Genetic Algorithm Engine Calibration with Penalty Functions

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing engine control systems face challenges in calibrating scheduled, linear models to ensure stability and non-oscillatory behavior, particularly when using gradient search methods which can get stuck in local optima and are sensitive to initial conditions.

Innovation Solution

The method employs genetic algorithms (GA's) with penalty functions to optimize engine calibration sub-problems, seeding initial populations with good individuals and using cost functions that balance model performance and stability, ensuring stable and non-oscillatory control by embedding optimization problems and using penalty functions to address constraints.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If gradient search methods are used for calibration, then computational efficiency is improved, but the system gets stuck in local optima and is sensitive to initial conditions

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecomputational efficiencyVSAvoidconvergence to global optimum
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies preliminary action by using genetic algorithms to perform a global search before refining results with gradient-based methods. The genetic algorithm phase prepares the calibration by exploring the parameter space broadly and identifying promising regions, which then serves as the starting point for more efficient local optimization, thereby avoiding local optima while maintaining computational efficiency.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces the mechanical gradient search mechanism with a biological inspiration-based genetic algorithm system. Instead of relying on gradient descent that follows local slopes, the system uses genetic operators (selection, crossover, mutation) to explore the parameter space, substituting a more robust search mechanism that doesn't get trapped in local optima.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

2Device complexity

If scheduled, linear models are used in engine control, then control simplicity is improved, but stability and non-oscillatory behavior become difficult to ensure

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontrol system simplicityVSAvoidcontrol stability
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSStability of the object's composition

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies parameter changes by systematically optimizing the parameters of the scheduled linear model through genetic algorithms. The calibration process adjusts model parameters and controller gains to achieve desired stability characteristics while maintaining the simplicity of the linear model structure. Penalty functions are used to enforce stability constraints during the optimization process.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements feedback through the genetic algorithm optimization loop that continuously evaluates candidate solutions against performance criteria including stability and non-oscillatory behavior. The algorithm uses feedback from cost function evaluations to guide the search toward parameter sets that ensure stable control while maintaining model simplicity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

3Stability of the object's composition

If penalty functions are used to enforce stability constraints, then control stability is improved, but the optimization landscape becomes more complex

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontrol stabilityVSAvoidoptimization landscape complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Stability of the object's compositionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies segmentation by dividing the optimization process into distinct phases: a genetic algorithm phase that handles global exploration with penalty functions for stability constraints, and potentially a refinement phase for local optimization. This segmentation allows the complex constrained optimization to be managed in manageable stages, reducing the overall optimization landscape complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Data Source

PatentUS7552007B2Calibration systems and methods for scheduled linear control algorithms in internal combustion engine control systems using genetic algorithms, penalty functions, weighting, and embedding
Publication Date: 2009.06.23 GM GLOBAL TECHNOLOGY OPERATIONS LLC
  • US7552007B2 patent drawing
  • US7552007B2 patent drawing
  • US7552007B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A method for calibrating an engine control system includes identifying engine calibration sub-problems for an engine calibration; seeding an initial generation for one of the engine calibration sub-problems with known/good individuals; optimizing free parameters in the one of the engine calibration sub-problem over a parameter/coefficient scheduling space using a genetic algorithm; using penalty functions; identifying a next one of the engine calibration sub-problems containing a prior one of the engine calibration sub-problems; seeding an initial population of the next one of the engine calibration sub-problems with know/good individuals; repeating until the engine calibration containing the engine calibration sub-problems is solved; and operating an engine control system of a vehicle using the engine calibration.