Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Volume 2015, Article ID 608325, 11 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/608325
Research Article

Entropy-Based Weighting for Multiobjective Optimization: An Application on Vertical Turning

1Institute of Production Engineering and Management, Federal University of Itajuba, BPS Avenue 1303, 37500-903 Itajuba, MG, Brazil
2Mahle Metal Leve S/A, Itajuba, MG, Brazil

Received 15 May 2015; Revised 13 July 2015; Accepted 22 July 2015

Academic Editor: Giovanni Falsone

Copyright © 2015 Luiz Célio Souza Rocha et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. S. S. Rao, Engineering Optimization: Theory and Practice, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, USA, 4th edition, 2009.
  2. M. Chen, Y. Guo, H. Liu, and C. Wang, “The evolutionary algorithm to find robust Pareto-optimal solutions over time,” Mathematical Problems in Engineering, vol. 2015, Article ID 814210, 18 pages, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  3. H.-Z. Huang, Y.-K. Gu, and X. Du, “An interactive fuzzy multi-objective optimization method for engineering design,” Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 451–460, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. P. Eskelinen and K. Miettinen, “Trade-off analysis approach for interactive nonlinear multiobjective optimization,” OR Spectrum, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 803–816, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  5. C.-L. Hwang and A. S. M. Masud, Multiple Objective Decision Making—Methods and Applications: A State-of-the-Art Survey, vol. 164 of Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, Springer, 1979.
  6. K. Miettinen, Nonlinear Multiobjective Optimization, Kluwer Academic, 1999. View at MathSciNet
  7. A. Messac and C. A. Mattson, “Generating well-distributed sets of pareto points for engineering design using physical programming,” Optimization and Engineering, vol. 3, pp. 431–450, 2002. View at Google Scholar
  8. G. Severino, E. J. Paiva, J. R. Ferreira, P. P. Balestrassi, and A. P. Paiva, “Development of a special geometry carbide tool for the optimization of vertical turning of martensitic gray cast iron piston rings,” The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, vol. 63, no. 5–8, pp. 523–534, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. S. Shin, F. Samanlioglu, B. R. Cho, and M. M. Wiecek, “Computing trade-offs in robust design: perspectives of the mean squared error,” Computers & Industrial Engineering, vol. 60, no. 2, pp. 248–255, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. I. Das and J. E. Dennis, “A closer look at drawbacks of minimizing weighted sums of objectives for Pareto set generation in multicriteria optimization problems,” Structural Optimization, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 63–69, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. V. Vahidinasab and S. Jadid, “Normal boundary intersection method for suppliers' strategic bidding in electricity markets: an environmental/economic approach,” Energy Conversion and Management, vol. 51, no. 6, pp. 1111–1119, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. M. K. Ardakani and R. Noorossana, “A new optimization criterion for robust parameter design—the case of target is best,” International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, vol. 38, no. 9-10, pp. 851–859, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. I. Das and J. E. Dennis, “Normal-boundary intersection: a new method for generating the Pareto surface in nonlinear multicriteria optimization problems,” SIAM Journal on Optimization, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 631–657, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  14. V. Wuwongse, S. Kobayashi, S.-I. Iwai, and A. Ichikawa, “Optimal design of linear control systems by an interactive optimization method,” Computers in Industry, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 381–394, 1983. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. E. Melachrinoudis, “Determining an optimum location for an undesirable facility in a workroom environment,” Applied Mathematical Modelling, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 365–369, 1985. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. T. L. Saaty, “How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 9–26, 1990. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  17. A. Z. Grzybowski, “Note on a new optimization based approach for estimating priority weights and related consistency index,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 39, no. 14, pp. 11699–11708, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. S.-P. Wan and J.-Y. Dong, “Power geometric operators of trapezoidal intuitionistic fuzzy numbers and application to multi-attribute group decision making,” Applied Soft Computing, vol. 29, pp. 153–168, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. Z.-J. Wang, “Consistency analysis and priority derivation of triangular fuzzy preference relations based on modal value and geometric mean,” Information Sciences, vol. 314, pp. 169–183, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  20. J. H. F. Gomes, A. P. Paiva, S. C. Costa, P. P. Balestrassi, and E. J. Paiva, “Weighted Multivariate Mean Square Error for processes optimization: a case study on flux-cored arc welding for stainless steel claddings,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 226, no. 3, pp. 522–535, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. J. S. Savier and D. Das, “Loss allocation to consumers before and after reconfiguration of radial distribution networks,” International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 540–549, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. D. Luo and X. Wang, “The multi-attribute grey target decision method for attribute value within three-parameter interval grey number,” Applied Mathematical Modelling, vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 1957–1963, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  23. J. Zhu and K. W. Hipel, “Multiple stages grey target decision making method with incomplete weight based on multi-granularity linguistic label,” Information Sciences, vol. 212, pp. 15–32, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. D. Luo, “Decision-making methods with three-parameter interval grey number,” System Engineering Theory and Practice, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 124–130, 2009. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. L. Rubio, M. De La Sen, A. P. Longstaff, and S. Fletcher, “Model-based expert system to automatically adapt milling forces in Pareto optimal multi-objective working points,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 40, no. 6, pp. 2312–2322, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. N. H. Tran and K. Tran, “Combination of fuzzy ranking and simulated annealing to improve discrete fracture inversion,” Mathematical and Computer Modelling, vol. 45, no. 7-8, pp. 1010–1020, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. N. Narang, J. S. Dhillon, and D. P. Kothari, “Weight pattern evaluation for multiobjective hydrothermal generation scheduling using hybrid search technique,” International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems, vol. 62, pp. 665–678, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  28. S. Monghasemi, M. R. Nikoo, M. A. Khaksar Fasaee, and J. Adamowski, “A novel multi criteria decision making model for optimizing time-cost-quality trade-off problems in construction projects,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 42, no. 6, pp. 3089–3104, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  29. C. E. Shannon, “A mathematical theory of communication,” The Bell System Technical Journal, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 379–423, 1948. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  30. L. C. S. Rocha, A. P. Paiva, E. J. Paiva, and P. P. Balestrassi, “Comparing DEA and principal component analysis in the multiobjective optimization of P-GMAW process,” Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  31. S.-C. Fang, J. R. Rajasekera, and H.-J. Tsao, Entropy Optimization and Mathematical Programming, Kluwer Academic, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet
  32. D. C. Montgomery, Design and Analysis of Experiments, John Wiley & Sons, 5th edition, 2001.
  33. I. Baba, H. Midi, S. Rana, and G. Ibragimov, “An alternative approach of dual response surface optimization based on penalty function method,” Mathematical Problems in Engineering, vol. 2015, Article ID 450131, 6 pages, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  34. J. Cornell, Experiments with Mixtures: Designs, Models, and the Analysis of Mixture Data, John Wiley & Sons, 3rd edition, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  35. P. K. Shukla and K. Deb, “On finding multiple Pareto-optimal solutions using classical and evolutionary generating methods,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 181, no. 3, pp. 1630–1652, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  36. T. G. Brito, A. P. Paiva, J. R. Ferreira, J. H. F. Gomes, and P. P. Balestrassi, “A normal boundary intersection approach to multiresponse robust optimization of the surface roughness in end milling process with combined arrays,” Precision Engineering, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 628–638, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  37. Z. Jia and M. G. Ierapetritou, “Generate Pareto optimal solutions of scheduling problems using normal boundary intersection technique,” Computers and Chemical Engineering, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 268–280, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  38. S. V. Utyuzhnikov, P. Fantini, and M. D. Guenov, “A method for generating a well-distributed Pareto set in nonlinear multiobjective optimization,” Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, vol. 223, no. 2, pp. 820–841, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  39. O. Köksoy and N. Doganaksoy, “Joint optimization of mean and standard deviation using response surface methods,” Journal of Quality Technology, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 239–252, 2003. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  40. O. Köksoy, “A nonlinear programming solution to robust multi-response quality problem,” Applied Mathematics and Computation, vol. 196, no. 2, pp. 603–612, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  41. D. G. Luenberger and Y. Ye, Linear and Nonlinear Programming, Springer, 3rd edition, 2008.
  42. G. A. Gabriele and K. M. Ragsdell, “The generalized reduced gradient method: a reliable tool for optimal design,” ASME Journal of Engineering for Industry, vol. 99, no. 2, pp. 394–400, 1977. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  43. G. E. P. Box and N. R. Draper, Empirical Model-Building and Response Surfaces, John Wiley & Sons, 1987. View at MathSciNet
  44. M. Mlakar, T. Tušar, and B. Filipič, “Comparing solutions under uncertainty in multiobjective optimization,” Mathematical Problems in Engineering, vol. 2014, Article ID 817964, 10 pages, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus