Skip to main content
Log in

Response surface methodology with stochastic constraints for expensive simulation

  • Case-Oriented Paper
  • Published:
Journal of the Operational Research Society

Abstract

This article investigates simulation-based optimization problems with a stochastic objective function, stochastic output constraints, and deterministic input constraints. More specifically, it generalizes classic response surface methodology (RSM) to account for these constraints. This Generalized RSM—abbreviated to GRSM—generalizes the estimated steepest descent—used in classic RSM—applying ideas from interior point methods, especially affine scaling. This new search direction is scale independent, which is important for practitioners because it avoids some numerical complications and problems commonly encountered. Furthermore, the article derives a heuristic that uses this search direction iteratively. This heuristic is intended for problems in which simulation runs are expensive, so that the search needs to reach a neighbourhood of the true optimum quickly. The new heuristic is compared with OptQuest, which is the most popular heuristic available with several simulation software packages. Numerical illustrations give encouraging results.

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.

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Angün E (2004). Black box simulation optimization: Generalized response surface methodology. PhD thesis, Tilburg University, Tilburg, Netherlands.

  • Barnes ER (1986). A variation on Karmarkar's algorithm for solving linear programming problems. Math Program 36: 174–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Gal I and Bukchin J (2002). The ergonomic design of working environment via rapid prototyping tools and design of experiments. IIE Trans 34(4): 375–391.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bettonvil B and Kleijnen JPC (1996). Searching for important factors in simulation models with many factors: sequential bifurcation. Eur J Opl Res 96: 180–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bettonvil B, del Castilllo E and Kleijnen JPC (2008). Statistical testing of optimality conditions in multiresponse simulation-based optimization. Working Paper, Tilburg University, Tilburg, Netherlands.

  • Booker AJ, Dennis JE Jr., Frank PD, Serafini DB, Torczon V and Trosset MW (1999). A rigorous framework for optimization of expensive functions by surrogates. Struct Optim 17(1): 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Del Castillo E and Montgomery DC (1993). Nonlinear programming solution to the dual response problem. J Qual Technol 25(3): 199–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Den Hertog D and Stehouwer HP (2002). Optimizing color picture tubes by high-cost nonlinear programming. Eur J Opl Res 140(2): 197–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Derringer G and Suich R (1980). Simultaneous optimization of several response variables. J Qual Technol 12: 214–219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Efron B and Tibshirani RJ (1993). An Introduction to the Bootstrap. Chapman & Hall: New York.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fan SK and Del Castillo E (1999). Calculation of an optimal region of operation for dual response systems fitted from experimental data. J Opl Res Soc 50(8): 826–836.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fu MC (2002). Optimization for simulation: theory vs. practice. INFORMS J Comput 14(3): 192–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glasserman P (1991). Gradient Estimation via Perturbation Analysis. Kluwer Academic: Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrington EC (1965). The desirability function. Ind Qual Control 21: 494–498.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helton JC, Anderson DR, Marietta MG and Rechard RP (1997). Performance assessment for the waste isolation pilot plant: From regulation to calculation for 40 CFR 191.13. Opns Res 45(2): 157–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho YC and Cao XR (1991). Perturbation Analysis of Discrete Event Dynamic Systems. Kluwer Academic: Dordrecht.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Irizarry M, Wilson JR and Trevino J (2001). A flexible simulation tool for manufacturing-cell design, II: Response surface analysis and case study. IIE Trans 33: 837–846.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelton WD, Sadowski RP and Sadowski DA (2002). Simulation with Arena, 2nd edn.. McGraw-Hill: Boston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khuri AI (1996). Multiresponse surface methodology. In: Ghosh S. and Rao C.R. (eds). Handbook of Statistics Vol. 13. Elsevier: Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khuri AI and Conlon M (1981). Simultaneous optimization of multiple responses represented by polynomial regression functions. Technometrics 23(4): 363–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khuri AI and Cornell JA (1996). Response Surfaces: Design and Analysis, 2nd edn.. Marcel Dekker: New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kleijnen JPC (1987). Statistical Tools for Simulation Practitioners. Marcel Dekker: New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kleijnen JPC (2008a). Design and Analysis of Simulation Experiments. Springer Science+Business Media: New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kleijnen JPC (2008b). Simulation experiments in practice: Statistical design and regression analysis. J Simul 2(1): 19–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleijnen JPC (2008c). Response surface methodology for constrained simulation optimization: An overview. Simul Model Pract Theory 16: 50–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleijnen JPC, van Beers W and van Nieuwenhuyse I (2008). Constrained optimization in simulation: A novel approach. Working Paper, Tilburg University, Tilburg, Netherlands.

  • Law AM (2007). Simulation Modeling and Analysis, 4th edn.. McGraw-Hill: Boston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myers RH and Carter WH (1973). Response surface techniques for dual response systems. Technometrics 15: 301–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myers RH and Montgomery DC (2002). Response Surface Methodology: Process and Product Optimization Using Designed Experiments, 2nd edn.. Wiley: New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao CR (1967). Least squares theory using an estimated dispersion matrix and its application to measurement of signals. In: Le Cam L.M. and Neyman J. (eds). Proceedings of the Fifth Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability Vol. I. University of California Press: Berkeley, pp. 355–372.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubinstein RY and Kroese DP (2004). The Cross-Entropy Method: A Unified Approach to Combinatorial Optimization, Monte-Carlo Simulation and Machine Learning. Springer: New York.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rubinstein RY and Shapiro A (1993). Discrete Event Systems: Sensitivity Analysis and Stochastic Optimization by the Score Function Method. Wiley: Chichester.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruud PA (2000). An Introduction to Classical Econometric Theory. Oxford University Press: New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simpson TW, Booker AJ, Ghosh D, Giunta AA, Koch PN and Yang R-J (2004). Approximation methods in multidisciplinary analysis and optimization: A panel discussion. Struct Multidisc Optim 27(5): 302–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spall JC (2003). Introduction to Stochastic Search and Optimization: Estimation, Simulation, and Control. Wiley: Hoboken, NJ.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tekin E and Sabuncuoglu I (2004). Simulation optimization: A comprehensive review on theory and applications. IIE Trans 36: 1067–1081.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vining GG and Myers RH (1990). Combining Taguchi and response surface philosophies: A dual response approach. J Qual Technol 22(1): 38–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vonk Noordegraaf A, Nielen M and Kleijnen JPC (2003). Sensitivity analysis by experimental design and metamodelling: Case study on simulation in national animal disease control. Eur J Opl Res 146(3): 433–443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wei CJ, Olson DL and White EM (1990). Simultaneous optimization in process quality control via prediction-interval constrained programming. J Opl Res Soc 41(12): 1161–1167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang T and Tseng L (2002). Solving a multi-objective simulation model using a hybrid response surface method and lexicographical goal programming approach: A case study on integrated circuit ink-marking machines. J Opl Res Soc 53(2): 211–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ye Y (1989). An extension of Karmarkar's algorithm and the trust region method for quadratic programming. In: Megiddo N. (ed). Progress in Mathematical Programming: Interior-Point and Related Methods. Springer-Verlag: New York, pp. 49–63.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to E Angün.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Angün, E., Kleijnen, J., den Hertog, D. et al. Response surface methodology with stochastic constraints for expensive simulation. J Oper Res Soc 60, 735–746 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2602614

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2602614

Keywords

Navigation