint function. In this way, sensitivity information from inactive load cases is taken into account throughout the optimization making the method less susceptible to local minima. Furthermore, by beginning with a low value for the

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations4
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTopology Optimization in EngineeringFrench-language works237,207