Coupling of inverse method and cuckoo search algorithm for multiobjective optimization design of an axial flow pump
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work describes the application of a multiobjective cuckoo search method for turbomachinery design optimization of an axial pump. Maximization of the total efficiency and minimization of the required net positive suction head of the pump are the two objective functions considered for the optimization problem. The optimization process is carried out on a range of imposed volumetric flow rates, with taking into account at each discretized radius between the hub and tip of the rotor: the profile camber, rotor wall thickness, angular deviation, and the solidity, regarded as geometrical constraints and nominal flow rate as mechanical constraint. Two strategies are proposed in order to solve the problem. In the first one, three forms of mono-objective model with two variables, total efficiency and net positive suction head, are considered. In the second one, a multiobjective model with nondominated sorting scheme is adopted. A comparative evaluation of results obtained from the proposed approach with those of a reference machine and genetic algorithm allowed us to validate the present work.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".