Modifications of generalized response surface methodology for constrained stochastic optimization problems

References

• Angün, E., and J. Kleijnen. 2012. An asymptotic test of optimality conditions in multiresponse simulation optimization. INFORMS Journal on Computing 24 (1):53–65. doi: 10.1287/ijoc.1100.0438.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Angün, E., J. Kleijnen, D. den Hertog, and G. Gürkan. 2009. Response surface methodology with stochastic constraints for expensive simulation. Journal of the Operational Research Society 60 (6):735–46. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.jors.2602614.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Angun, E. 2004. Black box simulation optimization: Generalized response surface methodology. PhD thesis. Tilburg, Netherlands: Tilburg University.
   Google Scholar
• Bashyam, S., and M. C. Fu. 1998. Optimization of (s, S) inventory systems with random lead times and a service level constraint. Management Science 44 (12-Part-2):S243–S256. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.44.12.S243.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bettonvil, B., E. Del Castillo, and J. P. Kleijnen. 2009. Statistical testing of optimality conditions in multiresponse simulation-based optimization. European Journal of Operational Research 199 (2):448–58. doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2008.11.050.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Box, G. E., and K. B. Wilson. 1951. On the experimental attainment of optimum conditions. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series b (Methodological) 13 (1):1–38. doi: 10.1111/j.2517-6161.1951.tb00067.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caligiuri, C., M. Bietresato, A. Algieri, M. Baratieri, and M. Renzi. 2022. Experimental investigation and RSM modeling of the effects of injection timing on the performance and NOx emissions of a micro-cogeneration unit fueled with biodiesel blends. Energies 15 (10):3586. doi: 10.3390/en15103586.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chang, K.-H., L. J. Hong, and H. Wan. 2013. Stochastic trust-region response-surface method (STRONG)—A new response-surface framework for simulation optimization. INFORMS Journal on Computing 25 (2):230–43. doi: 10.1287/ijoc.1120.0498.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, H., M. Liu, Y. Liu, S. Lin, and Z. Yang. 2020. Partial surrogate cuts method for network-constrained optimal scheduling of multi-carrier energy systems with demand response. Energy 196:117119. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2020.117119.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chugh, T., K. Sindhya, J. Hakanen, and K. Miettinen. 2019. A survey on handling computationally expensive multiobjective optimization problems with evolutionary algorithms. Soft Computing 23 (9):3137–66. doi: 10.1007/s00500-017-2965-0.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fu, M. C., and K. J. Healy. 1997. Techniques for optimization via simulation: An experimental study on an (s, S) inventory system. IIE Transactions 29 (3):191–9. doi: 10.1080/07408179708966326.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glasserman, P. 2013. Monte Carlo methods in financial engineering, vol. 53. New York: Springer Science & Business Media.
   Google Scholar
• Gosavi, A. 2015. Simulation-based optimization. New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• He, Z., P.-F. Zhu, and S.-H. Park. 2012. A robust desirability function method for multi-response surface optimization considering model uncertainty. European Journal of Operational Research 221 (1):241–7. doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2012.03.009.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hejazi, T.-H. 2021. State-dependent resource reallocation plan for health care systems: A simulation optimization approach. Computers & Industrial Engineering 159:107502. doi: 10.1016/j.cie.2021.107502.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hejazi, T.-H., H. Badri, and K. Yang. 2019. A reliability-based approach for performance optimization of service industries: an application to healthcare systems. European Journal of Operational Research 273 (3):1016–25. doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2018.09.026.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jin, Y. 2011. Surrogate-assisted evolutionary computation: Recent advances and future challenges. Swarm and Evolutionary Computation 1 (2):61–70. doi: 10.1016/j.swevo.2011.05.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jin, Y., H. Wang, T. Chugh, D. Guo, and K. Miettinen. 2019. Data-driven evolutionary optimization: An overview and case studies. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 23 (3):442–58. doi: 10.1109/TEVC.2018.2869001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, R. W. 2001. An introduction to the bootstrap. Teaching Statistics 23 (2):49–54. doi: 10.1111/1467-9639.00050.
   Google Scholar
• Kleijnen, J. P. 2009. Kriging metamodeling in simulation: A review. European Journal of Operational Research 192 (3):707–16. doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2007.10.013.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kronqvist, J., D. E. Bernal, and I. E. Grossmann. 2020. Using regularization and second order information in outer approximation for convex MINLP. Mathematical Programming 180 (1-2):285–310. doi: 10.1007/s10107-018-1356-3.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montgomery, D. C. 2017. Design and analysis of experiments (9th ed.). New York: John wiley & sons.
   Google Scholar
• Nazarpour, M., A. Taghizadeh-Alisaraei, A. Asghari, A. Abbaszadeh-Mayvan, and A. Tatari. 2022. Optimization of biohydrogen production from microalgae by response surface methodology (RSM). Energy 253:124059. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2022.124059.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Onokwai, A., H. Owamah, M. Ibiwoye, G. Ayuba, and O. Olayemi. 2022. Application of response surface methodology (RSM) for the optimization of energy generation from Jebba hydro-power plant, Nigeria. ISH Journal of Hydraulic Engineering 28 (1):1–9. doi: 10.1080/09715010.2020.1806120.
   Google Scholar
• Panda, T., and B. Gowrishankar. 2008. Critical analysis of application of generalized distance function for optimization of important variables for esterase synthesis by Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Bioresource Technology 99 (13):5545–55. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2007.10.057.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruud, P. A. 2000. An introduction to classical econometric theory. Oxford: OUP Catalogue.
   Google Scholar
• Safizadeh, M. H. 2002. Minimizing the bias and variance of the gradient estimate in RSM simulation studies. European Journal of Operational Research 136 (1):121–35. doi: 10.1016/S0377-2217(01)00063-7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Song, Z. 2015. The evaluation of parameter m in the big m method of linear programming. In International Conference on Materials Engineering and Information Technology Applications (MEITA 2015). Dordrecht: Atlantis Press. doi: 10.2991/meita-15.2015.8.
   Google Scholar
• Tang, L., and K. Xu. 2002. A unified approach for dual response surface optimization. Journal of Quality Technology 34 (4):437–47. doi: 10.1080/00224065.2002.11980175.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wan, J., and J. P. Kleijnen. 2006. Simulation for the optimization of (s, S) inventory system with random lead times and a service level constraint by using arena and OptQuest (Date: 18 June, 2006).
   Google Scholar
• Wang, H., Y. Jin, and J. O. Jansen. 2016. Data-driven surrogate-assisted multiobjective evolutionary optimization of a trauma system. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 20 (6):939–52. doi: 10.1109/TEVC.2016.2555315.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zazanis, M. A., and R. Suri. 1993. Convergence rates of finite-difference sensitivity estimates for stochastic systems. Operations Research 41 (4):694–703. doi: 10.1287/opre.41.4.694.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar