Simultaneous optimization procedures

In contrast to the simultaneous optimization procedures described in the previous section, the Simplex method is a sequential one. A minimum number of initial experiments is performed, and based on the outcome of these a decision is made on the location of a subsequent data point. This simplest form of a sequential optimization scheme can be characterized by the path 1012 in figure 5.4. 

Takewaki (1997) proposed a stiffness-damping simultaneous optimization procedure where the sum of mean square responses to stationary random excitations is minimized subjected to the constraints on total stiffness and damping capacity. It is a two-step optimization method where, in the first step, the optimal design is found for a specified value of total stiffness and damping, while in the second step the procedure is repeated for a set of total stiffiiess and damping capacity. 

This procedure corresponds to a full Cl (i.e. including all possible excitations) within a restricted set of occupied and virtual MOs (called die active space , hence the CAS acronym). In addition, die AO coefficients in die one-electron MOs are simultaneously optimized, such that these eventually represent an optimal basis set for the given CL... 

In practice often more than one quality criterion is relevant. In the case of the need to build in robustness, at least two criteria are already needed the quality criterion itself and its associated robustness criterion. Hence, optimization has to be done on more than one criterion simultaneously. If a simultaneous optimization technique is used then there are procedures to deal with multiple optimization criteria. Several methods for multi-criteria optimization have been proposed and recently a tutorial/review has appeared [22]. 

In general, this interpolative result is not identical with the rigorous result. Nevertheless, as we shall see in later sections, the information theory result often is in good agreement. Needless to say it would be better to use an optimization procedure which would simultaneously satisfy the moment theorems and give the correct A (0), but we have not been able to devise such a procedure. 

Optimization methods can be classified in several ways, and the choice is largely subjective. For our purposes, it is convenient to categorize them as sequential or simultaneous. A sequential method is one in which the experimental and evaluation stages alternate throughout the procedure, with the results of previous experiments being used to predict further experiments in search of the optimum. In contrast, with a simultaneous optimization strategy, most if not all experiments are completed prior to evaluation. (Note that simultaneous has a different meaning here than in the previous section.)... 

The octasaceharide which carries an additional A -acetylglucosamine at the reducing end in comparison to the heptasaccharide was prepared by an independent synthesis. This compound shows a different conformational behavior than the heptasaccharide [122]. The minimum energy conformation, as calculated by the GESA program, shows the trisaccharide at the 6-position of the P-mannose bent back towards the reducing end. This particular effect is in qualitative agreement with the observation of the conformational difference between the tri- and the pentasaccharide described above. The NMR analysis of this octasaceharide confirms the calculated structure. One important fact for the correct prediction of the conformational data was the simultaneous treatment of all independent parameters in the optimization procedure (Table 8). 

Reactive separations combining mass transfer with simultaneous chemical reactions inside one column unit provide an important synergistic effect and bring about several advantages. However, the design of the RS columns is more sophisticated than that of traditional operations, and the influence of column internals increases significantly. These internals have to support both separation and reaction steps which often requires a thorough optimization procedure. 

In this section we will describe several optimization procedures which are simultaneous in the sense that all experiments are performed according to a pre-planned experimental design. However, unlike the methods described in section 5.2, the experimental data are now interpreted in terms of the individual retention surfaces for all solutes. The window diagram is the best known example of this kind of procedure. 

Window diagrams and related methods may in principle be applied to optimization problems in more than one dimension. The main difference compared with one-parameter problems is that graphical procedures become much more difficult and that the role of the computer becomes more and more important. Deming et al. [558,559] have applied the window diagram method to the simultaneous optimization of two parameters in RPLC. The volume fraction of methanol and the concentration of ion-pairing reagent (1-octane sulfonic acid) were considered for the optimization of a mixture of 2,6-disubstituted anilines [558]. A five-parameter model equation was used to describe the retention surface for each solute. Data were recorded according to a three-level, two-factor experimental... 

When equality constraints or restrictions on certain variables exist in an optimization situation, a powerful analytical technique is the use of Lagrange multipliers. In many cases, the normal optimization procedure of setting the partial of the objective function with respect to each variable equal to zero and solving the resulting equations simultaneously becomes difficult or impossible mathematically. It may be much simpler to optimize by developing a Lagrange expression, which is then optimized in place of the real objective function. 

A lab-scale procedure for refolding the recombinant protein, secretory leukocyte protease inhibitor, was scaled to 1000 liter production batches. Optimization of reaction conditions by a statistical experimental design approach resulted in consistent activity recoveries of 80-85%, and lowered cost. The statistical design method allows simultaneous optimization of interacting process variables. Changes in the refold reaction conditions greatly influence the level of specific contaminants, thus purity becomes an important parameter in addition to yield. Our experience in the development, scale-up, and cost analysis of a protein refolding operation is presented. 

In reality, many chemical processes are defined by complex equations where the application of SOO techniques does not provide satisfactory results in the presence of multiple conflicting objectives. Instead, the solution lies with the use of MOO techniques. MOO refers to the simultaneous optimization of multiple, often conflicting objectives, which produces a set of alternative solutions called the Pareto domain (Deb, 2001). These solutions are said to be Pareto-optimal in the sense that no one solution is better than any other in the domain when compared on all criteria simultaneously and in the absence of any preferences for one criterion over another. The decision-maker s experience and knowledge are then incorporated into the optimization procedure in order to classify the available alternatives in terms of his/her preferences (Doumpos and Zopounidis, 2002). MOO techniques... 

It Is difficult to resolve a small number of components simultaneously. This can have significant Implications with respect to the way we handle data and design optimization procedures. 

---