Advantages of surrogate models for architectural design optimization

Abstract Climate change, resource depletion, and worldwide urbanization feed the demand for more energy and resource-efficient buildings. Increasingly, architectural designers and consultants analyze building designs with easy-to-use simulation tools. To identify design alternatives with good performance, designers often turn to optimization methods. Randomized, metaheuristic methods such as genetic algorithms are popular in the architectural design field. However, are metaheuristics the best approach for architectural design problems that often are complex and ill defined? Metaheuristics may find solutions for well-defined problems, but they do not contribute to a better understanding of a complex design problem. This paper proposes surrogate-based optimization as a method that promotes understanding of the design problem. The surrogate method interpolates a mathematical model from data that relate design parameters to performance criteria. Designers can interact with this model to explore the approximate impact of changing design variables. We apply the radial basis function method, a specific type of surrogate model, to two architectural daylight optimization problems. These case studies, along with results from computational experiments, serve to discuss several advantages of surrogate models. First, surrogate models not only propose good solutions but also allow designers to address issues outside of the formulation of the optimization problem. Instead of accepting a solution presented by the optimization process, designers can improve their understanding of the design problem by interacting with the model. Second, a related advantage is that designers can quickly construct surrogate models from existing simulation results and other knowledge they might possess about the design problem. Designers can thus explore the impact of different evaluation criteria by constructing several models from the same set of data. They also can create models from approximate data and later refine them with more precise simulations. Third, surrogate-based methods typically find global optima orders of magnitude faster than genetic algorithms, especially when the evaluation of design variants requires time-intensive simulations.

[1]  Nils-Hassan Quttineh,et al.  An adaptive radial basis algorithm (ARBF) for expensive black-box mixed-integer constrained global optimization , 2008 .

[2]  O. Weck,et al.  A COMPARISON OF PARTICLE SWARM OPTIMIZATION AND THE GENETIC ALGORITHM , 2005 .

[3]  Achille Messac,et al.  Extended Radial Basis Functions: More Flexible and Effective Metamodeling , 2004 .

[4]  Thomas Hemker,et al.  Derivative Free Surrogate Optimization for Mixed-Integer Nonlinear Black Box Problems in Engineering , 2010 .

[5]  Dan Boneh,et al.  On genetic algorithms , 1995, COLT '95.

[6]  Mattias Björkman,et al.  Global Optimization of Costly Nonconvex Functions Using Radial Basis Functions , 2000 .

[7]  Tomasz Arciszewski,et al.  Evolutionary computation and structural design: A survey of the state-of-the-art , 2005 .

[8]  Bryan Lawson,et al.  How Designers Think: The Design Process Demystified , 1990 .

[9]  Nikolaos V. Sahinidis,et al.  Derivative-free optimization: a review of algorithms and comparison of software implementations , 2013, J. Glob. Optim..

[10]  David Rutten,et al.  Galapagos: On the Logic and Limitations of Generic Solvers , 2013 .

[11]  H. Rittel,et al.  Dilemmas in a general theory of planning , 1973 .

[12]  Rivka Oxman,et al.  Performance-Based Design: Current Practices and Research Issues , 2008 .

[13]  Christoph F. Reinhart,et al.  DIVA 2.0: INTEGRATING DAYLIGHT AND THERMAL SIMULATIONS USING RHINOCEROS 3D, DAYSIM AND ENERGYPLUS , 2011 .

[14]  David Jason Gerber,et al.  Designing-in performance: A framework for evolutionary energy performance feedback in early stage design , 2014 .

[15]  G. Gary Wang,et al.  Review of Metamodeling Techniques in Support of Engineering Design Optimization , 2007, DAC 2006.

[16]  Fabio Schoen,et al.  Global optimization of expensive black box problems with a known lower bound , 2013, J. Glob. Optim..

[17]  John L. Nazareth,et al.  Introduction to derivative-free optimization , 2010, Math. Comput..

[18]  Kristina Shea,et al.  CDO: Computational Design + Optimisation in Building Practice , 2005 .

[19]  Eleni Chatzi,et al.  Interactive particle swarm optimization for the architectural design of truss structures , 2013, 2013 IEEE Symposium on Computational Intelligence for Engineering Solutions (CIES).

[20]  Goldberg,et al.  Genetic algorithms , 1993, Robust Control Systems with Genetic Algorithms.

[21]  Christine A. Shoemaker,et al.  A Stochastic Radial Basis Function Method for the Global Optimization of Expensive Functions , 2007, INFORMS J. Comput..

[22]  M. Patriksson,et al.  A method for simulation based optimization using radial basis functions , 2010 .

[23]  Tibor Csendes,et al.  Noname manuscript No. (will be inserted by the editor) The GLOBAL Optimization Method Revisited , 2022 .

[24]  John Christopher Miles,et al.  Genetic algorithms for design , 2010 .

[25]  Leifur Leifsson,et al.  Surrogate-Based Methods , 2011, Computational Optimization, Methods and Algorithms.

[26]  Alberto Costa,et al.  Black-Box Optimization of Lighting Simulation in Architectural Design , 2014, CSDM Asia.

[27]  Xin-She Yang,et al.  Engineering Optimization: An Introduction with Metaheuristic Applications , 2010 .

[28]  Wenjie Yang,et al.  Performance-driven architectural design and optimization technique from a perspective of architects , 2013 .

[29]  Michael Hensel.  Performance-Oriented Architecture: Rethinking Architectural Design and the Built Environment , 2013 .

[30]  Tamara G. Kolda,et al.  Optimization by Direct Search: New Perspectives on Some Classical and Modern Methods , 2003, SIAM Rev..

[31]  John Mardaljevic,et al.  Daylighting, Artificial Lighting and Non-Visual Effects Study for a Residential Building , 2012 .

[32]  Donald R. Jones,et al.  Efficient Global Optimization of Expensive Black-Box Functions , 1998, J. Glob. Optim..

[33]  Hans-Martin Gutmann,et al.  A Radial Basis Function Method for Global Optimization , 2001, J. Glob. Optim..

[34]  In-Ho Kim,et al.  CDO : Computational Design + Optimization in Building Practice , 2006 .

[35]  Kristina Shea,et al.  Towards integrated performance-driven generative design tools , 2004 .

[36]  Robert Woodbury,et al.  Elements of Parametric Design , 2010 .

[37]  Bryan Lawson,et al.  What designers know , 2018, The Design Student’s Journey.

[38]  Timothy W. Simpson,et al.  Metamodels for Computer-based Engineering Design: Survey and recommendations , 2001, Engineering with Computers.

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

[40]  John Haymaker,et al.  A comparison of multidisciplinary design, analysis and optimization processes in the building construction and aerospace industries , 2007 .

[41]  Richard H. Crawford,et al.  Global optimization of NURBs-based metamodels , 2007 .

[42]  Bernhard Schölkopf,et al.  A tutorial on support vector regression , 2004, Stat. Comput..

[43]  Robert F. Woodbury,et al.  Whither design space? , 2006, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.