Skip to main content
Log in

A constrained, globalized, and bounded Nelder–Mead method for engineering optimization

  • Research paper
  • Published:
Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

One of the fundamental difficulties in engineering design is the multiplicity of local solutions. This has triggered much effort in the development of global search algorithms. Globality, however, often has a prohibitively high numerical cost for real problems. A fixed cost local search, which sequentially becomes global, is developed in this work. Globalization is achieved by probabilistic restarts. A spacial probability of starting a local search is built based on past searches. An improved Nelder–Mead algorithm is the local optimizer. It accounts for variable bounds and nonlinear inequality constraints. It is additionally made more robust by reinitializing degenerated simplexes. The resulting method, called the Globalized Bounded Nelder–Mead (GBNM) algorithm, is particularly adapted to tackling multimodal, discontinuous, constrained optimization problems, for which it is uncertain that a global optimization can be afforded. Numerical experiments are given on two analytical test functions and two composite laminate design problems. The GBNM method compares favorably with an evolutionary algorithm, both in terms of numerical cost and accuracy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bäck, T. 1996: Evolutionary Algorithms in Theory and Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press

  2. Barhen, J.; Protopopescu, V.; Reister, D. 1997: TRUST: a deterministic algorithm for global constrained optimization. Science 276, 1094–1097

    Google Scholar 

  3. Berthelot, J.-M. 1999: Composite Materials: Mechanical Behavior and Structural Analysis, Mechanical Engineering Series. Berlin: Springer

  4. Duda, O.R.; Hart, P.E.; Stork, D.G. 2001: Pattern Classification, 2nd edn. New York: John Wiley & Sons

  5. Durand, N.; Alliot, J.-M. 1999: A combined Nelder–Mead simplex and genetic algorithm. Available at: http://www.recherche.enac.fr/opti/papers/

  6. Goldberg, D.E.; Voessner, S. 1999: Optimizing global-local search hybrids. In: GECCO 99 – Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (held in Orlando), pp. 220–228

  7. Haftka, R.T.; Gürdal, Z. 1993: Elements of Structural Optimization, 3rd edn. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers

  8. Hickernell, F.J.; Yuan, Y.-X. 1997: A simple multistart algorithm for global optimization. OR Trans. 1(2), 1–11

    Google Scholar 

  9. Hu, X.; Shonkwiller, R.; Spruill, M.C. 1994: Random Restarts in Global Optimization. Technical Report, School of Mathematics, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta

  10. Le Riche, R.; Guyon, F. 2001: Dual evolutionary optimization. In: Collet, P.; Lutton, E.; Schoenauer, M.; Fonlupt, C.; Hao, J.-K. (eds.) Artificial Evolution, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, No. 2310, selected papers of the 5th International Conference on Artificial Evolution (held in Le Creusot), pp. 281–294

  11. Luersen, M.A.; Le Riche, R. 2001: Globalisation de l’Algorithme de Nelder–Mead : Application aux Composites. Technical Report, LMR, INSA de Rouen, France; in French

  12. Michalewicz, Z.; Schoenauer, M. 1997: Evolutionary algorithms for constrained parameter optimization. Evolut. Comput. 4(1), 1–32

    Google Scholar 

  13. Minoux, M. 1986: Mathematical Programming: Theory and Algorithms. New York: John Wiley & Sons

  14. Moscato, P. 1989: On Evolution, Search, Optimization, Genetic Algorithms and Martial Arts: Towards Memetic Algorithms. Caltech Concurrent Computation Program, C3P Report 826

  15. Nelder, J.A.; Mead, R. 1965: A simplex for function minimization. Comput. J. 7, 308–313

    Google Scholar 

  16. Okamoto, M.; Nonaka, T.; Ochiai, S.; Tominaga, D. 1998: Nonlinear numerical optimization with use of a hybrid genetic algorithm incorporating the modified Powell method. Appl. Math. Comput. 91, 63–72

    Google Scholar 

  17. Rockafellar, R.T. 1976: Lagrange multipliers in optimization. In: Cottle R.W.; Lemke C.E. (eds.) Nonlinear Programming, Proc. SIAM-AMS, 9, 145–168

  18. Shang, Y.; Wan, Y.; Fromherz, M.P.J.; Crawford, L. 2001: Toward adaptive cooperation between global and local solvers for continuous constraint problems. In: CP’01 Workshop on Cooperative Solvers in Constraints Programming (held in Pahos)

  19. Syswerda, G. 1991: A study of reproduction in generational and steady state genetic algorithms. In: Rawlins, G.J.E. (ed.) Foundations of Genetic Algorithms. San Mateo: Morgan Kaufmann

  20. Törn, A.A. 1978: A search-glustering approach to global optimization. In: Towards Global Optimization 2, pp. 49–62

  21. Törn, A.A.; Zilinskas A. 1989: Global Optimization. Berlin: Springer-Verlag

  22. Wright, M.H. 1996: Direct search methods: once scorned, now respectable. In: Dundee Biennial Conference in Numerical Analysis (held in Harlow), pp. 191–208

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M.A. Luersen .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Luersen , M., Le Riche , R. & Guyon , F. A constrained, globalized, and bounded Nelder–Mead method for engineering optimization. Struct Multidisc Optim 27, 43–54 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-003-0320-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-003-0320-9

Keywords

Navigation