A mixed-categorical data-driven approach for prediction and optimization of hybrid discontinuous composites performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
View Video Presentation: https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2022-4037.vid Surrogate models are an essential engineering tool and their popularity has increased recently due to the high computational cost of evaluating real-world simulations. However, most of these functions are described by mixed variables (continuous and categorical), which makes it harder to create accurate interpolation functions. This work builds a surrogate model from a given mixed data set, in order to quickly and accurately calculate the mechanical performance of hybrid discontinuous composites. Then, in order to find the optimal hybridization, three different approaches are performed: mono-objective, targeted and multi-objective. Starting from a virtual database provided by the industrial partner, the mixed categorical optimization process is performed by coupling a multi-armed bandit strategy with a continuous Bayesian optimization solver. The efficiency of the proposed approach is tested and two main results are achieved. The obtained surrogate models are shown to be sufficiently accurate, having an R² score grater than 90% in average. Our proposed optimization process is also able to identify correctly the optimal fibres with respect to the desirable targets.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".