Research article

Multi-response optimization of machining characteristics in ultrasonic machining of WC-Co composite through Taguchi method and grey-fuzzy logic

  • Received: 18 November 2017 Accepted: 17 January 2018 Published: 22 January 2018
  • This article addresses the application of grey based fuzzy logic coupled with Taguchi’s approach for optimization of multi performance characteristics in ultrasonic machining of WC-Co composite material. The Taguchi’s L-36 array has been employed to conduct the experimentation and also to observe the influence of different process variables (power rating, cobalt content, tool geometry, thickness of work piece, tool material, abrasive grit size) on machining characteristics. Grey relational fuzzy grade has been computed by converting the multiple responses, i.e., material removal rate and tool wear rate obtained from Taguchi’s approach into a single performance characteristic using grey based fuzzy logic. In addition, analysis of variance (ANOVA) has also been attempted in a view to identify the significant parameters. Results revealed grit size and power rating as leading parameters for optimization of multi performance characteristics. From the microstructure analysis, the mode of material deformation has been observed and the critical parameters (i.e., work material properties, grit size, and power rating) for the deformation mode have been established.

    Citation: Ravi Pratap Singh, Ravinder Kataria, Jatinder Kumar, Jagesvar Verma. Multi-response optimization of machining characteristics in ultrasonic machining of WC-Co composite through Taguchi method and grey-fuzzy logic[J]. AIMS Materials Science, 2018, 5(1): 75-92. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2018.1.75

    Related Papers:

    [1] Lei Mao, Yan Zhang . Robust optimal excess-of-loss reinsurance and investment problem with p-thinning dependent risks under CEV model. Quantitative Finance and Economics, 2021, 5(1): 134-162. doi: 10.3934/QFE.2021007
    [2] Sang Phu Nguyen, Toan Luu Duc Huynh . Portfolio optimization from a Copulas-GJR-GARCH-EVT-CVAR model: Empirical evidence from ASEAN stock indexes. Quantitative Finance and Economics, 2019, 3(3): 562-585. doi: 10.3934/QFE.2019.3.562
    [3] Keyue Yan, Ying Li . Machine learning-based analysis of volatility quantitative investment strategies for American financial stocks. Quantitative Finance and Economics, 2024, 8(2): 364-386. doi: 10.3934/QFE.2024014
    [4] James P. Gander . Market Value Volatility and the Volume of Traded Stock for U.S. Industrial Corporations. Quantitative Finance and Economics, 2017, 1(4): 403-410. doi: 10.3934/QFE.2017.4.403
    [5] Yuhang Zheng, Siming Liu . A Dynamic Analysis of the Business Cycle Model with a Fixed-time Delay. Quantitative Finance and Economics, 2017, 1(2): 174-185. doi: 10.3934/QFE.2017.2.174
    [6] Muath Asmar, Susanne Trimbath . Regulatory reform and trade settlement failures in USA equity markets: Does regulatory reform matter?. Quantitative Finance and Economics, 2022, 6(4): 537-552. doi: 10.3934/QFE.2022023
    [7] Lucia Morales, Daniel Rajmil . Investing in virtue and frowning at vice? Lessons from the global economic and financial crisis. Quantitative Finance and Economics, 2023, 7(1): 1-18. doi: 10.3934/QFE.2023001
    [8] Nereida Polovina, Ken Peasnell . The effects of different modes of foreign bank entry in the Turkish banking sector during the 2007–2009 Global financial crisis. Quantitative Finance and Economics, 2023, 7(1): 19-49. doi: 10.3934/QFE.2023002
    [9] Anna Timonina-Farkas . COVID-19: data-driven dynamic asset allocation in times of pandemic. Quantitative Finance and Economics, 2021, 5(2): 198-227. doi: 10.3934/QFE.2021009
    [10] Andrea Ferrario, Massimo Guidolin, Manuela Pedio . Comparing in- and out-of-sample approaches to variance decomposition-based estimates of network connectedness an application to the Italian banking system. Quantitative Finance and Economics, 2018, 2(3): 661-701. doi: 10.3934/QFE.2018.3.661
  • This article addresses the application of grey based fuzzy logic coupled with Taguchi’s approach for optimization of multi performance characteristics in ultrasonic machining of WC-Co composite material. The Taguchi’s L-36 array has been employed to conduct the experimentation and also to observe the influence of different process variables (power rating, cobalt content, tool geometry, thickness of work piece, tool material, abrasive grit size) on machining characteristics. Grey relational fuzzy grade has been computed by converting the multiple responses, i.e., material removal rate and tool wear rate obtained from Taguchi’s approach into a single performance characteristic using grey based fuzzy logic. In addition, analysis of variance (ANOVA) has also been attempted in a view to identify the significant parameters. Results revealed grit size and power rating as leading parameters for optimization of multi performance characteristics. From the microstructure analysis, the mode of material deformation has been observed and the critical parameters (i.e., work material properties, grit size, and power rating) for the deformation mode have been established.


    1. Introduction

    Investment is an important means of earning profit for insurance companies, reinsurance is in use for controlling insurers' risk exposure. Recently, it became a hot point in optimization and control fields to consider reinsurance and investment synthetically under risk models. There are two main models of reinsurance-investment problem, that is, maximizing the insurer's expected utility of terminal wealth and minimizing the probability of ruin under reinsurance-investment strategies, and each model is based on the quantitative description for insurer's surplus processes. From the known literature, we see that two major types of mathematical model for the surplus of the insurance company are usually exploited, which are the Cramer-Lundberg model and the diffusion model, the former is the so called classical risk process, and the later is an approximation to the former which is feasible as one deals with large insurance portfolios, where an individual claim is relatively small compared to the size of the surplus.

    In our paper, the continuous-time mean-variance reinsurance-investment problem is to be considered, where multiple risky assets for investment exist in the market and diffusion model is exploited to describe the risk process of the insurance company. Under diffusion model of the risk process, related reinsurance-investment problems have attracted a great deal of interest. Promislow et al. (2005) studied the optimal reinsurance-investment strategy to minimize the probability of ruin for insurance companies. Taksar et al. (2003) also obtained the optimal reinsurance-investment strategy to minimize the probability of ruin for insurance companies under diffusion model of surplus process. By solving the corresponding Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman equations, Cao et al. (2009) obtained the optimal reinsurance-investment strategies for maximizing the utility of terminal wealth with exponential and power utility functions. Luo et al. (2008) studied the similar problem as Cao et al. (2009) in Black-Scholes market subject to some investment constraints. All of the literature (Browne, 1995; Promislow et al., 2005; Taksar et al., 2003; Cao et al., 2009; Luo et al., 2008) researched their optimization problems in Black-Scholes market with single risky asset. Bai et al. (2008) considered the reinsurance-investment problem in Black-Scholes market with multiple risky assets and no-shorting constraint. Zhang et al. (2009) studied the optimal reinsurance-investment problem of maximizing the expected exponential utility of terminal wealth and solve it by using the corresponding Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman equation. It is noted that the transaction costs when investing in the risky assets and conditional Value-at-Risk to control the whole risk have been considered.

    For the sack of practical need in management, mean-variance portfolio selection model initiated by Markowitz has attracted much attention all the time. There has been few literature up to now which devoted themselves to studying the continuous-time mean-variance reinsurance-investment problem, however, the continuous-time mean-variance portfolio selection problem was researched by Zhou et al. (2000)with the help of stochastic linear-quadratic method. As the subsequent paper, Lim et al. (2002) pointed out: there are many advantages of using the framework of stochastic linear-quadratic control to study dynamic mean-variance problems, meanwhile it was recognized that the solution to the problem could also have been obtained via dynamic programming and the associated Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman equation when the market coefficients are assumed to be deterministic. It is observed that, when the market coefficients are assumed to be deterministic, the Lagrange method can be applied to solving the continuous-time mean-variance portfolio selection problems, which was expounded in Chow (1997) in a general way and was applied to investment decisions and pricing of contingent claims in Chow (1996) and Chow (1999), respectively. The Lagrange method is more popular than other dynamic optimization methods. For our continuous-time mean-variance reinsurance-investment problem with deterministic market coefficients, the Lagrange method is also a simple one to obtain our results, which is the main reason for this research. It should be recognized that the Lagrange method is limited to complex circumstances such as random market coefficients, which induces more complex backward stochastic differential equation for solving the process of the Lagrange multiplier. For more details on the subject, we refer to the recent work such as Chen et al. (2013), Shen et al. (2015), and so on.

    This paper is organized as follows: In Section 2, we state the mean-variance optimization problem. In Section 3, we use the Lagrange method to analysis the mean-variance problem, necessary and sufficient conditions for the problem are discussed, the optimal strategy and its effective frontier in explicit forms are obtained. In Section 4, we show a numerical example.


    2. Problem Formulation

    Throughout this paper we denote by M the transpose of any matrix or vector M=(mij), ||M||=i,jm2ij its norm, Rm the mdimensional real space, 1 the vector with unit entries, [0,T] the finite horizon of investment and Et the expectation at time t[0,T].

    Market uncertainty is modeled by a filtered complete probability space (Ω,F,P,{Ft}t[0,T]). Assume that the filtration {Ft}t[0,T] is generated by an (m+1)-dimensional standard Brownian motion {(W0t,W1t,,Wmt):t[0,T]} for a positive integer m. F0={Φ,Ω}, FT=F.

    We recall that the space LF,2([0,T];Rm) of mean square integrable functions u(t,x) from R×Ω to Rm possesses a natural Hilbert space structure, inducing the norm

    ||u||F,2=(E0T0||u(t,X)||2dt)12<+.

    Following the framework of Promislow and Young (2005), we model the insurer's claim process C according to a Brownian motion with drift as follows:

    dC(t)=adtbdW0t, (1)

    where a and b are positive constants. Assume that the premium be paid continuously at the constant rate c0=(1+θ)a with safety loading θ>0, and that the insurer purchase the proportional reinsurance to reduce the underlying risk. Let q(t) represent the proportion reinsured at time t. Similar to the premium paid to the insurer, the reinsurance premium is paid continuously at the constant rate c1=(1+η)aq with safety loading η>θ>0. Based on Eq. (1), the surplus process R(t) is given by the dynamics

    dR(t)=c0dt(1q(t))dC(t)c1dt=(θηq(t))adt+b(1q(t))dW0t. (2)

    In addition to reinsurance, the insurer is allowed to invest its surplus in a financial market in which (m+1) assets are traded continuously over [0,T] in a self-financing fashion (i.e., there is no consumption nor income). The 0th asset is a bond whose price S0(t) is subject to the following deterministic ordinary differential equation:

    dS0(t)=r(t)S0(t)dt,S0(0)=1, (3)

    where r(t)C([0,T];R+) is the interest rate of the risk-free asset. The remaining m assets are risky and their price processes S1(t),S2(t),,Sm(t) satisfy the following stochastic differential equations:

    dSi(t)=μi(t)Si(t)dt+σi(t)Si(t)dWt,Si(0)=si>0,i=1,2,,m, (4)

    where μi(t) and σi(t)=[σi1(t),,σim(t)] are the appreciation rate and dispersion (or volatility) rate of the ith asset, respectively, and W=(W1t,,Wmt). We assume that μi(t) and σi(t) are scalar-valued deterministic bounded functions. Denoting

    σ(t)=[σ1(t)σm(t)]Rm×m, (5)

    we assume throughout that σ(t) is uniformly nondegenerate: that is, there exists δ>0 such that

    σ(t)σ(t)δI,t[0,T]. (6)

    A strategy s is described by a stochastic process (q(t),π(t)), where π(t) :=(π1(t),π2(t),,πm(t)), πi(t) is the dollar amount invested in asset i(i=1,2,,m) at time t.

    Let X(t) denote the resulting surplus process after incorporating strategy s into (2). The dynamics of X(t) can be represented as follows.

    dX(t)=[r(t)X(t)+(θηq(t))a+τ(t)π(t)]dt+b(1q(t))dW0t+π(t)σ(t)dWt, (7)

    where τ(t)=(μ1(t)r(t),,μm(t)r(t)), X(0)=x0.

    The admissible strategy set with initial wealth x0 is defined as

    A(x0):={s=(q(t),π(t))|q(t),π(t)satisfies(2.7)}

    The objective of the insurer is to determine an optimal strategy sA(x0) such that the variance of the terminal wealth, Var[X(T)], is minimized, subject to that the expected terminal wealth, E0[X(T)], takes a given level K>x0exp(T0r(t)dt). This can be expressed as the optimization problem:

    {minsA(x0)Var[X(T)]=E0[X2(T)K],s.t.E0[X(T)]=K. (8)

    We introduce a Lagrange multiplier 2ξR and after rearranging terms arrive at the new cost function,

    E0[(X(T)2K)2+2ξ(X(T)K)]=E0[X(T)(Kξ)]2ξ2.

    Letting γ=Kξ leads to the following optimal stochastic control problem,

    maxsA(x0){(Kγ)2E0[X(T)2γ]2}. (9)

    Remark 2.1. The link between problem (8) and (9) is provided by the Lagrange duality theorem, see e.g. Luenberger (1968)

    minsA(x0)Var[X(T)]=maxγRmaxsA(x0){(Kγ)2E0[X(T)2γ]2}.

    3. Mean-Variance Analysis by the Lagrange Method

    For the first step, we consider problem (9) for a fixed γ. Follow the Lagrange method introduced by Chow (1997), recognizing dX(t)=X(t+dt)X(t), and let dt be a very small time interval. The Lagrange expression for the optimization problem (9) beginning from t=0 is

    L=(Kγ)2Et[X(T)2γ]2
    T0Etλ(t+dt)[X(t+dt)X(t)(r(t)X(t)+(θηq(t))a+τ(t)π(t))dt
    b(1q(t))dW0tπ(t)σ(t)dWt]. (10)

    For simplicity, denote by

    f(X(t),q(t),π1(t),,πm(t))=r(t)X(t)+(θηq(t))a+τ(t)π(t),
    R(q(t))=b(1q(t)).

    The Lagrange expression (10) can be rewritten as follows.

    L=(Kγ)2Et[X(T)2γ]2
    T0Etλ(t+dt)[X(t+dt)fdtR(q)dW0tπ(t)σ(t)dWt]. (11)

    Remark 3.1: By theorem 4.2 of Yong and Zhou(1999), problem (9) with dynamic constraint (7) admits a pathwise unique admissible strategy in A(x0), which implies, for a given γR, maximization of the cost function L in (11) is uniquely solvable, henceforth, the Lagrange multiplier λ=λ(t,X(t)) can be uniquely determined.


    3.1. Necessary conditions

    Let the function λ be in the form λ=λ(t,X(t)), applying Ito's differentiation rule to evaluate dλ yields

    dλ=[λt+λXf+122λX2(R2(q)+||π(t)σ(t)||2)]dt
    +λXR(q)dW0t+λXπ(t)σ(t)dWt. (12)

    Differentiating (11) with respect to X(T), we have

    λ(T)=2X(T)+2γ. (13)

    Differentiating (11) with respect to q(t) gives

    Lq=fqEtλ(t+dt)dt+EtdW0tRqλ(t+dt)
    =fq(λdt+Etdλdt)+EtdW0tRqλ(t+dt)
    =[fqλ(t)+RqλXR(q)]dt+o(dt)
    =[aηλ(t)bR(q)λX]dt+o(dt)=0.

    Hence

    aηλ(t)+bR(q)λX=0. (14)

    Differentiating (11) with respect to π(t) yields

    Lπ=[λ(t)τ(t)+λXσ(t)σ(t)π(t)]dt+o(dt)=0.

    Hence

    λ(t)τ(t)+λXσ(t)σ(t)π(t)=0. (15)

    Noting the term λ(t)[X(t)] in the integrand of (11), differentiating (11) with respect to X(t)(0t<T) gives

    LX=λ(t)+Etλ(t+dt)+fXEtλ(t+dt)dt
    =λ(t)+Et(λ(t)+dλ(t))+fXEt(λ(t)+dλ(t))dt
    =[λt+λXf+fXλ(t)+122λX2(R2(q)+||π(t)σ(t)||2)]dt+o(dt)
    =0.

    Hence

    λt+λXf+fXλ(t)+122λX2(R2(q)+||π(t)σ(t)||2)=0. (16)

    Now we state the necessary conditions for the optimization problem (9) as follows.

    Proposition 3.1. Let s=(q(t),π(t)) be the optimal reinsurance-investment strategy for the optimization problem (9), then the equations (12)-(16) hold.


    3.2. Sufficient conditions

    First, we give the explicit expression of the wealth process X(t). Let

    Y(t)=X(t)exp(t0r(s)ds),

    which yields

    dY(t)=exp(t0r(s)ds)[dX(t)r(t)X(t)dt],

    In view of (7), we have

    dY(t)=exp(t0r(s)ds)[((θηq(t))a+τ(t)π(t))dt+R(q)dW0t+π(t)σ(t)dWt],

    and thus

    Y(t)Y(0)=t0exp(s0r(u)du)[((θηq(s))a+τ(s)π(s))ds+R(q)dW0s+π(s)σ(s)dWs].

    So, we have

    X(t)=x0exp(t0r(s)ds)+t0exp(tsr(u)du)[(θηq(s))a+τ(s)π(s))ds.
    +R(q)dW0s+π(s)σ(s)dW. (17)

    In view of (17), it is not difficulty to find that both Et[X(T)2/q2] and Et[X(T)2/πi2] are positive, which guarantees that the necessary conditions stated in proposition 3.1 are also sufficient conditions for the optimization problem (9) according to Chow (1997).


    3.3. Optimal reinsurance-investment strategy

    Noting that f=r(t)X(t)(θηq(t))a+(θηq(t))a+τ(t)π(t), from (3.7) and (3.4), we have

    {λt+[r(t)X(t)+(θηq(t))a+τ(t)π(t)]λX    12[R2(q)+||π(t)σ(t)||2]2λX2+r(t)λ(t)=0,λ(T)=2X(T)+2γ. (18)

    According to Remark 3.1, problem (18) has an unique solution λ(t,X(t)). So, in view of (14) and (15), the components of admissible strategy, q(t) and π(t), are uniquely determined. For purpose of getting the unique solution of (18), we start by finding q(t) and π(t) in linear feedback form as follows.

    q(t)=ϕ1(t)X(t)+φ1(t),π(t)=ϕ2(t)X(t)+φ2(t), (19)

    where ϕ1,φ1C1[0,T;R] and ϕ2,φ2C1[0,T;Rm] are deterministic functions to be determined.

    From (14) and (19), remarking that R(q)=b(1q(t)), we have

    aηλ(t)+b2(1ϕ1(t)X(t)φ1(t))λX=0. (20)

    Differentiating (20) with respect to X(t) arrives at

    (aηb2ϕ1(t))λX+bR(q)2λX2=0.

    Hence

    R2(q)2λX2=(ϕ1(t)aη/b2)bR(q)2λX2=aη(ϕ1(t)aη/b2)λ, (21)

    where (14) is incorporated in the second equality in (21).

    From (15) and (19), we have

    λ(t)τ(t)+λXσ(t)σ(t)(ϕ2(t)X(t)+φ2(t))=0. (22)

    Differentiating (22) with respect to X(t) arrives at

    λX(τ(t)+σ(t)σ(t)ϕ2(t))+2λX2σ(t)σ(t)π(t)=0. (23)

    Hence

    ||π(t)σ(t)||22λX2=λXπ(t)(τ(t)+σ(t)σ(t)ϕ2(t)).
    =λXτ(t)π(t)+λ(t)ϕ2(t)τ(t), (24)

    where (15) is incorporated in the second equality in (23). Substituting from (21) and (24) into (18) gives

    {λt+[r(t)X(t)+(θηq(t))a+12τ(t)π(t)]λX    +12[2r(t)aη(ϕ1(t)aη/b2)+ϕ2(t)τ(t)]λ=0,λ(T)=2X(T)+2γ. (25)

    Characteristic equation of the first order partial differential equation in (25) is

    dt1=dXr(t)X(t)+(θηq(t))a+12τ(t)π(t)
    =dλ12(2r(t)aη(ϕ1(t)aη/b2)+ϕ2(t)τ(t))

    In view of

    dt1=dXr(t)X(t)+(θηq(t))a+12τ(t)π(t)

    we obtain a first integration as follows.

    C1=X(t)exp(t0(r(s)aηϕ1(s)+12τ(s)ϕ2(s)ds)
    Tt(aθaηφ1(u)+12τ(u)ϕ2(u))×exp(u0(r(s)aηϕ1(s)+12τ(s)ϕ2(s)ds)du,

    where C1 is constant. In view of

    dt1=dλ12(2r(t)aη(ϕ1(t)aη/b2)+ϕ2(t)τ(t)),

    we get another first integration:

    C2=λ(t)+12Tt[2r(s)aη(ϕ1(s)aη/b2)+ϕ2(s)τ(s)]ds,

    where C2 is constant. It is obvious that both the first integrations obtained above are mutual independent. Invoking the boundary condition in (25), that is, λ(T)=2X(T)+2γ, relationship between C1 and C2 is

    C2=2exp(T0(r(s)aηϕ1(s)+12τ(s)ϕ2(s))ds)C1+2γ

    so we get the solution of (25) as following.

    λ(t)+12Tt[2r(s)aη(ϕ1(s)aη/b2)+ϕ2(s)τ(s)]ds
    =2exp(T0(r(s)aηϕ1(s)+12τ(s)ϕ2(s))ds)
    ×[X(t)exp(t0(r(s)aηϕ1(s)+12τ(s)ϕ2(s)ds)
    Tt(aθaηφ1(u)+12τ(u)φ2(u))
    ×exp(u0(r(s)aηϕ1(s)+12τ(s)φ2(s))du]+2γ. (26)

    From (26), we see that

    {λX=2exp(Tt(r(s)aηϕ1(s)+12τ(s)ϕ2(s)ds)0,2λX2=0. (27)

    By (21) and the second equation in (27), we get ϕ1(t)=aη/b2. By (23) and (27), we get ϕ2(t)=(σ(t)σ(t))1τ(t). Substituting from the results of ϕ1(t) and ϕ2(t) into (27) shows

    λX=2exp(Tt(r(s)a2η2b212||σ1(s)τ(s)||2)ds):=H(t). (28)

    Substituting from the results of ϕ1(t) and ϕ2(t) into (26) gives

    λ(t)=H(t)X(t)+h(t), (29)

    where

    h(t)=2Tt(aθaηφ1(u)+12τ(u)φ2(u))
    ×exp(Tu(r(s)a2η2b212||σ1(s)τ(s)||2)ds)du
    12Tt[2r(s)||σ1(s)τ(s)||2]ds+2γ.

    Then h(T)=2γ, and

    dhdt=[(aθaηφ1(t)+12τ(t)φ2(t))]H(t)
    +12[2r(s)||σ1(t)τ(t)||2], (30)

    where H(t) is given by (28).

    By (22), (29) and ϕ2(t)=(σ(t)σ(t))1τ(t), we have

    H(t)φ2(t)=h(t)(σ(t)σ(t))1τ(t). (31)

    By (20), (29) and ϕ1(t)=aη/b2, we have

    H(t)φ1(t)=aηb2h(t)+H(t). (32)

    Substituting from (31) and (32) into (30) gives

    dhdt=(a2η2b2+12||σ1(t)τ(t)||2)h(t)+aθH(t)+12[2r(t)||σ1(t)τ(t)||2].

    Remarking that h(T)=2γ, we have

    h(t)=2γexp(a2η2b2(Tt)+12Tt||σ1(s)τ(s)||2ds)
    Ttexp(a2η2b2(ut)+12ut||σ1(s)τ(s)||2ds)
    ×[aθH(u)+(r(u)12||σ1(u)τ(u)||2]du. (33)

    From (31) and (32), we have

    φ2(t)=h(t)H(t)(σ(t)σ(t))1τ(t),φ1(t)=aηb2h(t)H(t)+1,

    so we have

    {q(t)=ϕ1(t)X(t)+φ1(t)=aηb(X(t)+h(t)H(t))+1;π(t)=ϕ2(t)X(t)+φ2(t)=(σ(t)σ(t))1τ(t)(X(t)+h(t)H(t)), (34)

    and

    λ(t)=H(t)X(t)+h(t), (35)

    where H(t) and h(t) are given by (28) and (33), respectively. We state one of our main results as follows.

    Proposition 3.2. Let τ(t)=(μ1(t)r(t),,μm(t)r(t)), and γR be given. The optimal reinsurance-investment strategy for problem (2.9) are given by (34), and the Lagrange multiplier λ(t,X(t)) is a linear function of X(t) which is given by (35).


    3.4. The effective frontier

    From (35), we have

    λt=dHdtX(t)+dhdt,λX=H(t),2λX2=0.

    From equations (12) and (13), we have the backward stochastic differential equation (BSDE, for short) with terminal value for the Lagrange multiplier λ.

    {dλ=[dHdtX(t)+dhdt+H(t)f]dt+H(t)R(q)dW0t+H(t)π(t)σ(t)dWt,λ(T)=2X(T)+2γ. (36)

    From (18) we have dHdtX(t)+dhdt+H(t)f=λr(t). Substituting from (34) into (36), one obtains

    {dλ=λ[r(t)dt+aηbdW0t+(σ1(t)τ(t))dWt],λ(T)=2X(T)+2γ. (37)

    BSDE (37) has the following solution.

    λ=2(X(T)γ)exp[Tt(r(s)l(s)2)ds]
    ×exp[aηb(W0TW0t)+Tt(σ1(s)τ(s))dWs], (38)

    where l=a2η2/b2+||σ1τ||2. By λ obtained in (38), we then have

    λ(0,X(0))=H(0)X(0)+h(0)
    =2(X(T)γ)exp[T0(r(t)l(t)2)dt]×exp[aηbW0T+T0(σ1(t)τ(t))dWt].

    Hence

    X(T)=12(H(0)x0+h(0))exp(T0(r(t)l(t)2)dt)
    ×exp(aηbW0TT0(σ1(t)τ(t))dWt)+γ,

    which implies

    E0[X(T)]=12(H(0)x0+h(0))exp(T0(r(t)l(t))dt)+γ.

    From (28) and (33), we have

    H(0)=2exp(T0(r(s)a2η2b212||σ1(s)τ(s)||2)ds),

    and

    h(0)=2γexp(a2η2b2T+12T0||σ1(s)τ(s)||2)ds)h(0),

    where

    h(0)=T0exp(a2η2b2u+12u0||σ1(s)τ(s)||2ds)
    ×[aθH(u)+(r(u)12||σ1(u)τ(u)||2)]du.

    Denoting by A=H(0)x0h(0), we have

    E0[X(T)]=12Aexp(T0(r(t)l(t))dt)
    +γ[1exp(T0(r(s)2l(s))ds12T0||σ1(s)τ(s)||2)ds)]. (39)

    Furthermore, we have

    X2(T)=14(H(0)x0+h(0))2exp(T0(2r(t)l(t))dt)
    ×exp(2aηbW0T2T0(σ1(t)τ(t))dWt)+γ2
    γ(H(0)x0+h(0))exp(T0(r(t)l(t)2)dt)
    ×exp(aηbW0TT0(σ1(t)τ(t))dWt),

    which yields

    E0[X2(T)]=14A2exp(T0(2r(t)3l(t))dt)
    +A[exp(T0(2r(s)4l(s))ds12T0||σ1(s)τ(s)||2)ds)exp(T0(r(s)l(s))ds)]γ
    +[1+exp(T0(2r(s)5l(s))dsT0||σ1(s)τ(s)||2)ds)]
    2exp(T0(r(s)2l(s))ds12T0||σ1(s)τ(s)||2)ds)γ2. (40)

    Using (39) and (40) we can thus give an explicit expression for the optimal cost in problem (8), as a one parameter family in γ

    (Kγ)2E0[X(T)γ]2=K22γK+2γE0[X(T)]E0[X2(T)]=K214A2exp(T0(2r(t)3l(t))dt)  [2K+Aexp(T0(2r(s)4l(s))ds12T0||σ1(s)τ(s)||2)ds)]γ  [exp(T0(2r(s)5l(s))dsT0||σ1(s)τ(s)||2)ds)1]γ2.

    Assume that

    T0(5l(s)2r(s))dsT0||σ1(s)τ(s)||2)ds
    =T0[4||σ1(s)τ(s)||22r(s)]ds+5a2η2T/b2:=ρ>0 (41)

    hold, using remark 2.1, we see that the minimum Var[X(T)] is achieved for

    γ=K+A2exp(T0(2r(s)4l(s))ds12T0||σ1(s)τ(s)||2ds)eρ1 (42)

    and

    minsA(x0)Var[X(T)]=eρeρ1[K+A2exp(T0l(s)ds+12T0||σ1(s)τ(s)||2)ds)]2. (43)

    Now we state the conclusion of the effective frontier of our mean-variance problem as follows.

    Proposition 3.3. Let K=E0[X(T)], τ(t)=(μ1(t)r(t),,μm(t)r(t)), l(t)=a2η2/b2+||σ1(t)τ(t)||2, A=H(0)x0h(0). Assume that (41) hold. The effective frontier of the mean-variance reinsurance-investment strategy for problem (8) is given by

    Var[X(T)]=eρeρ1[K+A2exp(T0l(s)ds+12T0||σ1(s)τ(s)||2)ds)]2. (44)

    4. Numerical Example

    Let x0=1, r(t)=0.06, m=3, μ1(t)=0.08, μ2(t)=0.10, μ3(t)=0.15, a=1, b=0.5, θ=0.2, η=0.3, and

    σ(t)=(0.200.150.060.100.300.250.400.050.50).

    Then

    σ1(t)=(2.8701.3570.9481.9712.1570.7652.1740.8701.304),τ(t)=(0.02,0.04,0.09),

    and

    ||σ1(t)τ(t)||2=0.022865,(σ(t)σ(t))1=(16.84801.53454.04781.53457.25101.80214.04781.80213.1843).

    Hence l(t)=a2η2/b2+||σ1(t)τ(t)||2=0.382865. In view of (28) and (33), and let e2.718, direct calculation gives h(t)/H(t)=0.07320.9268×1.9794Tt. According to proposition 3.2, the mean-variance optimal reinsurance-investment strategy are given by (34), that is,

    {q(t)=aηb2(X(t)+h(t)H(t))+1=1+1.2(X(t)+0.07320.9268×1.9794Tt)    =1.0878+1.2X(t)1.1122×1.9794Tt;π(t)=(σ(t)σ(t))1τ(t)(X(t)+h(t)H(t))    =(0.63990.09720.2955)(X(t)++0.07320.9268×1.9794Tt)    =(0.04680.00710.0216)(0.63990.09720.2955)X(t)+(0.59310.09010.2739)×1.9794Tt,

    Remark that

    ρ=T0[4||σ1(s)τ(s)||22r(s)]ds+5a2η2T/b2=1.77146T>0, A=H(0)x0h(0)=0.13082.5858×1.3653T+0.4550×1.4498T. In view of (44), the effective frontier of the mean-variance reinsurance-investment strategy is given by

    Var[X(T)]=eρeρ1[K+A2exp(T0l(s)ds+12T0||σ1(s)τ(s)||2)ds)]2
    =5.8784T5.8784T1(0.0654×1.4498T+0.2775×2.1019T1.2929×1.0619T+E0[X(T)])2.

    Furthermore, let T=1, we have

    Var[X(1)]=1.2050(0.6948+E0[X(1)])2.

    Acknowledgments

    This work is supported by the Foundation of Guangzhou Academy of International Finance (No: 16GFR01A04, 16GFR01A07).


    Conflict of Interest

    All authors declare no conflicts of interest in this paper.


    [1] Singh RP, Kumar J, Kataria R, et al. (2015) Investigation of the machinability of commercially pure titanium in ultrasonic machining using graph theory and matrix method. J Eng Res 3: 75–94.
    [2] Kataria R, Kumar J, Pabla BS (2015) Experimental Investigation and Optimization of Machining Characteristics in Ultrasonic Machining of WC-Co Composite using GRA Method. Mater Manuf Process 31: 685–693.
    [3] Lalchhuanvela H, Doloi B, Battacharyya B (2012) Enabling and Understanding Ultrasonic Machining of Engineering Ceramics Using Parametric Analysis. Mater Manuf Process 27: 443–448. doi: 10.1080/10426914.2011.585497
    [4] Komaraiah M, Reddy PN (1993) A study on the influence of workpiece properties in ultrasonic machining. Int J Mach Tool Manu 33: 495–505. doi: 10.1016/0890-6955(93)90055-Y
    [5] Kumar J, Khamba JS (2009) An investigation into the effect of work material properties, tool geometry and abrasive properties on performance indices of ultrasonic machining. Int J Mach Mach Mater 5: 347–366.
    [6] Dam H, Schreiber MP, Quist P (1995) Productivity, surface quality and tolerances in ultrasonic machining of ceramics. J Mater Process Tech 51: 358–368. doi: 10.1016/0924-0136(94)01587-Q
    [7] Kataria R, Kumar J, Pabla BS (2015) Experimental Investigation into the Hole Quality in Ultrasonic Machining of WC-Co Composite. Mater Manuf Process 30: 921–933. doi: 10.1080/10426914.2014.995052
    [8] Kataria R, Kumar J (2015) Machining of WC-Co composites-A review. Mater Sci Forum 808: 51–64.
    [9] Abdullah A, Shabgard MR, Ivanov A, et al. (2009) Effect of ultrasonic-assisted EDM on surface integrity of cemented tungsten carbide (WC-Co). Int J Adv Manuf Tech 41: 268–280. doi: 10.1007/s00170-008-1476-7
    [10] Bhavsar SN, Aravindan S, Rao V (2012) Machinability study of cemented carbide using focused ion beam (FIB) milling. Mater Manuf Process 27: 1029–1034. doi: 10.1080/10426914.2011.654166
    [11] Gadalla AM, Tsai W (1989) Machining of WC-Co composites. Mater Manuf Process 4: 411–423. doi: 10.1080/10426918908956301
    [12] Jahan M, Wong YS, Rahman M (2012) Experimental investigation into the influence of major operating parameters during micro-electro discharge drilling of cemented carbide. Mach Sci Technol 16: 131–156. doi: 10.1080/10910344.2012.648575
    [13] Kung KY, Horng JT, Chiang KT (2009) Material removal rate and electrode wear ratio study on the powder mixed electrical discharge machining of cobalt-bonded tungsten carbide. Int J Adv Manuf Tech 40: 95–104. doi: 10.1007/s00170-007-1307-2
    [14] Mahdavinejad RA, Mahdavinejad A (2005) ED machining of WC-Co. J Mater Process Tech 162–163: 637–643.
    [15] Yadav SKS, Yadav V (2013) Experimental investigation to study electrical discharge diamond cutoff grinding (EDDCG) machinability of cemented carbide. Mater Manuf Process 28: 1077–1081. doi: 10.1080/10426914.2013.792414
    [16] Ramulu M (2005) Ultrasonic machining effects on the surface finish and strength of silicon carbide ceramics. Int J Manuf Tech Manage 7: 107–125.
    [17] Kumar V, Khamba JS (2010) An investigation into the ultrasonic machining of co-based super alloy using the taguchi approach. Int J Mach Mach Mater 7: 230–243.
    [18] Kumar J, Khamba JS, Mohapatra SK (2009) Investigating and modelling tool-wear rate in the ultrasonic machining of titanium. Int J Adv Manuf Tech 41: 1107–1117. doi: 10.1007/s00170-008-1556-8
    [19] Hocheng H, Kuo KL, Lin JT (1999) Machinability of zirconia ceramic in ultrasonic drilling. Mater Manuf Process 14: 713–724. doi: 10.1080/10426919908914864
    [20] Singh R, Khamba JS (2008) Comparison of slurry effect on machining characteristics of titanium in ultrasonic drilling. J Mater Process Tech 197: 200–205. doi: 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2007.06.026
    [21] Majeed MA, Vijayaraghvan L, Malhotra SK, et al. (2008) Ultrasonic machining of Al2O3/LaPO4 composites. Int J Mach Tool Manu 48: 40–46. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2007.07.012
    [22] Kumar J, Khamba JS, Mohapatra SK (2008) An investigation into the machining characteristics of titanium using ultrasonic machining. Int J Mach Mach Mater 3: 143–161.
    [23] Dvivedi A, Kumar P (2007) Surface quality evaluation in ultrasonic drilling through the Taguchi technique. Int J Adv Manuf Tech 34: 131–140. doi: 10.1007/s00170-006-0586-3
    [24] Komaraiah M, Manan MA, Reddy PN, et al. (1988) Investigation of surface roughness and accuracy in ultrasonic machining. Precis Eng 10: 59–68. doi: 10.1016/0141-6359(88)90001-3
    [25] Kumar J, Khamba JS (2008) An Experimental study on ultrasonic machining of pure titanium using designed experiments. J Braz Soc Mech Sci 30: 231–238.
    [26] Ross PJ (1996) Taguchi Techniques for Quality Engineering: loss function, orthogonal experiments, parameter and tolerance design, New York: McGraw Hill.
    [27] Pan LK, Wang CC, Wei SL, et al. (2007) Optimizing multiple quality characteristics via Taguchi method-based Grey analysis. J Mater Process Tech 182: 107–116. doi: 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2006.07.015
    [28] Kataria R, Kumar J (2014) A Comparison of the different Multiple response optimization techniques for turning operation of AISI O1 tool steel. J Eng Res 2: 161–184.
    [29] Kumar J (2014) Investigation into the surface quality and micro-hardness in the ultrasonic machining of titanium (ASTM GRADE-1). J Braz Soc Mech Sci 36: 807–823. doi: 10.1007/s40430-014-0130-6
    [30] Kataria R, Kumar J, Pabla BS (2016) Experimental investigation of surface quality in ultrasonic machining of WC-Co composites through Taguchi method. AIMS Mater Sci 3: 1222–1235. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2016.3.1222
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Yue Liu, Dehao Ruan, Stability of a Class of Impulsive Neutral Stochastic Functional Partial Differential Equations, 2020, 2020, 1026-0226, 1, 10.1155/2020/9051396
    2. Xia Zhao, Mengjie Li, Qinrui Si, Optimal investment-reinsurance strategy with derivatives trading under the joint interests of an insurer and a reinsurer, 2022, 30, 2688-1594, 4619, 10.3934/era.2022234
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2018 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(5554) PDF downloads(819) Cited by(18)

Article outline

Figures and Tables

Figures(15)  /  Tables(9)

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog