Reliability-Based Design Optimization on Qualitative Objective With Limited Information
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reliability-based design optimization (RBDO) algorithms typically assume a designer's prior knowledge of the objective function along with its explicit mathematical formula and the probability distributions of random design variables. These assumptions may not be valid in many industrial cases where there is limited information on variable variability and the objective function is subjective without mathematical formula. A new methodology is developed in this research to model and solve problems with qualitative objective functions and limited information about random variables. Causal graphs and design structure matrix are used to capture designer's qualitative knowledge of the effects of design variables on the objective. Maximum entropy theory and Monte Carlo simulation are used to model random variables' variability and derive reliability constraint functions. A new optimization problem based on a meta-objective function and transformed deterministic constraints is formulated, which leads close to the optimum of the original mathematical RBDO problem. The developed algorithm is tested and validated with the Golinski speed reducer design case. The results show that the algorithm finds a near-optimal reliable design with less initial information and less computation effort as compared to other RBDO algorithms that assume full knowledge of the problem.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it