Ensemble of surrogates with recursive arithmetic average

Surrogate models are often used to replace expensive simulations of engineering problems. The common approach is to construct a series of metamodels based on a training set, and then, from these surrogates, pick out the best one with the highest accuracy as an approximation of the computationally intensive simulation. However, because the choice of approximate model depends on design of experiments (DOEs), the traditional strategy thus increases the risk of adopting an inappropriate model. Furthermore, in the design of complex product system, because of its feature of one-of-a-kind production, acquiring more samples is very expensive and intensively time-consuming, and sometimes even impossible. Therefore, in order to save sampling cost, it is a reasonable strategy to take full advantage of all the stand-alone surrogates and then combine them into an ensemble model. Ensemble technique is an effective way to make up for the shortfalls of traditional strategy. Motivated by the previous research on ensemble of surrogates, a new technique for constructing of a more accurate ensemble of surrogates is proposed in this paper. The weights are obtained using a recursive process, in which the values of these weights are updated in each iteration until the last ensemble achieves a desirable prediction accuracy. This technique has been evaluated using five benchmark problems and one reality problem. The results show that the proposed ensemble of surrogates with recursive arithmetic average provides more ideal prediction accuracy than the stand-alone surrogates and for most problems even exceeds the previously presented ensemble techniques. Finally, we should point out that the advantages of combination over selection are still difficult to illuminate. We are still using an “insurance policy” mode rather than offering significant improvements.

[1]  R. L. Hardy Multiquadric equations of topography and other irregular surfaces , 1971 .

[2]  R. Dennis Cook,et al.  Cross-Validation of Regression Models , 1984 .

[3]  M. J. D. Powell,et al.  Radial basis functions for multivariable interpolation: a review , 1987 .

[4]  N. Cressie Spatial prediction and ordinary kriging , 1988 .

[5]  Jerome Sacks,et al.  Designs for Computer Experiments , 1989 .

[6]  C. D. Boor,et al.  On multivariate polynomial interpolation , 1990 .

[7]  J. Friedman Multivariate adaptive regression splines , 1990 .

[8]  L. Cooper,et al.  When Networks Disagree: Ensemble Methods for Hybrid Neural Networks , 1992 .

[9]  Richard J. Mammone,et al.  Artificial neural networks for speech and vision , 1994 .

[10]  Ron Kohavi,et al.  A Study of Cross-Validation and Bootstrap for Accuracy Estimation and Model Selection , 1995, IJCAI.

[11]  Richard O. Mason,et al.  Applying ethics to information technology issues , 1995, CACM.

[12]  Christopher M. Bishop,et al.  Neural networks for pattern recognition , 1995 .

[13]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  Applications of machine learning and rule induction , 1995, CACM.

[14]  Manolis Papadrakakis,et al.  Structural optimization using evolution strategies and neural networks , 1998 .

[15]  Yuhong Yang REGRESSION WITH MULTIPLE CANDIDATE MODELS: SELECTING OR MIXING? , 1999 .

[16]  T. Simpson,et al.  Comparative studies of metamodeling techniques under multiple modeling criteria , 2000 .

[17]  Wayne L. Tabor,et al.  RESPONSE SURFACE MODEL DEVELOPMENT FOR GLOBAL/LOCAL OPTIMIZATION USING RADIAL BASIS FUNCTIONS* , 2000 .

[18]  Bernard Yannou,et al.  Metamodeling of Combined Discrete/Continuous Responses , 2001 .

[19]  T. Simpson,et al.  Comparative studies of metamodelling techniques under multiple modelling criteria , 2001 .

[20]  T. Simpson,et al.  Computationally Inexpensive Metamodel Assessment Strategies , 2002 .

[21]  Thomas J. Santner,et al.  The Design and Analysis of Computer Experiments , 2003, Springer Series in Statistics.

[22]  Salvador Pintos,et al.  An Optimization Methodology of Alkaline-Surfactant-Polymer Flooding Processes Using Field Scale Numerical Simulation and Multiple Surrogates , 2005 .

[23]  Jack P. C. Kleijnen,et al.  State-of-the-Art Review: A User's Guide to the Brave New World of Designing Simulation Experiments , 2005, INFORMS J. Comput..

[24]  T. Simpson,et al.  Analysis of support vector regression for approximation of complex engineering analyses , 2005, DAC 2003.

[25]  Raphael T. Haftka,et al.  Surrogate-based Analysis and Optimization , 2005 .

[26]  H. Fang,et al.  Global response approximation with radial basis functions , 2006 .

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

[28]  R. Haftka,et al.  Ensemble of surrogates , 2007 .

[29]  Timothy W. Simpson,et al.  Design and Analysis of Computer Experiments in Multidisciplinary Design Optimization: A Review of How Far We Have Come - Or Not , 2008 .

[30]  M. Rais-Rohani,et al.  Ensemble of metamodels with optimized weight factors , 2008 .

[31]  R. Haftka,et al.  Multiple surrogates: how cross-validation errors can help us to obtain the best predictor , 2009 .

[32]  Andy J. Keane,et al.  Recent advances in surrogate-based optimization , 2009 .

[33]  Raphael T. Haftka,et al.  Making the Most Out of Surrogate Models: Tricks of the Trade , 2010, DAC 2010.