Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Mulugeta A. Haile

dblp:185/2587 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0002-3038-9155ORCID · verified

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 1 · 1 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Computer graphics and multimedia
1 paper
Computational fabrication · 50% Geometric modeling and processing · 50%
Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Generative modeling · 100%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Geometric modeling and processing › topology optimization
structural topology optimization
0.912025
Generating Physically Sound Designs from Text and a Set of Physical Constraints · NeurIPS 2025
Machine learning › Generative modeling › diffusion model
text-to-image generation
0.312025
Generating Physically Sound Designs from Text and a Set of Physical Constraints · NeurIPS 2025

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

text-image model · 1.7differentiable physics simulation · 1.73-point bending test · 1.7
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Generating Physically Sound Designs from Text and a Set of Physical Constraints
abstract
We present TIDES, a text informed design approach for generating physically sound designs based on a textual description and a set of physical constraints. TIDES jointly optimizes structural (topology) and visual properties. A pre-trained text-image model is used to measure the design's visual alignment with a text prompt and a differentiable physics simulator is used to measure its physical performance. We evaluate TIDES on a series of structural optimization problems operating under different load and support conditions, at different resolutions, and experimentally in the lab by performing the 3-point bending test on 2D beam designs that are extruded and 3D printed. We find that it can jointly optimize the two objectives and return designs that satisfy engineering design requirements (compliance and density) while utilizing features specified by text.
Gregory Barber, Todd C. Henry, Mulugeta A. Haile
NeurIPS3
2019 Ballistic Trajectory Estimation Using Polynomial Chaos Based Square Root Ensemble Filter
Ruixin Niu, Mulugeta A. Haile
FUSION3
2016 Robust Particle Filters for Fatigue Crack Growth Estimation in Rotorcraft Structures
abstract
Fatigue crack growth propagation in critical rotorcraft structures is much more complex than fixed-wing aircrafts in part due to the random and vibratory nature of the rotorcraft flight load spectrum. Existing physical damage models, which are originally developed for the uniform cyclic loads of fixed-wing platforms, are not accurate enough for rotorcraft structures. Such inaccuracy often results in increased risk of operation and higher cost of maintenance. The goal of this paper is to present an integrated diagnostic framework for accurate fatigue life estimation of critical rotorcraft structures by combining the predictions of a physical damage model and evidence from real-time diagnostic sensor data. The diagnostic framework obtains the most probable crack size at each inspection interval using a sequential Monte Carlo method known as particle filters. To validate the framework, three representative rotorcraft principal structural elements were tested using an actual rotorcraft flight load spectrum. Results show that the crack size estimation error of the method presented here is much lower than any of the currently available physical damage models.
Mulugeta A. Haile, Jaret C. Riddick, Abey H. Assefa
IEEE Trans. Reliab.1