LAPSE:2026.0492
Published Article

LAPSE:2026.0492
Transfer Learning-Enhanced Deep Probabilistic Surrogates for Scalable Multi-Fidelity Bayesian Optimisation in Process Design
June 12, 2026
Abstract
Self-driving laboratories (SDLs) increasingly use Bayesian optimisation (BO) to navigate expensive design spaces, yet high-fidelity simulations and experiments remain too costly to query at scale. Multi-fidelity Bayesian optimisation (MFBO) alleviates this by combining abundant low-fidelity evaluations with scarce high-fidelity observations. However, Gaussian process (GP) surrogates can become computational bottlenecks as data volume and dimensionality increase, motivating scalable alternatives. Here, we assess transfer learning based deep neural network (DNN) surrogates that pretrain on low-fidelity data and fine-tune on high-fidelity observations. We construct a chemical process benchmark for glacial acetic acid separation and purification with paired low- and high-fidelity flowsheets. The optimisation considers eight decision variables and minimises the minimum selling price (MSP), while enforcing a product purity threshold via a quadratic penalty. To reflect realistic resource constraints, we define seven training scenarios with approximately constant total simulation time, given the large cost gap between fidelities. Across all scenarios, the transfer learning DNN outperforms a GP regression baseline trained only on high-fidelity data. Test-set R² increases from 0.41 to 0.71 for the DNN, compared with 0.32 to 0.51 for GP, with gains already visible in the most data-scarce setting. These results suggest that transfer learning-enhanced DNN surrogates can offer accurate, scalable multi-fidelity surrogate models for process optimisation, and could be a practical component in BO-based automated discovery settings where low- and high-fidelity data coexist.
Self-driving laboratories (SDLs) increasingly use Bayesian optimisation (BO) to navigate expensive design spaces, yet high-fidelity simulations and experiments remain too costly to query at scale. Multi-fidelity Bayesian optimisation (MFBO) alleviates this by combining abundant low-fidelity evaluations with scarce high-fidelity observations. However, Gaussian process (GP) surrogates can become computational bottlenecks as data volume and dimensionality increase, motivating scalable alternatives. Here, we assess transfer learning based deep neural network (DNN) surrogates that pretrain on low-fidelity data and fine-tune on high-fidelity observations. We construct a chemical process benchmark for glacial acetic acid separation and purification with paired low- and high-fidelity flowsheets. The optimisation considers eight decision variables and minimises the minimum selling price (MSP), while enforcing a product purity threshold via a quadratic penalty. To reflect realistic resource constraints, we define seven training scenarios with approximately constant total simulation time, given the large cost gap between fidelities. Across all scenarios, the transfer learning DNN outperforms a GP regression baseline trained only on high-fidelity data. Test-set R² increases from 0.41 to 0.71 for the DNN, compared with 0.32 to 0.51 for GP, with gains already visible in the most data-scarce setting. These results suggest that transfer learning-enhanced DNN surrogates can offer accurate, scalable multi-fidelity surrogate models for process optimisation, and could be a practical component in BO-based automated discovery settings where low- and high-fidelity data coexist.
Record ID
Keywords
Deep surrogate models, Multi-fidelity Bayesian optimisation, Process optimisation, Transfer learning
Subject
Suggested Citation
Lee J, Errington E, Guo M. Transfer Learning-Enhanced Deep Probabilistic Surrogates for Scalable Multi-Fidelity Bayesian Optimisation in Process Design. Systems and Control Transactions 5:2320-2326 (2026) https://doi.org/10.69997/sct.118913
Author Affiliations
Lee J: Department of Engineering, King's College London, London, WC2R 2LS, United Kingdom
Errington E: Department of Engineering, King's College London, London, WC2R 2LS, United Kingdom
Guo M: Department of Engineering, King's College London, London, WC2R 2LS, United Kingdom
[Login] to see author email addresses.
Errington E: Department of Engineering, King's College London, London, WC2R 2LS, United Kingdom
Guo M: Department of Engineering, King's College London, London, WC2R 2LS, United Kingdom
[Login] to see author email addresses.
Journal Name
Systems and Control Transactions
Volume
5
First Page
2320
Last Page
2326
Year
2026
Publication Date
2026-06-12
Version Comments
Original Submission
Other Meta
PII: 2320-2326-508-SCT-5-2026, Publication Type: Journal Article
Record Map
Published Article

LAPSE:2026.0492
This Record
External Link

https://doi.org/10.69997/sct.118913
Publisher Version
Download
Meta
Record Statistics
Record Views
6
Version History
[v1] (Original Submission)
Jun 12, 2026
Verified by curator on
Jun 12, 2026
This Version Number
v1
Citations
Most Recent
This Version
URL Here
https://psecommunity.org/LAPSE:2026.0492
Record Owner
PSE Press
Links to Related Works
References Cited
- Häse F, Roch LM, Aspuru-Guzik A. Next-generation experimentation with self-driving laboratories. Trends in Chemistry 1:282-291 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trechm.2019.02.007
- MacLeod BP, Parlane FGL, Morrissey TD, Häse F, Roch LM, Dettelbach KE, Moreira R, Yunker LPE, Rooney MB, Deeth JR, Lai V, Ng GJ, Situ H, Zhang RH, Elliott MS, Haley TH, Dvorak DJ, Aspuru-Guzik A, Hein JE, Berlinguette CP. Self-driving laboratory for accelerated discovery of thin-film materials. Sci. Adv. 6: (2020) https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aaz8867
- Nikolaev P, Hooper D, Webber F, Rao R, Decker K, Krein M, Poleski J, Barto R, Maruyama B. Autonomy in materials research: a case study in carbon nanotube growth. npj Comput Mater 2: (2016) https://doi.org/10.1038/npjcompumats.2016.31
- E. Brochu, V.M. Cora, N. De Freitas, arXiv preprint arXiv:1012.2599, (2010).
- Shahriari B, Swersky K, Wang Z, Adams RP, de Freitas N. Taking the human out of the loop: a review of bayesian optimization. Proc. IEEE 104:148-175 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1109/jproc.2015.2494218
- J. Snoek, H. Larochelle, R.P. Adams, Advances in neural information processing systems, 25 (2012).
- Shin Y, Lee M, Kim D, Lee J, Lee JW. A hybrid evolutionary and bayesian framework for automated process synthesis of energy-efficient multicomponent azeotropic separation networks. Separation and Purification Technology 384:136280 (2026) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2025.136280
- K. Kandasamy, G. Dasarathy, J. Schneider, B. Póczos, in: International conference on machine learning, PMLR, 2017, pp. 1799-1808.
- Kennedy M. Predicting the output from a complex computer code when fast approximations are available. Biometrika 87:1-13 (2000) https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/87.1.1
- J. Wu, M. Poloczek, A.G. Wilson, P. Frazier, Advances in neural information processing systems, 30 (2017).
- R.B. Gramacy, H.K. Lee, Statistics and Computing, 22 (2012) 713-722.
- J. Snoek, K. Swersky, R. Zemel, R. Adams, in: International conference on machine learning, PMLR, 2014, pp. 1674-1682.
- Rasmussen CE, Williams CKI. Gaussian processes for machine learning. The MIT Press (2005) https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/3206.001.0001
- Patwary MMA, Byna S, Satish NR, Sundaram N, Luki? Z, Roytershteyn V, Anderson MJ, Yao Y, Prabhat , Dubey P. BD-CATS. Proceedings of the International Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis :1-12 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1145/2807591.2807616
- Pan SJ, Yang Q. A survey on transfer learning. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 22:1345-1359 (2010) https://doi.org/10.1109/tkde.2009.191
- Cortes-Peña Y, Kumar D, Singh V, Guest JS. Biosteam: a fast and flexible platform for the design, simulation, and techno-economic analysis of biorefineries under uncertainty. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. 8:3302-3310 (2020) https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.9b07040
- J.D. Seader, E.J. Henley, D.K. Roper, Separation process principles, wiley New York, 1998.
- M. Fenske, Industrial & Engineering Chemistry, 24 (1932) 482-485.
- E. Gilliland, Industrial & Engineering Chemistry, 32 (1940) 1101-1106.
- von Domarus E. Anthropology and psychotherapy. APT 2:603-614 (1948) https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.psychotherapy.1948.2.4.603
- L.T. Biegler, I.E. Grossmann, A.W. Westerberg, (1997).
- Mckay MD, Beckman RJ, Conover WJ. A comparison of three methods for selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer code. Technometrics 42:55-61 (2000) https://doi.org/10.1080/00401706.2000.10485979
- Kuhn M, Johnson K. Applied predictive modeling. Springer New York (2013) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6849-3
- in, King's College London. (2022). King's Computational Research, Engineering and Technology Environment (CREATE). Retrieved March 2, 2022, from https://doi.org/10.18742/rnvf-m076
(0.1 seconds)
[0.1 s]

