Some studies on differential evolution variants for application to nuclear reactor core design

Abstract During the design of nuclear reactor cores, reactor cell parameters such as dimensions, enrichment and materials must be adjusted considering restrictions such as the average thermal flux, criticality and sub-moderation. Due to the complexity of this problem, trial-and-error methods do not necessarily guarantee acceptable solutions. Thus, the necessity of formulating the design of a nuclear reactor core as an optimization problem, where the decision variables are optimized taking constraints into account. Once the problem is formulated in such way, global search methods may be used in order to generate candidate solutions, that is, sets of core design parameters, to be analyzed by programs that simulate the neutron interactions in the reactor core. The Differential Evolution (DE) algorithm is one of those state-of-art global search methods, whose application has outperformed competitive algorithms in several optimization problems including the optimization problem of nuclear core design. Modifications in the DE such as the Trigonometric Mutation Operator and the Opposition-based learning have been reported in the literature, with considerable advances in the results of many problems. This performance motivated us to apply these two variants of differential evolution to the nuclear core design problem, which is the aim of this paper. The results are promising, demonstrating that the improvements are applicable in nuclear science and engineering applications.

[1]  J. E. Suich,et al.  THE HAMMER SYSTEM: HETEROGENEOUS ANALYSIS BY MULTIGROUP METHODS OF EXPONENTIALS AND REACTORS. , 1967 .

[2]  Shahryar Rahnamayan,et al.  An intuitive distance-based explanation of opposition-based sampling , 2012, Appl. Soft Comput..

[3]  Luca Maria Gambardella,et al.  Adaptive memory programming: A unified view of metaheuristics , 1998, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[4]  Roberto Schirru,et al.  Particle Swarm Optimization in Reactor Core Design , 2006 .

[5]  Wagner F. Sacco,et al.  The fuzzy clearing approach for a niching genetic algorithm applied to a nuclear reactor core design optimization problem , 2004 .

[6]  Bruno Sareni,et al.  Fitness sharing and niching methods revisited , 1998, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[7]  Shahryar Rahnamayan,et al.  Opposition versus randomness in soft computing techniques , 2008, Appl. Soft Comput..

[8]  Xin Yao,et al.  Evolutionary programming using mutations based on the Levy probability distribution , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[9]  Shahryar Rahnamayan,et al.  Opposition-Based Differential Evolution (ODE) with Variable Jumping Rate , 2007, 2007 IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computational Intelligence.

[10]  Aimo A. Törn,et al.  Global Optimization , 1999, Science.

[11]  Samir W. Mahfoud Niching methods for genetic algorithms , 1996 .

[12]  David H. Ackley,et al.  An empirical study of bit vector function optimization , 1987 .

[13]  Hamid R. Tizhoosh,et al.  Opposition-Based Learning: A New Scheme for Machine Intelligence , 2005, International Conference on Computational Intelligence for Modelling, Control and Automation and International Conference on Intelligent Agents, Web Technologies and Internet Commerce (CIMCA-IAWTIC'06).

[14]  Nélio Henderson,et al.  A Metropolis algorithm combined with Hooke-Jeeves local search method applied to global optimization , 2010, Appl. Math. Comput..

[15]  D. Rozon,et al.  Canada deuterium uranium reactor design optimization using three-dimensional generalized perturbation theory , 1992 .

[16]  Gustavo Mendes Platt,et al.  The Luus-Jaakola algorithm applied to a nuclear reactor core design optimisation , 2008 .

[17]  John H. Holland,et al.  Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems: An Introductory Analysis with Applications to Biology, Control, and Artificial Intelligence , 1992 .

[18]  René Thomsen,et al.  A comparative study of differential evolution, particle swarm optimization, and evolutionary algorithms on numerical benchmark problems , 2004, Proceedings of the 2004 Congress on Evolutionary Computation (IEEE Cat. No.04TH8753).

[19]  J. A. Thie,et al.  Void Measurement in a Boiling Reactor , 1961 .

[20]  Jouni Lampinen,et al.  A Trigonometric Mutation Operation to Differential Evolution , 2003, J. Glob. Optim..

[21]  Takuji Nishimura,et al.  Mersenne twister: a 623-dimensionally equidistributed uniform pseudo-random number generator , 1998, TOMC.

[22]  M. Montaz Ali,et al.  Differential evolution algorithms applied to nuclear reactor core design , 2009 .

[23]  M.M.A. Salama,et al.  Opposition-Based Differential Evolution , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[24]  Rakesh Angira,et al.  Optimization of dynamic systems: A trigonometric differential evolution approach , 2007, Comput. Chem. Eng..

[25]  Wagner F. Sacco,et al.  A parallel genetic algorithm with niching technique applied to a nuclear reactor core design optimization problem , 2008 .

[26]  M. Montaz Ali,et al.  Population set-based global optimization algorithms: some modifications and numerical studies , 2004, Comput. Oper. Res..

[27]  Cláudio M. N. A. Pereira,et al.  Two stochastic optimization algorithms applied to nuclear reactor core design , 2006 .

[28]  Roberto Schirru,et al.  Basic investigations related to genetic algorithms in core designs , 1999 .

[29]  Rainer Storn,et al.  Differential Evolution – A Simple and Efficient Heuristic for global Optimization over Continuous Spaces , 1997, J. Glob. Optim..

[30]  A. K. Ziver,et al.  Estimation of distribution algorithms for nuclear reactor fuel management optimisation , 2006 .

[31]  Madeline Anne Feltus,et al.  Nuclear fuel management optimization using genetic algorithms , 1995 .

[32]  Paul J. Turinsky,et al.  In-core nuclear fuel management optimization for pressurized water , 1991 .

[33]  Hee Cheon No,et al.  Determination of the minimal number and optimal sensor location in a nuclear system with fixed incore detectors , 1994 .

[34]  J. Duderstadt,et al.  Nuclear reactor analysis , 1976 .