Micro-time variant multi-objective particle swarm optimization (micro-TVMOPSO) of a solar thermal combisystem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multi-objective optimization (MOO) algorithms usually require a high number of objective function evaluations to approximate the Pareto-optimal solutions, which can be time-consuming in many engineering applications . To overcome this issue, MOO algorithms using a small population, often referred to as micro-MOO algorithms, aim at approximating the true Pareto front using a smaller number of objective function evaluations. Such algorithms are not common in the evolutionary algorithms literature and their usage in building engineering is seldom. This paper proposes a micro-time variant multi-objective particle swarm optimization (micro-TVMOPSO), which is a revised version of the micro-MOPSO algorithm. First, the proposed algorithm is applied along with eight other MOO algorithms to 24 benchmark problems, and their performance is compared by using two metrics. Although the proposed micro-TVMOPSO algorithm faced difficulties in solving some complicated Pareto fronts, it outperformed the eight optimization algorithms on 10 of the 24 selected benchmark problems. After the comparison of proposed micro-TVMOPSO with several MOO algorithms for different benchmark problems, the micro-TVMOPSO is applied to a case study in engineering: the design optimization of a residential solar thermal combisystem using two conflicting objective functions, the life cycle cost (LCC) and energy use (LCE). Different patterns of variation of the decision variables were observed from the non-dominated solutions found by micro-TVMOPSO, which would have not been possible to notice by performing a single-objective optimization. For instance, the increase of number of solar collectors from 1 to 10 had the impact of increasing the LCC by 84% and decreasing the LCE by 63%. The results indicated that the number of solar thermal collectors is the variable having the most effect on both LCC and LCE. When the number of collectors increases, more energy is harvested, and larger tanks and less auxiliary electric power are needed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".