Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
125 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
53 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
42 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
47 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Fast and Accurate Zero-Training Classification for Tabular Engineering Data (2401.06948v1)

Published 13 Jan 2024 in cs.CE

Abstract: In engineering design, navigating complex decision-making landscapes demands a thorough exploration of the design, performance, and constraint spaces, often impeded by resource-intensive simulations. Data-driven methods can mitigate this challenge by harnessing historical data to delineate feasible domains, accelerate optimization, or evaluate designs. However, the implementation of these methods usually demands machine-learning expertise and multiple trials to choose the right method and hyperparameters. This makes them less accessible for numerous engineering situations. Additionally, there is an inherent trade-off between training speed and accuracy, with faster methods sometimes compromising precision. In our paper, we demonstrate that a recently released general-purpose transformer-based classification model, TabPFN, is both fast and accurate. Notably, it requires no dataset-specific training to assess new tabular data. TabPFN is a Prior-Data Fitted Network, which undergoes a one-time offline training across a broad spectrum of synthetic datasets and performs in-context learning. We evaluated TabPFN's efficacy across eight engineering design classification problems, contrasting it with seven other algorithms, including a state-of-the-art AutoML method. For these classification challenges, TabPFN consistently outperforms in speed and accuracy. It is also the most data-efficient and provides the added advantage of being differentiable and giving uncertainty estimates. Our findings advocate for the potential of pre-trained models that learn from synthetic data and require no domain-specific tuning to make data-driven engineering design accessible to a broader community and open ways to efficient general-purpose models valid across applications. Furthermore, we share a benchmark problem set for evaluating new classification algorithms in engineering design.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (30)
  1. Hollmann, N., Müller, S., Eggensperger, K., and Hutter, F., 2023, “TabPFN: A Transformer That Solves Small Tabular Classification Problems in a Second,” doi:10.48550/arXiv.2207.01848, 2207.01848
  2. Malak, R. J., Jr. and Paredis, C. J. J., 2010, “Using Support Vector Machines to Formalize the Valid Input Domain of Predictive Models in Systems Design Problems,” https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4002151Journal of Mechanical Design, 132(101001).
  3. Yoo, D., Hertlein, N., Chen, V. W., Willey, C. L., Gillman, A., Juhl, A., Anand, S., Vemaganti, K., and Buskohl, P. R., 2021, “Bayesian Optimization of Equilibrium States in Elastomeric Beams,” https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4050743Journal of Mechanical Design, 143(111702).
  4. Tsai, Y.-K. and Malak, R. J., 2022, “A Constraint-Handling Technique for Parametric Optimization and Control Co-Design,” ASME 2022 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, American Society of Mechanical Engineers Digital Collection, doi:10.1115/DETC2022-89957.
  5. Massoudi, S., Picard, C., and Schiffmann, J., 2022/ed, “Robust Design Using Multiobjective Optimisation and Artificial Neural Networks with Application to a Heat Pump Radial Compressor,” https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2021.25Design Science, 8.
  6. Wiest, T., Seepersad, C. C., and Haberman, M. R., 2022, “Robust Design of an Asymmetrically Absorbing Willis Acoustic Metasurface Subject to Manufacturing-Induced Dimensional Variationsa),” https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0009162The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 151(1), pp. 216–231.
  7. Caputo, C. and Cardin, M.-A., 2021, “THE ROLE OF MACHINE LEARNING FOR FLEXIBILITY AND REAL OPTIONS ANALYSIS IN ENGINEERING SYSTEMS DESIGN,” https://doi.org/10.1017/pds.2021.573Proceedings of the Design Society, 1, pp. 3121–3130.
  8. Sharpe, C., Wiest, T., Wang, P., and Seepersad, C. C., 2019, “A Comparative Evaluation of Supervised Machine Learning Classification Techniques for Engineering Design Applications,” https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4044524Journal of Mechanical Design, 141(12).
  9. Chen, W. and Fuge, M., 2018, “Active Expansion Sampling for Learning Feasible Domains in an Unbounded Input Space,” doi:10.48550/arXiv.1708.07888, 1708.07888
  10. Li, H., Qiu, L., Wang, Z., Zhang, S., Tan, J., and Zhang, L., 2022, “An Assembly Precision Prediction Method for Customized Mechanical Products Based on GAN-FTL,” https://doi.org/10.1177/09544054211021340Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture, 236(3), pp. 160–173.
  11. Regenwetter, L., Heyrani Nobari, A., and Ahmed, F., 2022, “Deep Generative Models in Engineering Design: A Review,” https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4053859Journal of Mechanical Design, 144(7).
  12. Chen, T. and Guestrin, C., 2016, “XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting System,” Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, ACM, San Francisco California USA, pp. 785–794, doi:10.1145/2939672.2939785.
  13. Erickson, N., Mueller, J., Shirkov, A., Zhang, H., Larroy, P., Li, M., and Smola, A., 2020, “AutoGluon-Tabular: Robust and Accurate AutoML for Structured Data,” doi:10.48550/arXiv.2003.06505, 2003.06505
  14. Regenwetter, L., Weaver, C., and Ahmed, F., 2023, “FRAMED: An AutoML Approach for Structural Performance Prediction of Bicycle Frames,” https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cad.2022.103446Computer-Aided Design, 156, p. 103446.
  15. Du, X., Bilgen, O., and Xu, H., 2021, “Generating Pseudo-Data to Enhance the Performance of Classification-Based Engineering Design: A Preliminary Investigation,” ASME 2020 International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, American Society of Mechanical Engineers Digital Collection, doi:10.1115/IMECE2020-24634.
  16. Raffel, C., Shazeer, N., Roberts, A., Lee, K., Narang, S., Matena, M., Zhou, Y., Li, W., and Liu, P. J., 2020, “Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformer,” Journal of Machine Learning Research, 21(140), pp. 1–67.
  17. Vaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., Uszkoreit, J., Jones, L., Gomez, A. N., Kaiser, Ł., and Polosukhin, I., 2017, “Attention Is All You Need,” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, Vol. 30, Curran Associates, Inc.
  18. Hu, E. J., Shen, Y., Wallis, P., Allen-Zhu, Z., Li, Y., Wang, S., Wang, L., and Chen, W., 2022, “LoRA: Low-rank Adaptation of Large Language Models,” International Conference on Learning Representations.
  19. Li, Y., Ildiz, M. E., Papailiopoulos, D., and Oymak, S., 2023, “Transformers as Algorithms: Generalization and Stability in In-context Learning,” 2301.07067
  20. Shwartz-Ziv, R. and Armon, A., 2022, “Tabular Data: Deep Learning Is Not All You Need,” https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2021.11.011Information Fusion, 81, pp. 84–90.
  21. Zhu, B., Shi, X., Erickson, N., Li, M., Karypis, G., and Shoaran, M., 2023, “XTab: Cross-table Pretraining for Tabular Transformers,” doi:10.48550/arXiv.2305.06090, 2305.06090
  22. Müller, S., Hollmann, N., Arango, S. P., Grabocka, J., and Hutter, F., 2022, “Transformers Can Do Bayesian Inference,” International Conference on Learning Representations.
  23. Regenwetter, L., Curry, B., and Ahmed, F., 2021, “BIKED: A Dataset for Computational Bicycle Design With Machine Learning Benchmarks,” https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4052585Journal of Mechanical Design, 144(3).
  24. Singh, A. and Tucker, C. S., 2017, “A Machine Learning Approach to Product Review Disambiguation Based on Function, Form and Behavior Classification,” https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2017.03.007Decision Support Systems, 97, pp. 81–91.
  25. Rokach, L., 2010, “Ensemble-Based Classifiers,” https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-009-9124-7Artificial Intelligence Review, 33(1), pp. 1–39.
  26. Heyrani Nobari, A., Chen, W., and Ahmed, F., 2021, “PcDGAN: A Continuous Conditional Diverse Generative Adversarial Network For Inverse Design,” Proceedings of the 27th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining, Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp. 606–616, doi:10.1145/3447548.3467414.
  27. Drela, M., 1989, “XFOIL: An Analysis and Design System for Low Reynolds Number Airfoils,” Low Reynolds Number Aerodynamics, T. J. Mueller, ed., Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 1–12, doi:10.1007/978-3-642-84010-4_1.
  28. Bryan, B., Nichol, R. C., Genovese, C. R., Schneider, J., Miller, C. J., and Wasserman, L., 2005, “Active Learning For Identifying Function Threshold Boundaries,” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, Vol. 18, MIT Press.
  29. Pedregosa, F., Varoquaux, G., Gramfort, A., Michel, V., Thirion, B., Grisel, O., Blondel, M., Prettenhofer, P., Weiss, R., Dubourg, V., Vanderplas, J., Passos, A., Cournapeau, D., Brucher, M., Perrot, M., and Duchesnay, É., 2011, “Scikit-Learn: Machine Learning in Python,” Journal of Machine Learning Research, 12(85), pp. 2825–2830.
  30. Lindauer, M., Eggensperger, K., Feurer, M., Biedenkapp, A., Deng, D., Benjamins, C., Ruhkopf, T., Sass, R., and Hutter, F., 2022, “SMAC3: A Versatile Bayesian Optimization Package for Hyperparameter Optimization,” Journal of Machine Learning Research, 23(54), pp. 1–9.
Citations (2)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.