1,769 research outputs found

    Meta-heuristic algorithms in car engine design: a literature survey

    Get PDF
    Meta-heuristic algorithms are often inspired by natural phenomena, including the evolution of species in Darwinian natural selection theory, ant behaviors in biology, flock behaviors of some birds, and annealing in metallurgy. Due to their great potential in solving difficult optimization problems, meta-heuristic algorithms have found their way into automobile engine design. There are different optimization problems arising in different areas of car engine management including calibration, control system, fault diagnosis, and modeling. In this paper we review the state-of-the-art applications of different meta-heuristic algorithms in engine management systems. The review covers a wide range of research, including the application of meta-heuristic algorithms in engine calibration, optimizing engine control systems, engine fault diagnosis, and optimizing different parts of engines and modeling. The meta-heuristic algorithms reviewed in this paper include evolutionary algorithms, evolution strategy, evolutionary programming, genetic programming, differential evolution, estimation of distribution algorithm, ant colony optimization, particle swarm optimization, memetic algorithms, and artificial immune system

    Artificial intelligence in the cyber domain: Offense and defense

    Get PDF
    Artificial intelligence techniques have grown rapidly in recent years, and their applications in practice can be seen in many fields, ranging from facial recognition to image analysis. In the cybersecurity domain, AI-based techniques can provide better cyber defense tools and help adversaries improve methods of attack. However, malicious actors are aware of the new prospects too and will probably attempt to use them for nefarious purposes. This survey paper aims at providing an overview of how artificial intelligence can be used in the context of cybersecurity in both offense and defense.Web of Science123art. no. 41

    A Framework for Meta-heuristic Parameter Performance Prediction Using Fitness Landscape Analysis and Machine Learning

    Get PDF
    The behaviour of an optimization algorithm when attempting to solve a problem depends on the values assigned to its control parameters. For an algorithm to obtain desirable performance, its control parameter values must be chosen based on the current problem. Despite being necessary for optimal performance, selecting appropriate control parameter values is time-consuming, computationally expensive, and challenging. As the quantity of control parameters increases, so does the time complexity associated with searching for practical values, which often overshadows addressing the problem at hand, limiting the efficiency of an algorithm. As primarily recognized by the no free lunch theorem, there is no one-size-fits-all to problem-solving; hence from understanding a problem, a tailored approach can substantially help solve it. To predict the performance of control parameter configurations in unseen environments, this thesis crafts an intelligent generalizable framework leveraging machine learning classification and quantitative characteristics about the problem in question. The proposed parameter performance classifier (PPC) framework is extensively explored by training 84 high-accuracy classifiers comprised of multiple sampling methods, fitness types, and binning strategies. Furthermore, the novel framework is utilized in constructing a new parameter-free particle swarm optimization (PSO) variant called PPC-PSO that effectively eliminates the computational cost of parameter tuning, yields competitive performance amongst other leading methodologies across 99 benchmark functions, and is highly accessible to researchers and practitioners. The success of PPC-PSO shows excellent promise for the applicability of the PPC framework in making many more robust parameter-free meta-heuristic algorithms in the future with incredible generalization capabilities

    ๋ฉ”ํƒ€ ํœด๋ฆฌ์Šคํ‹ฑ ์ตœ์ ํ™”๋ฅผ ์ด์šฉํ•œ ๊ธฐ๊ณ„ํ•™์Šต ๊ธฐ๋ฐ˜ ์„ ๋ฐ• ๊ฑด์กฐ ๊ณต์ • ๋ฆฌ๋“œ ํƒ€์ž„ ์˜ˆ์ธก

    Get PDF
    ํ•™์œ„๋…ผ๋ฌธ(์„์‚ฌ) -- ์„œ์šธ๋Œ€ํ•™๊ต๋Œ€ํ•™์› : ๊ณต๊ณผ๋Œ€ํ•™ ์กฐ์„ ํ•ด์–‘๊ณตํ•™๊ณผ, 2021.8. ํ•˜์˜ค์œ ์ฃผ.In the shipbuilding industry, each production process has a respective lead time; that is, the duration between start and finish times. Lead time is basic data that is necessary for high-efficiency production planning and systematic production management. Therefore, lead time must be accurate. However, the traditional method of lead time management is not scientific because it mostly makes the plan by calculating the average lead times derived from historical data. Therefore, to understand the complex relationship between lead time and other influencing factors, this study proposes to use machine learning (ML) algorithms, support vector machine (SVM) and artificial neural network (ANN), which are frequently applied in prediction fields. Moreover, to improve prediction accuracy, this study proposes to apply meta-heuristic algorithms to optimize the parameters of the ML models. This thesis builds hybrid models, including meta-heuristic-ANN, meta-heuristic-SVM models. In addition, this study compares modelโ€™s performance with each other. In searching for the ML modelโ€™s parameters, the results point out that the new self-organizing hierarchical particle swarm optimization (PSO) with jumping time-varying acceleration coefficients (NHPSO-JTVAC) algorithm is superior in terms of performance. More importantly, the test results demonstrate that the integrated models, based on NHPSO-JTVAC, have the smallest mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) test error in the three shipyard block process data sets, 11.79%, 16.03% and 16.45%, respectively. The results also demonstrate that the built models based on NHPSO-JTVAC can achieve further meaningful enhancements in terms of prediction accuracy. Overall, the NHPSOโ€“JTVAC-SVM, NHPSOโ€“JTVAC-ANN models are feasible for predicting the lead time in shipbuilding.์กฐ์„  ์‚ฐ์—…์—์„œ ๊ฐ ๊ณต์ •์€ ๋ฆฌ๋“œ ํƒ€์ž„์„ ๊ฐ€์ง„๋‹ค. ๋ฆฌ๋“œ ํƒ€์ž„์ด๋ž€ ๊ณต์ • ์‹œ์ž‘๊ณผ ์ข…๋ฃŒ ๊ฐ„์— ์‹œ๊ฐ„์œผ๋กœ, ๊ณ ํšจ์œจ์˜ ์ƒ์‚ฐ๊ณ„ํš๊ณผ ์ฒด๊ณ„์  ์ƒ์‚ฐ๊ด€๋ฆฌ๋ฅผ ์œ„ํ•ด ๋งค์šฐ ์ค‘์š”ํ•œ ์ง€ํ‘œ์ด๋‹ค. ํŠนํžˆ, ์ƒ์‚ฐ ๊ณ„ํš ๋‹จ๊ณ„์—์„œ ์ •ํ™•ํ•œ ๋ฆฌ๋“œํƒ€์ž„ ์˜ˆ์ธก์€ ๋‚ฉ๊ธฐ ์ค€์ˆ˜๋ฅผ ์œ„ํ•œ ๊ณ„ํš ์ˆ˜๋ฆฝ์„ ์œ„ํ•ด ๋งค์šฐ ์ค‘์š”ํ•˜๋‹ค. ๊ทธ๋Ÿฌ๋‚˜ ๊ธฐ์กด์˜ ์˜ˆ์ธก ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•์€ ๊ณผ๊ฑฐ ๋ฐ์ดํ„ฐ์˜ ํ‰๊ท ๊ฐ’์„ ์‚ฌ์šฉํ–ˆ๊ธฐ ๋•Œ๋ฌธ์— ์ •ํ™•๋„๊ฐ€ ๋งค์šฐ ๋–จ์–ด์กŒ๋‹ค. ๋”ฐ๋ผ์„œ ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์—์„œ๋Š” ๋ฆฌ๋“œ ํƒ€์ž„๊ณผ ๋‹ค๋ฅธ ์˜ํ–ฅ ์š”์ธ ๊ฐ„์˜ ๋ณต์žกํ•œ ๊ด€๊ณ„๋ฅผ ์ดํ•ดํ•˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด ์˜ˆ์ธก ๋ถ„์•ผ์—์„œ ์ž์ฃผ ์ ์šฉ๋˜๋Š” ๋จธ์‹  ๋Ÿฌ๋‹ (ML) ๋ชจ๋ธ์ธ ์„œํฌํŠธ ๋ฒกํ„ฐ ๋จธ์‹  (SVM) ๋ฐ ์ธ๊ณต ์‹ ๊ฒฝ๋ง (ANN) ์ ์šฉ์„ ์ œ์•ˆํ•œ๋‹ค. ๋˜ํ•œ, ๊ธฐ๊ณ„ํ•™์Šต ๋ชจ๋ธ ์˜ˆ์ธก ์ •ํ™•๋„๋ฅผ ํ–ฅ์ƒ์‹œํ‚ค๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด ๋ฉ”ํƒ€ ํœด๋ฆฌ์Šคํ‹ฑ ์•Œ๊ณ ๋ฆฌ์ฆ˜์„ ์ ์šฉํ•˜์—ฌ ๋ชจ๋ธ์˜ ํŒŒ๋ผ๋ฏธํ„ฐ๋ฅผ ์ตœ์ ํ™”ํ•˜๊ณ ์ž ํ•œ๋‹ค. ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” meta-heuristics-ANN, meta-heuristics-SVM ๋ชจ๋ธ์„ ํฌํ•จํ•˜๋Š” ํ•˜์ด๋ธŒ๋ฆฌ๋“œ ๋ชจ๋ธ์„ ๊ตฌ์ถ•ํ•œ๋‹ค. ๋”๋ถˆ์–ด, ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ๋ฉ”ํƒ€ ํœด๋ฆฌ์Šคํ‹ฑ ์•Œ๊ณ ๋ฆฌ์ฆ˜ ๊ธฐ๋ฐ˜์œผ๋กœ ์ตœ์ ํ™”๋œ ๊ธฐ๊ณ„ํ•™์Šต ๋ชจ๋ธ์˜ ์„ฑ๋Šฅ์„ ์„œ๋กœ ๋น„๊ตํ•œ๋‹ค. ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋ฅผ ํ†ตํ•ด, ML ๋ชจ๋ธ์˜ ํŒŒ๋ผ๋ฏธํ„ฐ๋ฅผ ํƒ์ƒ‰ํ•˜๋Š” ๊ณผ์ •์—์„œ particle swam optimization (PSO)์˜ enhanced ๋ฒ„์ „์ธ NHPSO-JTVAC ์•Œ๊ณ ๋ฆฌ์ฆ˜์ด ํƒ์ƒ‰ ์„ฑ๋Šฅ ๋ฉด์—์„œ ๋‹ค๋ฅธ ์•Œ๊ณ ๋ฆฌ์ฆ˜๋ณด๋‹ค ์šฐ์ˆ˜ํ•˜๋‹ค๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์„ ์•Œ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค. ๋ฟ๋งŒ ์•„๋‹ˆ๋ผ ํ…Œ์ŠคํŠธ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋ฅผ ์‚ดํŽด๋ณด๋ฉด NHPSO-JTVAC์— ๊ธฐ๋ฐ˜ํ•œ ํ•˜์ด๋ธŒ๋ฆฌ๋“œ ๋ชจ๋ธ์ด ์กฐ์„ ์†Œ ์„ธ ๊ฐœ์˜ ๋ธ”๋ก ๊ณต์ • ๋ฐ์ดํ„ฐ์—์„œ (๊ฐ๊ฐ 11.79%, 16.03% ๋ฐ 16.45%) ๊ฐ€์žฅ ์ž‘์€ MAPE ํ…Œ์ŠคํŠธ ์˜ค์ฐจ์ž„์„ ์•Œ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค. ์ด๊ฒƒ์€ NHPSO-JTVAC๋ฅผ ๊ธฐ๋ฐ˜์œผ๋กœ ๊ตฌ์ถ•๋œ ๋ชจ๋ธ์ด ์˜ˆ์ธก ์ •ํ™•๋„ ์ธก๋ฉด์—์„œ ์˜๋ฏธ ์žˆ๋Š” ํ–ฅ์ƒ์„ ๋” ๋‹ฌ์„ฑํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ์Œ์„ ๋ณด์—ฌ์ค€๋‹ค. ์ „๋ฐ˜์ ์œผ๋กœ NHPSO-JTVAC-SVM, NHPSO-JTVAC-ANN ๋ชจ๋ธ์€ ์กฐ์„ ์†Œ ๋ธ”๋ก ๊ณต์ •์˜ ๋ฆฌ๋“œ ํƒ€์ž„์„ ์˜ˆ์ธกํ•˜๋Š” ๋ฐ ์ ํ•ฉํ•˜๋‹ค๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์„ ํ™•์ธํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค.Chapter 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Background and Motivation 1 1.2 Related Works 3 1.2.1 Related Works for Lead Time Prediction 3 1.2.2 Related Works for Hybrid Predictive Model 4 1.3 Thesis Organization 6 Chapter 2 Machine Learning 7 2.1 Support Vector Machine 7 2.1.1 Support Vector Machine Algorithm 7 2.1.2 Hyperparameter Optimization for SVM 10 2.2 Artificial Neural Network 11 2.2.1 Artificial Neural Network Algorithm 11 2.2.2 Hyperparameter Optimization for ANN 15 Chapter 3 Meta-heuristic Optimization Algorithms 17 3.1 Particle Swarm Optimization 17 3.2 NHPSO-JTVAC: An Advanced Version of PSO 18 3.3 Bat Algorithm 19 3.4 Firefly Algorithm 21 3.5 Grasshopper Optimization Algorithm 22 3.6 Moth Search Algorithm 24 Chapter 4 Hybrid Artificial Intelligence Models 27 4.1 Hybrid Meta-heuristic-SVM Models 27 4.1.1 Hybrid PSO-SVM Model 29 4.1.2 Hybrid NHPSO-JTVAC-SVM Model 30 4.1.3 Hybrid BA-SVM Model 31 4.1.4 Hybrid FA-SVM Model 33 4.1.5 Hybrid GOA-SVM Model 34 4.1.6 Hybrid MSA-SVM Model 35 4.2 Hybrid Meta-heuristic-ANN Models 36 4.2.1 Hybrid PSO-ANN Model 38 4.2.2 Hybrid NHPSO-JTVAC-ANN Model 39 4.2.3 Hybrid BA-ANN Model 40 4.2.4 Hybrid FA-ANN Model 41 4.2.5 Hybrid GOA-ANN Model 42 4.2.6 Hybrid MSA-ANN Model 43 Chapter 5 Lead Time Prediction Based on Hybrid AI Models 44 5.1 Data and Preparation 44 5.1.1 Data Normalization 45 5.1.2 Feature Selection 45 5.2 Lead Time Prediction 46 5.3 Performance Metrics 47 Chapter 6 Experimental Results 49 6.1 Results Based on Hybrid SVM-based Models 49 6.2 Results Based on Hybrid ANN-based Models 55 6.3 Overall Results 60 Chapter 7 Conclusions and Future Works 62 Bibliography 63 Appendix A 68 Abstract in Korean 69์„
    • โ€ฆ
    corecore