Is the Brent driver supported in OpenMDAO 1.x+? - openmdao

I am working on converting code that used the Brent driver to the new OpenMDAO 1.x+. However, I couldn't find the new version. Is the Brent driver supported in OpenMDAO 1.x+?. Would it be possible to request the Brent driver if it hasn't yet been converted to the new version?

We haven't migrated the Brent driver over yet. We can add it to the list of things to do, but I don't know how tough it will be. Brent is a special driver designed to handle only a single variable and im not 100% sure how we'll handle that situation now.

If you only need to use it across a single component I suggest that u use an implicit component with an internal solver and provide partial derivatives of of the residuals along with the outputs.
That way you can converge the whole thing with the standard Brent driver and just let OpenMDAO compute the total derivatives around the converged point. A good example of this is our LinearSystem component. It solves a simple linear system using numpy.linalg.solve. But it reports its behavior to the framework as an implicit component.

Related

OpenMDAO: interrupt a design of experiment computations

I am creating this new topic because I am using the OpenMDAO platform, and more specifically its design of experiment option. I would like to know if there is a proper way to interrupt and stop the computations if a condition is met in my program.
I have already used OpenMDAO optimizers to study and solve some problems and to stop the computations I used to raise an Exception to stop the program. This strategy seems to work for optimizers but not so much when I am using the LatinHypercubeGenerator driver: it is like the OpenMDAO program is still trying to compute the points even if Exception or RuntimeError are raise within the OpenMDAO explicit component function "compute".
In that respect I am wondering if there is a way to kill OpenMDAO during calculations. I tried to check if an OpenMDAO built-in attribute or method could do the job, but I have not found anything.
Does anyone know how to stop OpenMDAO DOE computations?
Many thanks in advance for any advice/help
As of OpenMDAO V3.18, there is no way to add some kind off a stopping condition to the DOE driver. You mention using AnalysisError to achieve this for other optimizers. This won't work in general either, since some drivers will intentionally catch those errors, react, and attempt to keep running the optimization.
You can see the run code of the driver, where a for loop is made and some try/catch blocks are used to record the success/failure of specific cases.
My suggestion for achieving what you want would be to copy the driver code into your model directory and make your own custom drivers. You can add whatever kind of termination condition you like, either based on results of a single case or some statistical analysis of the currently run cases.
If you come up with a clean way of doing it, you can always submit a POEM and/or a pull request to propose adding your new functionality to the mainline of OpenMDAO.

Using ExternalCodeComp as the single comp and OpenMDAO concept

I am very much attracted to the idea of using the OpenMDAO. However I am not sure if it is worthwhile to use OpenMDAO in an optimization scenario where I use an external code as a single component and nothing else.
Is there any difference between the implementation using an optimizer available in SciPy versus the aforementioned openmdao implementation.
Or any difference between that and implementation of similar approach in some other language like matlab optimization toolbox etc?
(Of course the way optimizers are implemented may differ but i mean conceptually am i taking advantage of OpenMDAO with this approach?)
As far as I read the articles; openMDAO is powerful in cases where multiple components ''interact'' with each other and "global derivatives"" are obtained?
Am I taking advantage of openMDAO by using single ExternalCodeComp
Using just a single ExternalCodeComp would not be using the full potential of OpenMDAO. There would still be some advantages, because the ExternalCodeComp handles a lot of file wrapping details for you. Additionally, there are often details in an optimization, such as adding constraints, the will commonly require additional components. In that case you might use an ExecComp to add a few additional calculations.
Lastly, using OpenMDAO would allow you to potentially grow your model in the future to include other disciplines.
If you are sure that you'll never do anything other than optimize the one external code, then OpenMDAO does reduce down to a similarly functionality to using the bare pyoptsparse, scipy, or matlab optimizers though. In this corner case, OpenMDAO doesn't bring a whole lot to the table, other than the ease of use of the ExternalCodeComp.

Constraint handling, integer & parallel optimization

I have recently been assigned to a project where an optimization tool will be developed in python.
Various online search points out there are multiple libraries/platforms that come with pros and cons. As far as I have looked up with the existing openmdao framework we can not have an optimizer that can do constraint handling, mixed-integer, parallel optimization. Here with parallel it is meant that each iteration should be parallellized as in GADriver. I wanted to ask some advice from the developers considering the future possible improvements on openmdao:
Is it a good idea to look into writing a wrapper for an existing optimizer that can handle the aforementioned request or should one opt out from openmdao completely as openmdao may not be the strongest platform in this specific problem?
if writing a wrapper is a good idea i assume one should look for driver routines in the openmdao 2.2.X github. Do you have any advice for an optimizer type within python (paid or free) that can be easily compatible with openmdao.
There is an AIAA paper titled "Next generation aircraft design considering airline operations and economics", which described current state-of-the-art research into mixed integer programming problems. The approach here used a hybrid method that takes advantage of the efficient gradient based capabilities of OpenMDAO to handle larger numbers of continuous design variables.
In general, there is no limitation on mixed integer programming. You just need to write your own driver to handle it. These algorithsm are complex, but SimpleGADriver is a decent place to start to see how to run the model in parallel.

Openmdao 1.x: Efficient way to implement Expected Improvement

I am currently using Openmdao 1.7.1. I am trying to have a MetaModel with Kriging train itself at the best point of Expected Improvement. The aim is to find a global optimum on a compact design space with an EGO-like method.
However I am facing the following conundrum:
In order to find the best point, the only way I see is to run an optimization on the Expected Improvement function with a gradient base optimizer in a nested Problem, with an outer problem running a FixedPointIterator, checking on the value of the Expected Improvement value.
My questions are the following:
Is there another, more efficient way of doing this ? I couldn't find anything about EGO in Openmdao 1.x, if there is, where should I look ?
If this is the only way:
Will this find the global optimum in my design space ?
Thank you in advance for your responses.
I think that you could develop EGO as a stand alone driver. The driver would be responsible for running the underlying model, collecting the cases, building the surrogate and doing its own sub-optimization.
You can use the surrogate models built into OpenMDAO for this. You just wouldn't use the meta-model component. You would just use the surrogate model by itself. For an example of how to do that, look at this test which runs kriging by itself.
So 90% of the EGO process would be wrapped up into a driver. This avoids the need for a sub-problem and I think simplifies the code significantly. The EGO algorithm is fairly simple and is not hard to code into the driver. You won't gain much by using nested-problems to implement it. But by making it a driver, you can still build a more complex model that will get run by EGO.

What is the main idea of OpenFOAM?

I just want to get the main idea/principle of openFOAM and how you create a simulation, please let me know where I go wrong,
So basically you have a object that interacts with gas or liquid and you want to simulate this, so you create model of the object, mesh it, specify where the gas will flow in and out and what are the walls, and set the other correct parameters and then run the program (with the approprate time step etc)?
OpenFOAM is an open source C++ library which implements the finite volume method (FVM), which is widely used in CFD.
What you have explained is a vague understanding of some of the applications of CFD. Those things you specified might not always be the case (i.e. the fluid might not necessarily be (a) gas and so on.
The main stages of a CFD problem are: making the geometry - mesh generation - preprocess - solving - postprocess.
There might be more stages added depending on the resolution and other specifics of the case.
Now OpenFoam is an open source (free for all) tool which is in C++ and helps solve the CFD problems. If the problem is simple and routine, and you have access to a commercial solver such as ANSYS fluent, then you can use that since it is easier and much less work if the problem is not specific. However, if the problem is specific and there are customized criteria OpenFoam is a nice tool.
It is written in C++ thus it is object oriented and also there are many many different solvers already written and available to use, so you will not have to write all the schemes and everything on your own from scratch.
However, my main advice to you is to read more about CFD to have a clear understanding, there are tens of good books avaiable.

Resources