Feasibility-Constrained Surrogate Modeling for Parameter Optimization

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing optimization methods for manufacturing or controlling technical systems are time and resource-consuming due to insufficient information about the computerized model, leading to generation of parameters that cannot be evaluated or do not satisfy system constraints.

Innovation Solution

A computer-implemented method that inputs a sample of parameter sets with feasibility identifiers, generates a surrogate model using feasible parameter sets via regression methods, and determines an optimized parameter set using a computerized optimization method, ensuring the optimized set meets system constraints.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If a typical optimizer is used without sufficient information about the computerized model, then the optimization process can be run, but it generates parameters that cannot be evaluated or do not satisfy system constraints, resulting in useless parameter sets

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveoptimization process efficiencyVSAvoidparameter set validity
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies preliminary action by filtering parameter sets before they are used for optimization. A feasibility identifier evaluates parameter sets in advance to mark them as technically feasible, non-feasible, or erroneous. This preliminary filtering ensures that only valid parameter sets are used in the optimization process, preventing the generation of useless parameters and improving both efficiency and reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

2Measurement precision

If computerized simulation methods such as FEA or CFD are used to evaluate parameter values, then evaluation accuracy is improved, but the process becomes time and resource consuming

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveparameter evaluation accuracyVSAvoidoptimization time
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies the copying principle by creating a simplified surrogate model that replicates the behavior of the complex computerized simulation model. The surrogate model is trained on a sample of parameter sets and can evaluate new parameter sets rapidly without requiring full FEA or CFD simulations. This copying approach maintains evaluation accuracy while dramatically reducing computation time and resource consumption.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

3Quantity of substance

If the surrogate model is generated using all parameter sets including erroneous and non-feasible ones, then more data is available for training, but the model learns from invalid data leading to incorrect optimization results

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetraining data volumeVSAvoidoptimization result accuracy
Core Design Contradiction:
Quantity of substanceVSManufacturing precision

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies local quality by treating different parameter sets differently based on their validity. Instead of uniformly using all parameter sets, the feasibility identifier assigns different qualities to parameter sets: technically feasible ones are used for training the surrogate model, while non-feasible and erroneous ones are excluded. This selective approach ensures the model learns only from valid data, maintaining optimization accuracy while still utilizing sufficient training data.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Data Source

PatentUS12265375B2Manufacturing or controlling a technical system using an optimized parameter set
Publication Date: 2025.04.01 SIEMENS AG
  • US12265375B2 patent drawing
  • US12265375B2 patent drawing
  • US12265375B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A computer-implemented method for manufacturing or controlling a technical system includes the method steps: (a) inputting a sample of parameter sets suitable for manufacturing or controlling the technical system, with a feasibility identifier assigned to each of the parameter sets, wherein the feasibility identifier marks each parameter set either as technically feasible or technically non-feasible or erroneous in terms of manufacturing or controlling the technical system, (b) generating a computerized surrogate model for the technical system based on the respective parameter sets of the sample, which are marked as technically feasible, by means of a regression method, (c) determining an optimized parameter set based on the surrogate model by means of a computerized optimization method, and (d) outputting the optimized parameter set for manufacturing or controlling the technical system.