MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411879513 · doi:10.3390/mi16070753

Using Adaptive Surrogate Models to Accelerate Multi-Objective Design Optimization of MEMS

2025· article· en· W4411879513 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueMicromachines · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Multi-Objective Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsNational Institute for NanotechnologyNational Research Council CanadaUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNational Research Council Canada
KeywordsRobustness (evolution)ActuatorFinite element methodFlexibility (engineering)Computer scienceMicroelectromechanical systemsEngineering optimizationMathematical optimizationSurrogate modelOptimization problemMulti-objective optimizationControl engineeringEngineeringArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmMachine learningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study presents a comprehensive multi-objective optimization framework specifically designed for micro-electromechanical systems (MEMS). The framework integrates both traditional and adaptive optimization techniques, named Surrogate-Assisted Multi-Objective Optimization (SAMOO) and Adaptive-SAMOO (A-SAMOO), respectively. By addressing key limitations of traditional approaches, such as the consideration of objective constraints and the provision of multiple design options, the proposed framework enhances both flexibility and practical applicability. Results show that adaptive optimization outperforms traditional offline methods by delivering a greater number and higher quality of optimal solutions while requiring fewer finite element method simulations. The adaptive approach showed a significant advantage by attaining high-quality solutions while requiring only 2.8% of the finite element method (FEM) evaluations compared to traditional methods that do not incorporate surrogate models. This performance boost highlights the advantages of online learning in enhancing the accuracy, speed, and diversity of solutions in MEMS optimization. These optimization schemes were tested on multiple MEMS devices with varying physics and complexities, specifically the U-shaped Lorentz force actuator, serpentine Lorentz force actuator, and thermal actuator. The results highlight the robustness and versatility of the proposed methods, particularly in addressing cases involving discrete design variables and strict objective constraints. This comprehensive, step-by-step framework serves as a valuable resource for researchers and practitioners aiming to optimize MEMS designs from the ground up, providing a reliable and effective approach to multi-objective optimization in MEMS applications.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.238 · 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