skip to main content
10.1145/3518997.3531024acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagespadsConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Hyperparameter Tunning in Simulation-based Optimization for Adaptive Digital-Twin Abstraction Control of Smart Manufacturing System

Published:10 June 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

Smart manufacturing utilizes digital twins (DTs) that are virtual forms of their production plants for optimizing decisions. Discrete-event models (DEMs) are frequently used to model the production dynamics of the plants. To accelerate the performance of the discrete-event simulations (DES), adaptive abstraction-level conversion (AAC) approaches were proposed to change specific subcomponents of the DEM with corresponding abstracted queuing models during the runtime based on the steady-state of the DEMs. However, the speedup and accuracy loss of the AAC-based simulations (ABS) are highly influenced by user-specified significance level α (degree of tolerance of statistical invariance between two samples) and the stability of the DEMs. In this paper, we proposed a simulation-based optimization (SBO) that optimizes the problem based on genetic algorithm (GA) while tuning the hyperparameter (α) during runtime to maximize the speedup of ABS under a specified accuracy constraint. For each population, the proposed method distributes the computing budget between the α exploration and fitness evaluation. A discrete-gradient-based method is proposed to estimate each individual’s initial α (close to the final optimum) using previous exploration results of neighboring individuals so that the closeness can reduce the iterative α exploration as GA converges. We also proposed a clean-up method that removes inferior results to improve the α estimation. The proposed method was applied to optimize raw-material releases of a large-scale manufacturing system to prove the concept and evaluate the performance under various situations.

References

  1. Aldeida Aleti and Irene Moser. 2016. A systematic literature review of adaptive parameter control methods for evolutionary algorithms. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 49, 3 (2016), 1–35.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. June-Young Bang and Yeong-Dae Kim. 2010. Hierarchical Production Planning for Semiconductor Wafer Fabrication Based on Linear Programming and Discrete-Event Simulation. IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering 7, 2(2010), 326–336. https://doi.org/10.1109/TASE.2009.2021462Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Jennifer Bekki, J.W. Fowler, Gerald Mackulak, and Barry Nelson. 2010. Indirect cycle time quantile estimation using the Cornish–Fisher expansion. IIE Transactions 42 (01 2010). https://doi.org/10.1080/07408170903019135Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. M A Chik, A B Rahim, A Z Md Rejab, K Ibrahim, and U. Hashim. 2014. Discrete event simulation modeling for semiconductor fabrication operation. In 2014 IEEE International Conference on Semiconductor Electronics (ICSE2014). 325–328. https://doi.org/10.1109/SMELEC.2014.6920863Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. D.P. Connors, G.E. Feigin, and D.D. Yao. 1996. A queueing network model for semiconductor manufacturing. IEEE Transactions on Semiconductor Manufacturing 9, 3(1996), 412–427. https://doi.org/10.1109/66.536112Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Carlos Alberto Barrera Diaz, Tehseen Aslam, and Amos H. C. Ng. 2021. Optimizing Reconfigurable Manufacturing Systems for Fluctuating Production Volumes: A Simulation-Based Multi-Objective Approach. IEEE Access 9(2021), 144195–144210. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3122239Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Ágoston E Eiben, Robert Hinterding, and Zbigniew Michalewicz. 1999. Parameter control in evolutionary algorithms. IEEE Transactions on evolutionary computation 3, 2(1999), 124–141.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. D. Fronckowiak, A. Peikert, and K. Nishinohara. 1996. Using discrete event simulation to analyze the impact of job priorities on cycle time in semiconductor manufacturing. In IEEE/SEMI 1996 Advanced Semiconductor Manufacturing Conference and Workshop. Theme-Innovative Approaches to Growth in the Semiconductor Industry. ASMC 96 Proceedings. 151–155. https://doi.org/10.1109/ASMC.1996.557987Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Dean Grosbard, Adar Kalir, Israel Tirkel, and Gad Rabinowitz. 2013. A queuing network model for wafer fabrication using decomposition without aggregation. In 2013 IEEE International Conference on Automation Science and Engineering (CASE). 717–722. https://doi.org/10.1109/CoASE.2013.6653941Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Changwu Huang, Yuanxiang Li, and Xin Yao. 2019. A survey of automatic parameter tuning methods for metaheuristics. IEEE transactions on evolutionary computation 24, 2(2019), 201–216.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. James P. Ignizio. 2009. Optimizing Factory Performance: Cost-Effective Ways to Achieve Significant and Sustainable Improvement(1st ed.). McGraw Hill, New York, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. J. Jimenez, B. Kim, J. Fowler, G. Mackulak, and You In Choung. 2002. Operational modeling and simulation of an inter-bay AMHS in semiconductor wafer fabrication. In Proceedings of the Winter Simulation Conference, Vol. 2. 1377–1382 vol.2. https://doi.org/10.1109/WSC.2002.1166405Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Rachel T. Johnson, John W. Fowler, and Gerald T. Mackulak. 2005. A Discrete Event Simulation Model Simplification Technique. In Proceedings of the 37th Conference on Winter Simulation(WSC ’05). Winter Simulation Conference, 2172–2176.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Donald E. Knuth. 1997. The Art of Computer Programming, Volume 1 (3rd Ed.): Fundamental Algorithms. Addison Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., USA.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Oliver Kramer. 2010. Evolutionary self-adaptation: a survey of operators and strategy parameters. Evolutionary Intelligence 3, 2 (2010), 51–65.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Lars Mönch, John W. Fowler, and Scott J. Mason. 2012. Production Planning and Control for Semiconductor Wafer Fabrication Facilities: Modeling, Analysis, and Systems(1st ed.). Springer, New York, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. D. Nazzal and L.F. McGinnis. 2005. Queuing models of vehicle-based automated material handling systems in semiconductor fabs. In Proceedings of the Winter Simulation Conference, 2005.8 pp.–. https://doi.org/10.1109/WSC.2005.1574540Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Oliver Rose. 2007. Improved simple simulation models for semiconductor wafer factories. In 2007 Winter Simulation Conference. 1708–1712. https://doi.org/10.1109/WSC.2007.4419793Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Moon Gi Seok, Wentong Cai, and Daejin Park. 2021. Hierarchical Aggregation/Disaggregation for Adaptive Abstraction-Level Conversion in Digital Twin-Based Smart Semiconductor Manufacturing. IEEE Access 9(2021), 71145–71158. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3073618Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Moon Gi Seok, Wentong Cai, Hessam S. Sarjoughian, and Daejin Park. 2020. Adaptive Abstraction-Level Conversion Framework for Accelerated Discrete-Event Simulation in Smart Semiconductor Manufacturing. IEEE Access 8(2020), 165247–165262. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3022276Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Moon GI Seok, Chew Wye Chan, Wentong Cai, Hessam S. Sarjoughian, and Daejin Park. 2020. Runtime Abstraction-Level Conversion of Discrete-Event Wafer-Fabrication Models for Simulation Acceleration. In Proceedings of the 2020 ACM SIGSIM Conference on Principles of Advanced Discrete Simulation(SIGSIM-PADS ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 83–92. https://doi.org/10.1145/3384441.3395982Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. ES Skakov and VN Malysh. 2018. Parameter meta-optimization of metaheuristics of solving specific NP-hard facility location problem. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series, Vol. 973. IOP Publishing, 012063.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. C. P. L. Veeger, L. F. P. Etman, E. Lefeber, I. J. B. F. Adan, J. van Herk, and J. E. Rooda. 2011. Predicting Cycle Time Distributions for Integrated Processing Workstations: An Aggregate Modeling Approach. IEEE Transactions on Semiconductor Manufacturing 24, 2(2011), 223–236. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSM.2010.2094630Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Enrique Ruiz Zúñiga, Matias Urenda Moris, Anna Syberfeldt, Masood Fathi, and Juan Carlos Rubio-Romero. 2020. A Simulation-Based Optimization Methodology for Facility Layout Design in Manufacturing. IEEE Access 8(2020), 163818–163828. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3021753Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Conferences
    SIGSIM-PADS '22: Proceedings of the 2022 ACM SIGSIM Conference on Principles of Advanced Discrete Simulation
    June 2022
    144 pages
    ISBN:9781450392617
    DOI:10.1145/3518997

    Copyright © 2022 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 10 June 2022

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate398of779submissions,51%
  • Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)36
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

    Other Metrics

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format .

View HTML Format