MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390471035 · doi:10.3390/machines12010025

Structural Design with Self-Weight and Inertial Loading Using Simulated Annealing for Non-Gradient Topology Optimization

2023· article· en· W4390471035 on OpenAlexaff
Hossein R. Najafabadi, Thiago C. Martins, Marcos de Sales Guerra Tsuzuki, Ahmad Barari

Bibliographic record

VenueMachines · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTopology Optimization in Engineering
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
FundersFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo
KeywordsSimulated annealingTopology optimizationBenchmark (surveying)CantileverSensitivity (control systems)Inertial frame of referenceComputer scienceConvergence (economics)Mathematical optimizationGradient methodTopology (electrical circuits)AlgorithmEngineeringMathematicsStructural engineeringFinite element methodElectronic engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores implementation of self-weight and inertial loading in topology optimization (TO) employing the Simulated Annealing (SA) algorithm as a non-gradient-based technique. This method can be applied to find optimum design of structures with no need for gradient information. To enhance the convergence of the SA algorithm, a novel approach incorporating the crystallization factor is introduced. The method is applied in a benchmark problem of a cantilever beam. The study systematically examines multiple scenarios, including cases with and without self-weight effects, as well as varying point loads. Compliance values are calculated and compared to those reported in existing literature to validate the accuracy of the optimization results. The findings highlight the versatility and effectiveness of the SA-based TO methodology in addressing complex design challenges with considerable self-weight or inertial effect. This work can contribute to structural design of systems where only the objective value is available with no gradient information to use sensitivity-based algorithms.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMachinesSame topicTopology Optimization in EngineeringFrench-language works237,207