Simulation-based on multi-objective optimization in complex system: A meta-modeling approach

Authors

https://doi.org/10.48314/caa.v2i1.47

Abstract

This research investigates simulation-based Multi-Objective Optimization (MOO) in complex systems. The main goal of this research is to develop a metamodeling approach that can simultaneously simulate multiple conflicting objectives in complex systems. This research seeks to identify and analyze the challenges in optimizing complex systems and provide solutions to improve the performance and efficiency of these systems. By using meta models, an attempt is made to reduce computational time and increase the accuracy of optimization results.

In this paper, MOO in the mining system of a copper mining complex is presented using the NBI optimization method and regression meta model. For this purpose, two objective functions are considered: maximizing the total extraction amount, which includes the sum of sulfide, oxide, low-grade ore and waste extractions in the mine, and minimizing the transportation travel time, subject to the constraints of storage capacity, transportation equipment and budget. The Central Composite Design (CCD) method is used to construct the Design of Experiments (DOE) for the design variables.

Firstly, the design variables include the number of 120-ton, 240-ton, 35-ton and 100-ton trucks are considered. The amount of objectives in each design combination is considered as the response surface. The appropriate meta model to maximize the total extraction rate and minimize the transportation travel time, two modified nonlinear regression functions are determined. The accuracy of the models for selection is examined using PRESS and R2 statistics. Also, the most common PRESS error is used to validate the meta models. Then, the MOO problem is solved using the modified NBI method. Finally, the Pareto solutions using this approach are presented and discussed.

This study investigates simulation-based MOO in complex systems and develops a metamodeling approach. The results show that the use of meta models can significantly reduce computational time and increase the accuracy of optimization results. By simulating multiple conflicting objectives simultaneously, this study identifies and analyzes the challenges in optimizing complex systems and provides effective solutions to improve the performance of these systems. In addition, the models developed in this study can help in optimal decision-making in various engineering and management fields and can be used as an efficient tool in solving complex problems. Ultimately, this study will not only contribute to a better understanding of optimization processes in complex systems, but will also pave the way for future research in this area.

Keywords:

Meta model, Modified NBI method, Multi-objective optimization, Design of experiment, Central composite design, Simulation

References

  1. [1] Okafor, C. J. (2025). Geometric analysis of gutter bracket using different NX siemens solver for linear and nonlinear investigation. Complexity analysis and applications, 2(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.48314/caa.v2i1.35
  2. [2] Abolghasemian, M., Kanafi, A. G., & Daneshmand-Mehr, M. (2022). Simulation-based multiobjective optimization of open-pit mine haulage system: A modified-NBI method and meta modeling approach. Complexity, 2022(1), 3540736. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/3540736
  3. [3] Jahangiri, S., Abolghasemian, M., Ghasemi, P., & Chobar, A. P. (2023). Simulation-based optimisation: Analysis of the emergency department resources under COVID-19 conditions. International journal of industrial and systems engineering, 43(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJISE.2021.10037641
  4. [4] ML, A., & Keihani, H. R. (2021). Factors influencing the investors to invest in stock market. Ashoka ml and hamid reza keihani, factors influencing the investors to invest in stock market, international journal of management (IJM), 11(1), 166–175. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3842763
  5. [5] Abolghasemian, M., Kanafi, A. G., & Daneshmandmehr, M. (2020). A two-phase simulation-based optimization of hauling system in open-pit mine. Iranian journal of management studies, 13(4), 705–732. https://doi.org/10.22059/IJMS.2020.294809.673898
  6. [6] Nageshwaraniyer, S. S., Son, Y. J., & Dessureault, S. (2013). Simulation-based optimal planning for material handling networks in mining. Simulation, 89(3), 330–345. https://doi.org/10.1177/0037549712464278
  7. [7] Bayanati, M., Peivandizadeh, A., Heidari, M. R., Foroutan Mofrad, S., Sasouli, M. R., & Pourghader Chobar, A. (2022). Prioritize strategies to address the sustainable supply chain innovation using multicriteria decision-making methods. Complexity, 2022(1), 1501470. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/1501470
  8. [8] Campbell, J. O., & Adesina, A. S. (2025). The projection and utilization of Neutrosophic algebra for decision-making processes. Complexity analysis and applications, 2(1), 12–24. https://doi.org/10.48314/caa.vi.39
  9. [9] Keihani, H., & Keihani, H. (2025). Transitioning corporate models and processes towards sustainable practices and adopting a circular economy approach. Global business management and economics (JGBME), 8(2), 31–46. file:///C:/Users/Administrator/Desktop/Transitioning-Corporate-Models-and-Processes-Towards-Sustainable-Practices-and-Adopting-a-Circular-Economy-Approach (1).pdf
  10. [10] Dengiz, B., İç, Y. T., & Belgin, O. (2016). A meta-model based simulation optimization using hybrid simulation-analytical modeling to increase the productivity in automotive industry. Mathematics and computers in simulation, 120, 120–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matcom.2015.07.005
  11. [11] Pourghader Chobar, A., Adibi, M. A., & Kazemi, A. (2021). A novel multi-objective model for hub location problem considering dynamic demand and environmental issues. Journal of industrial engineering and management studies, 8(1), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.22116/jiems.2021.239719.1373
  12. [12] Dengiz, B., & Belgin, O. (2014). Simulation optimization of a multi-stage multi-product paint shop line with Response Surface Methodology. Simulation, 90(3), 265–274. https://doi.org/10.1177/0037549713516508
  13. [13] Amouzgar, K., Bandaru, S., Andersson, T., & Ng, A. H. C. (2018). A framework for simulation-based multi-objective optimization and knowledge discovery of machining process. The international journal of advanced manufacturing technology, 98(9), 2469–2486. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-018-2360-8
  14. [14] Syberfeldt, A., Ng, A., John, R. I., & Moore, P. (2009). Multi-objective evolutionary simulation-optimisation of a real-world manufacturing problem. Robotics and computer-integrated manufacturing, 25(6), 926–931. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcim.2009.04.013
  15. [15] Keihani, H. R. (2021). The relationship between macroeconomic factors and indian stock market. Journal of contemporary issues in business & government, 27(5), 1306–1312. https://cibgp.com/index.php/1323-6903/article/view/2063
  16. [16] Abolghasemian, M., Eskandari, H., & Darabi, H. (2018). Simulation based optimization of haulage system of an open-pit mine: Meta modeling approach. Organizational resources management researchs, 8(2), 1-17. (In Persian). https://www.sid.ir/paper/373514/en
  17. [17] Kaur, P., Chand, M., Kaur, D., & Rakshit, M. (2024). Inventory modeling for deteriorating items with stock dependent demand, shortages and inflation under two-warehouse storage management system in a fuzzy environment. Complexity analysis and applications, 1(1), 14–24. https://doi.org/10.48314/caa.v1i1.19
  18. [18] Ghasemi, F., & Keihani, H. (2025). Application of machine learning and data science in project construction scheduling. International journal of sustainable applied science and engineering, 2(2), 39–52. https://doi.org/10.22034/ijsase.v2i2.171
  19. [19] Chugh, T., Sindhya, K., Hakanen, J., & Miettinen, K. (2019). A survey on handling computationally expensive multiobjective optimization problems with evolutionary algorithms. Soft computing, 23(9), 3137–3166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-017-2965-0
  20. [20] Zeinali, F., Mahootchi, M., & Sepehri, M. M. (2015). Resource planning in the emergency departments: A simulation-based metamodeling approach. Simulation modelling practice and theory, 53, 123–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.simpat.2015.02.002
  21. [21] Roudaki, M., Pourghader Chobar, A., Nagahi, A., Keihani, H., & Alamiparvin, R. (2025). Evaluation of supply chain performance using combination of DEA and fuzzy TOPSIS: A case from Iranian electric industry. Journal of industrial engineering and management studies, 12(1), 114–124. https://doi.org/10.22116/jiems.2025.514276.1596
  22. [22] Syberfeldt, A., Andersson, M., Ng, A., & Bengtsson, V. (2015). Multi-objective evolutionary optimization of personnel scheduling. International journal of artificial intelligence & applications, 6(1), 41–52. https://doi.org/10.5121/ijaia.2015.6103
  23. [23] Moussavi, S. E., Mahdjoub, M., & Grunder, O. (2018). A multi-objective programming approach to develop an ergonomic job rotation in a manufacturing system. IFAC-papersonline, 51(11), 850–855. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2018.08.445
  24. [24] Das, A. K., & Pratihar, D. K. (2019). A novel approach for neuro-fuzzy system-based multi-objective optimization to capture inherent fuzziness in engineering processes. Knowledge-based systems, 175, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2019.03.017
  25. [25] Karmellos, M., Georgiou, P. N., & Mavrotas, G. (2019). A comparison of methods for the optimal design of Distributed Energy Systems under uncertainty. Energy, 178, 318–333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.04.153
  26. [26] Russell, A., & Taghipour, S. (2019). Multi-objective optimization of complex scheduling problems in low-volume low-variety production systems. International journal of production economics, 208, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2018.11.005
  27. [27] Zhang, J., Huang, Y., Wang, Y., & Ma, G. (2020). Multi-objective optimization of concrete mixture proportions using machine learning and metaheuristic algorithms. Construction and building materials, 253, 119208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.119208
  28. [28] Messac, A., & Mattson, C. A. (2004). Normal constraint method with guarantee of even representation of complete Pareto frontier. AIAA journal, 42(10), 2101–2111. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.8977
  29. [29] Barton, R. R., & Meckesheimer, M. (2006). Metamodel-based simulation optimization. Handbooks in operations research and management science, 13, 535–574. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0927-0507(06)13018-2
  30. [30] Eskandari, H., Darabi, H., & Hosseinzadeh, S. A. (2013). Simulation and optimization of haulage system of an open-pit mine [presentation]. Proceedings of the 2013 Summer Computer Simulation Conference. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262204242_Simulation_and_optimization_of_haulage_system_of_an_open-pit_mine
  31. [31] Amouzgar, K., Rashid, A., & Stromberg, N. (2013). Multi-objective optimization of a disc brake system by using SPEA2 and RBFN. International design engineering technical conferences and computers and information in engineering conference (Vol. 55898, p. V03BT03A029). American Society of Mechanical Engineers. https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC2013-12809

Downloads

Published

2025-03-05

Issue

Vol. 2 No. 1 (2025): Complexity Analysis and Applications

Section

Articles

Categories

How to Cite

Keihani, H. (2025). Simulation-based on multi-objective optimization in complex system: A meta-modeling approach. Complexity Analysis and Applications, 2(1), 25-38. https://doi.org/10.48314/caa.v2i1.47

Similar Articles

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.