Packing optimization of practical systems using a dynamic acceleration methodology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract System design is a challenging and time-consuming task which often requires close collaboration between several multidisciplinary design teams to account for complex interactions between components and sub-systems. As such, there is a growing demand in industry to create better performing, efficient, and cost-effective development tools to assist in the system design process. Additionally, the ever-increasing complexity of systems today often necessitates a shift away from manual expertise and a movement towards computer-aided design tools. This work narrows the scope of the system design process by focusing on one critical design aspect: the packaging of system components. The algorithm presented in this paper was developed to optimize the packaging of system components with consideration of practical, system-level functionalities and constraints. Using a dynamic acceleration methodology, the algorithm packages components from an initial position to a final packed position inside of a constrained volume. The motion of components from initial to final positions is driven by several acceleration forces imposed on each component. These accelerations are based on physical interactions between components and their surrounding environment. Various system-level performance metrics such as center of mass alignment and rotational inertia reduction are also considered throughout optimization. Results of several numerical case studies are also presented to demonstrate the functionality and capability of the proposed packaging algorithm. These studies include packaging problems with known optimal solutions to verify the efficacy of the algorithm. Finally, the proposed algorithm was used in a more practical study for the packaging of an urban air mobility nacelle to demonstrate the algorithm’s prospective capabilities in solving real-world packaging problems.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".