The meta-models are constructed for static recrystallisation of dual phase steels using evolutionary neural nets (EvoNN). Four mutually conflicting objectives—(i) overall kinetics, (ii) grain size, (iii) the amount of strain and (iv) the precipitate volume fraction—are optimised simultaneously using an emerging k-optimal approach incorporated in the EvoNN, using a predator–prey genetic algorithm. The first objective involved minimisation of error with respect to experimental observation. The grain size and the amount of strain were minimised, whereas the precipitate volume fraction was maximised. The aim is to control the recrystallisation process in order to achieve desired material properties of dual phase steel during the final stages of heat treatment.
PetterssonF., ChakrabortiN. and SaxenH.: ‘A genetic algorithms based multi-objective neural net applied to noisy blast furnace data’, Appl. Soft Comput., 2007, 7, 387–397. doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2005.09.001
2.
MohantyD., CahndraA. and ChakrabortiN.: ‘Genetic algorithms based multi-objective optimization of an iron making rotary kiln’, Comp. Mater. Sci., 2009, 45, 181–188. doi: 10.1016/j.commatsci.2008.03.056
3.
JhaR., SenP. K. and ChakrabortiN.: ‘Multi-objective genetic algorithms and genetic programming models for minimizing input carbon rates in a blast furnace compared with a conventional analytic approach’, Steel Res. Int., 2014, 85, (12), 219–232. doi: 10.1002/srin.201300074
4.
MondalD. N., SarangiK., PetterssonF., SenP. K., SaxenH. and ChakrabortiN.: ‘Cu–Zn separation by supported liquid membrane analyzed through multi-objective genetic algorithms’, Hydrometallurgy, 2011, 107, 112–123. doi: 10.1016/j.hydromet.2011.02.008
5.
HalderC., MadejL., PietrzykM. and ChakrabortiN.: ‘Optimization of cellular automata model for the heating of dual phase steel by genetic algorithm and genetic programming’, Mater. Manuf. Process., 2015, 30, 552–562. doi: 10.1080/10426914.2014.994765
6.
RajakP., TewaryU., DasS., BhattacharyaB. and ChakrabortiN.: ‘Phases in Zn-coated Fe analyzed through an evolutionary meta-model and multi-objective genetic algorithms’, Comp. Mater. Sci., 2011, 50, 2502–2516. doi: 10.1016/j.commatsci.2011.03.034
7.
RajakP., GhoshS., BhattacharyaB. and ChakrabortiN.: ‘Pareto-optimal analysis of Zn-coated Fe in the presence of dislocations using genetic algorithms’, Comp. Mater. Sci., 2012, 62, 266–271. doi: 10.1016/j.commatsci.2012.05.002
8.
HariharanK., NguyenN. T., ChakrabortiN., LeeM. G. and BarlatF.: ‘Multi-objective genetic algorithms to optimize variable drawbead geometry for tailor welded blanks made of dissimilar steels’, Steel Res. Int., 2014, 85, 1597–1607. doi: 10.1002/srin.201300471
9.
HariharanK., ChakrabortiN., BarlatF. and LeeM. G.: ‘A novel multi-objective genetic algorithms-based calculation of Hill's coefficients’, Metall. Mater. Trans. A, 2014, 45A, 2704–2707. doi: 10.1007/s11661-014-2274-5
10.
ArisoyY. M. and OzelT.: ‘Machine learning based predictive modeling of machining induced microhardness and grain size in Ti–6Al–4V alloy’, Mater. Manuf. Process., 2015, 30, 425–433. doi: 10.1080/10426914.2014.961476
11.
JhaR., PetterssonF., DulikravichG. S., SaxenH. and ChakrabortiN.: ‘Evolutionary design of nickel-based superalloys using data-driven genetic algorithms and related strategies’, Mater. Manuf. Process., 2015, 30, 488–510. doi: 10.1080/10426914.2014.984203
12.
GiriB. K., HakanenJ., MiettinenK. and ChakrabortiN.: ‘Genetic programming through bi-objective genetic algorithms with a study of a simulated moving bed process involving multiple objectives’, Appl. Soft Comput., 2013, (5), 2613–2623. doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2012.11.025
13.
GiriB. K., PetterssonF., SaxenH. and ChakrabortiN.: ‘Genetic programming evolved through Bi-objective genetic algorithms applied to a blast furnace’, Mater. Manuf. Process., 2013, (7), 776–782. doi: 10.1080/10426914.2013.763953
14.
KovacicM.: ‘Modeling of total decarburization of spring steel with genetic programming’, Mater. Manuf. Process., 2015, 30, 434–443. doi: 10.1080/10426914.2014.961477
15.
Chakraborti:N.: ‘Critical assessment 3: the unique contribution of multi-objective evolutionary and genetic algorithms in materials research’, Mater. Sci. Technol., 2014, 30, 1259–1262. doi: 10.1179/1743284714Y.0000000578
16.
ChakrabortiN.: ‘Promise of multiobjective genetic algorithms in coating performance formulation’, Surf. Eng., 2014, 30, 79–82. doi: 10.1179/1743294413Y.0000000219
17.
ChakrabortiN.: ‘Evolutionary data-driven modeling—informatics for materials science and engineering’71, ; 2013, Oxford, Butterworth-Heinemann.
18.
ChakrabortiN.: ‘Strategies for evolutionary data-driven modeling in chemical and metallurgical systems—applications of metaheuristics in process engineering’89, ; 2014, Basel, Springer.
19.
AdeyemoJ. A. and OlofintoyeO. O.: ‘Evaluation of combined Pareto multiobjective differential evolution on tuneable problems’, Int. J. Simul. Model., 2014, 13, (3), 276–287. doi: 10.2507/IJSIMM13(3)2.264
20.
CoelloC. A. C. and BecerraR. L.: ‘Evolutionary multiobjective optimization in materials science and engineering’, Mater. Manuf. Process., 2009, 24, (2), 119–129. doi: 10.1080/10426910802609110
21.
ZhouA., QuB. -Y., LiH., ZhaoS. -Z., SuganthanP. N. and ZhangQ.: ‘Multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: a survey of the state of the art’, Swarm Evolut. Comput., 2011, 1, (1), 32–49. doi: 10.1016/j.swevo.2011.03.001
22.
FarinaM. and AmatoP.: ‘On the optimal solution definition for many-criteria optimization problems’. Proc. Int. Conf. on ‘NAFIPS-FLINT International Conference’, Piscataway, NJ, IEEE Service Center, June 2002, 233–238.
23.
DebK.: ‘Multi-objective optimization using evolutionary algorithms’, 30–34; 2001, New York, Wiley.
24.
SteponaviceI., RuuskaS. and MiettinenK.: ‘A solution process for simulation-based multiobjective design optimization with an application in the paper industry’, Comput. Aided Design, 2014, 47, 45–58. doi: 10.1016/j.cad.2013.08.045
25.
VoseM. D.: ‘The simple genetic algorithm: foundations and theory’; 1999, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.
26.
WangL., ZengY. and ChenT.: ‘Back propagation neural network with adaptive differential evolution algorithm for time series forecasting’, Expert Syst. Appl., 2015, 42, 855–863. doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2014.08.018
27.
MadejL., SieradzkiL., SitkoM., PerzynskiK., RadwanskiK. and KuziakR.: ‘Multi scale cellular automata and finite element based model for cold deformation and annealing of a ferritic–pearlitic microstructure’, Comp. Mater. Sci., 2013, 77, 172–181. doi: 10.1016/j.commatsci.2013.04.020
28.
MadejL., WangJ., PerzynskiK. and HodgsonP. D.: ‘Numerical modeling of dual phase microstructure behaviour under deformation conditions on the basis of digital material representation’, Comp. Mater. Sci., 2014, 95, 651–662. doi: 10.1016/j.commatsci.2014.08.035
29.
LongshawS. M. and RogersB. D.: ‘Automotive fuel cell sloshing under temporally and spatially varying high acceleration using GPU-based smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH)’, Adv. Eng. Softw., 2015, 83, 31–44. doi: 10.1016/j.advengsoft.2015.01.008
30.
MoidownikM. A.: ‘Zener pinning’, 2nd edn, ‘Encyclopedia of materials: science and technology’, 9855–9859; 2001, New York, Elsevier.
31.
ZhengC., XiaoN., LiD. and LiY.: ‘Microstructure prediction of the austenite recrystallization during multi-pass steel strip hot rolling: a cellular automaton modeling’, Comp. Mater. Sci., 2008, 44, 507–514. doi: 10.1016/j.commatsci.2008.04.010
32.
YangB. J., ChuzhoyL. and JohnsonM. L.: ‘Modeling of reaustenitization of hypoeutectoid steels with cellular automaton method’, Comp. Mater. Sci., 2007, 41, 186–194. doi: 10.1016/j.commatsci.2007.04.001
