Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 108 references

STORX: An Open-Source Object-Oriented Framework for Shape and Topology Optimization in MATLAB

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-02 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper claims STORX is the first open-source MATLAB framework to unify parametric shape optimization, level-set shape optimization, and the major families of topology optimization.

desk verdict A useful teaching framework with honest claims, but the demo numbers need external validation before the faithfulness claim carries weight. read the letter →

arxiv 2606.17291 v2 pith:LB6Y6PSX submitted 2026-06-15 cs.CE

Amir M. Mirzendehdel , Krishnan Suresh This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CE MSC 74P1565K10
keywords open-sourcesoftwareobject-orientedprogrammingMATLABtopologyoptimizationshapelevel-setmethodsdensity-baseddesignformanufacturing
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper's central claim is that STORX is the first open-source MATLAB framework to unify parametric shape optimization, level-set shape optimization, and the major topology-optimization families—density-based, level-set, and topological-sensitivity-driven—under one consistent interface. The argument is that all these methods share a pipeline of geometry, meshing, finite-element analysis, sensitivity evaluation, and design update, differing only in representation and update scheme, and that STORX makes that shared structure explicit through abstract base classes. If the claim holds, students and researchers get a single platform for controlled head-to-head comparison of methods usually taught as separate scripts, and new objectives, constraints, or manufacturing rules can be added without rewriting core code. The paper supports the claim with benchmark problems, extensions to stress, thermal, multi-load, and fluid problems, and a 3D-printed gripper example.

What carries the argument

The carrying mechanism is 'separation of intent' realized through abstract MATLAB base classes. The functional class defines any objective or constraint via two methods, evaluate and gradient; the mfgConstraints class defines manufacturing rules (minimum feature size, Heaviside projection, retained regions, symmetry) via filterDesign and filterSensitivity, which act as plug-in operators on design and sensitivity fields and chain through the chain rule. A boundary-representation (B-Rep) geometry class decouples arbitrary 2D geometry from meshing, and solver objects are passed directly into optimizer classes, making the shared pipeline—geometry, discretization, FEA solve, sensitivity, update—r

What would settle it

Two checks would settle the claim: (1) scan the catalogued prior-work list and the literature for any earlier open-source MATLAB framework that already unified parametric and level-set shape optimization with density, level-set, and topological-sensitivity topology optimization; (2) run the cantilever-beam compliance benchmark at 3,200 elements with the reported SIMP-OC settings and compare the final compliance (paper reports 6.98 N.m) to published reference values for the same problem and filter radius—a large discrepancy would indicate an implementation error undermining the comparative resu

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

STORX organizes optimization into four components—state-equation solver, optimizer, objective/constraint functionals, and manufacturing constraints—joined by abstract base classes. One set of interfaces serves parametric shape optimization, level-set shape optimization via Hamilton-Jacobi evolution, and topology optimization across density methods (SIMP/RAMP with OC, MMA, GCMMA), level-set methods (standard and modified Hamilton-Jacobi), and sensitivity-driven methods (ESO, BESO, PareTO). Demonstrations include cantilever, L-bracket, MBB, and gripper compliance benchmarks, a grid-versus-triangular FEA check, runtime comparison against a specialized 88-line reference implementation, and exten

Load-bearing premise

The central 'first' claim rests on the completeness of the authors' survey of prior open-source codes, and the benchmark conclusions rest on the implemented methods faithfully reproducing the methods they cite; if either gives way—an existing unified MATLAB framework, or an implementation that diverges from published reference results—the contribution becomes incremental rather than foundational.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Controlled comparisons: because shape and topology methods share physics, meshing, and sensitivity machinery, reported performance differences—such as PareTO and modified-HJE designs beating ESO/BESO on compliance—are attributable to the optimizer rather than to divergent setup.
  • Extensibility: adding a new objective, constraint, or manufacturing rule requires implementing just two methods (evaluate/gradient or filterDesign/filterSensitivity); the paper demonstrates this by adding stress minimization, local volume-fraction constraints, and a fluid-flow wrapper without core changes.
  • General geometries: B-Rep-defined domains let users move beyond rectangles; the gripper example with circular cutouts is optimized with five different methods, exported to STL, and 3D-printed.
  • Unified teaching workflow: one framework now covers density, level-set, and sensitivity-driven methods, so the continuum between shape and topology optimization can be studied in a single reproducible workflow.
  • Educational use: in a graduate course, students implemented a newly taught local volume-fraction constraint within an assignment and pursued independent projects on antenna design, fluid-structure interaction, and auxetic metamaterials.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The paper reports final compliance values but does not compare them against published reference solutions for the same benchmarks; a neutral check of implementation fidelity would be rerunning a canonical problem and comparing STORX's final compliance to literature values.
  • Because every method shares one FEA and filtering stack, the reported rankings (PareTO and modified HJE ahead of ESO/BESO) could shift if that common stack changed; the framework's deeper value may be making such sensitivity checks easy rather than the particular rankings shown.
  • The measured per-iteration overhead of roughly 60-68% versus a specialized reference implementation is the explicit cost of generality; a natural extension is matrix-free or lazy FEA inside the same interfaces to close that gap at large resolutions.
  • The architecture implies that an optimizer the authors did not implement could be dropped in as a new derived class; a stress test of the 'no core rewrites' promise would be implementing a recent method from the literature and confirming that only new classes are added.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents STORX, an open-source MATLAB object-oriented framework for shape and topology optimization. It claims to be the first open-source MATLAB framework unifying parametric shape optimization, level-set shape optimization, and multiple topology optimization families: density-based (SIMP/RAMP), level-set (standard and modified Hamilton-Jacobi), and topological-sensitivity methods (ESO, BESO, PareTO). The architecture separates solvers, optimizers, objectives/constraints, and manufacturing constraints through abstract base classes. The manuscript describes the class hierarchy and code snippets, then demonstrates the framework on cantilever, L-bracket, MBB, gripper, multi-load, self-weight, thermal, and fluid examples, reporting compliance, displacement, and stress tables and a runtime comparison with top88.

Significance. If the code is correct and the framework is as extensible as claimed, STORX is a genuinely useful educational and prototyping platform. The object-oriented separation of intent, support for non-rectangular B-Rep geometries, and the consistent interfaces across shape and topology optimization families are concrete strengths, as are the vectorized implementation with optional explicit loops and the 3D-printed demonstrator. The paper does not claim new optimization mathematics; its contribution is architectural. However, the verification depth is currently insufficient for a software paper: the benchmark tables report outputs of the implemented codes but never compare those outputs to published reference solutions. Without such validation, the central claim that STORX faithfully unifies these methods is only partially supported.

major comments (3)
  1. [Tables 2–6; Section 6.2] None of the optimized results in Tables 2–6 is compared to a published reference solution. For instance, the density-based MBB compliance C=15.0 N.m in Table 3 and the level-set TO results in Tables 4–5 could be checked against top88 and Challis's level-set code under identical mesh, load, and volume fraction; the runtime comparison in Fig. 23 validates speed only. A bug in any shared routine (FEA assembly, density filter, Heaviside projection, OC/MMA update) would corrupt every module and would be invisible without reference baselines. Since the central 'faithfully implemented unified framework' claim rests on these benchmarks, add reference values, convergence histories, and a pinned code version/commit hash.
  2. [Section 1.1 / Table 1 / Appendix A] The novelty claim — 'first open-source MATLAB framework to unify parametric shape, level-set shape, and multiple families of topology optimization' — is not supported by the survey as presented. Table 1 and Appendix Table 7 are explicitly TO-centered and do not catalog parametric shape optimization frameworks or unified SO/TO platforms; the statement is only qualified by 'to the best of our knowledge.' To make the claim load-bearing, the authors should either report a systematic search (databases, keywords, inclusion/exclusion) or soften the claim to 'to our knowledge, no existing MATLAB framework combines these specific families.'
  3. [Section 6.5.1, Eq. (32)] Equation (32) is not the chain-rule sensitivity of the density filter defined in Eqs. (28)–(31). From Eq. (31), ∂φ/∂ρ_i = Σ_e (∂φ/∂ρ̃_e) H_{ei} χ_i / Σ_j H_{ej} χ_j. Equation (32) instead gives 1/max(ρ_i,ε) Σ_e H_{ei} ρ_i ∂φ/∂ρ̃_e, which has a different normalization and does not follow from the filter. If the code uses Eq. (32), the density gradients are inconsistent with the stated design mapping; if it uses the exact chain rule, Eq. (32) misdescribes the implementation. Please correct the equation or explicitly identify it as a heuristic sensitivity filter distinct from density filtering.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Replication of Results] The statement 'MATLAB code is available at https://github.com/DEL-KU/storx' should include a commit hash, DOI/archive version, and license. A bare repository URL is not a fixed artifact and weakens the reproducibility claim.
  2. [Figures 34 and 35] The horizontal axes of the progress curves contain repeated '0.00' strings and are unreadable. Please redraw with proper numeric tick labels.
  3. [Tables 2, 4, 5] Several table headings contain typos ('fro', 'T able', 'obtained withlevel-set TO'). Also, units and the exact volume fraction for each example should be stated in the table captions for reproducibility.
  4. [Appendix A / References] The mapping between the appendix table and the reference list is inconsistent: Table 7 attributes both 'Comet-FEniCS Numerical Tour' and 'Bleyer' to [37], while [38] is listed as Ferguson's fenics-topopt. The text also cites 'FEniCS Project' as [37]. Please reconcile the citations.
  5. [Section 3.2, Eq. (1)] The residual notation R_el(d) := K_el d - f_el = 0 states the equilibrium condition, but the following sentence calls this 'the state equation'; it is the residual form. Minor rewording would improve clarity.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: STORX is a software/architecture paper whose demonstrations run known, externally published methods; the central contribution is code organization, not a derived prediction.

full rationale

The paper is an open-source software and teaching-framework contribution. It does not claim to derive new physics, fit parameters to data, or predict unseen quantities from fitted inputs. Each module implements a standard, cited method: SIMP/RAMP density-based TO (Bendsøe and Sigmund; Sigmund top99/top88), level-set methods (Challis; Allaire et al.), topological sensitivity and evolutionary methods (Xie and Steven; Suresh's publicly available 199-line PareTO code), and fluid TO (Alexandersen). The benchmark tables report the output of these implemented optimizers; the results are demonstrations of the algorithms rather than predictions that reduce by construction to fitted parameters. There is no equation in the paper whose derived output coincides with an input by definition. The only load-bearing self-citations are references to the authors' own prior PareTO and TOuNN works, but these are published, reproducible, externally checkable methods, and the present paper does not invoke any 'uniqueness theorem' from them to forbid alternatives or to force its architecture. The novelty claim ('first open-source MATLAB framework to unify...') is explicitly hedged with 'to the best of our knowledge' and is a literature-survey assertion, not a mathematically derived result; completeness of the survey is a correctness/novelty risk, not circularity. The skeptic's concern that benchmark compliance values are not compared against published reference solutions is a validation gap that could hide implementation bugs, but it does not mean the paper's statements are equivalent to their inputs. Accordingly, no circular step is identified and the score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new fitted parameters or postulated entities. It relies on standard mathematical models from the optimization literature, and the benchmark setup parameters (penalty exponents, filter radii, volume fractions) are user choices rather than fitted quantities.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Linear elasticity model for structural benchmarks (Eq. 1)
    All structural examples treat the material as linear elastic with small strains/displacements, as stated in Section 3.2. This is standard for the benchmarks but limits generalization beyond that regime.
  • domain assumption SIMP material interpolation with power-law penalization (Eq. 14)
    Used throughout density-based topology optimization (Section 6.1) to map pseudo-densities to stiffness. Standard but not universally applicable.
  • domain assumption Level-set evolution via Hamilton-Jacobi equation (Sections 5.2, 6.3.1)
    The framework relies on the HJE to evolve the level-set function, including re-initialization steps. This is a standard formulation for level-set shape/topology optimization.
  • domain assumption Topological derivative formula for compliance (Eq. 21)
    Used in topological-sensitivity methods (Section 6.4) to nucleate holes. The closed-form expression is cited from literature and assumed valid for the 2D linear elastic setting.
  • domain assumption Brinkman penalization for fluid flow (Section 8.3)
    The fluid examples model solid regions as Brinkman penalties in the Navier-Stokes equations. This is an established modeling approach but adds a specific assumption about the physics.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of STORX: An Open-Source Object-Oriented Framework for Shape and Topology Optimization in MATLAB." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LB6Y6PSX

@misc{pith2026260617291,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: STORX: An Open-Source Object-Oriented Framework for Shape and Topology Optimization in MATLAB},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LB6Y6PSX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2606.17291}
}
read the original abstract

This paper presents STORX: Shape and Topology Optimization for Research and Experimentation, an open-source MATLAB-based educational framework for learning and teaching computational design optimization. Unlike existing educational codes, which are typically built around a single formulation, STORX is, to the best of our knowledge, the first open-source MATLAB framework to unify parametric shape, level-set shape, and multiple families of topology optimization. All modules in STORX follow a consistent object-oriented structure and integrate visualization, sensitivity analysis, and finite element routines, enabling users to explore the continuum between shape and topology optimization in a transparent and reproducible manner. The code is designed to complement graduate-level coursework and independent research by emphasizing modularity and extensibility through a clear separation of intent. Core software interfaces are defined via abstract base classes, enabling new objective functionals and design/manufacturing constraints to be implemented by adding derived classes without modifying the core code. The paper also describes the software architecture and demonstrates how the framework maps mathematical formulations directly to executable code through a series of illustrative problems.

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

108 extracted references · 3 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Struc- tural and Multidisciplinary Optimization 21(2), 120–127 (2001) https://doi.org/10

    Sigmund, O.: A 99 line topology opti- mization code written in matlab. Struc- tural and Multidisciplinary Optimization 21(2), 120–127 (2001) https://doi.org/10. 1007/s001580050176

    2001

  2. [2]

    Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization43(1), 1–16 (2011) https:// doi.org/10.1007/s00158-010-0594-7

    Andreassen, E., Clausen, A., Schevenels, M., Lazarov, B.S., Sigmund, O.: Efficient topol- ogy optimization in matlab using 88 lines of code. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization43(1), 1–16 (2011) https:// doi.org/10.1007/s00158-010-0594-7

    doi:10.1007/s00158-010-0594-7 2011

  3. [3]

    Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization45(3), 329– 357 (2012)

    Talischi, C., Paulino, G.H., Pereira, A., 41 Menezes, I.F.: Polytop: a matlab imple- mentation of a general topology optimiza- tion framework using unstructured polyg- onal finite element meshes. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization45(3), 329– 357 (2012)

    2012

  4. [4]

    Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimiza- tion50(6), 1175–1196 (2014) https://doi

    Liu, K., Tovar, A.: An efficient 3d topol- ogy optimization code written in matlab. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimiza- tion50(6), 1175–1196 (2014) https://doi. org/10.1007/s00158-014-1107-x

    doi:10.1007/s00158-014-1107-x 2014

  5. [5]

    Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization68(9), 1–16 (2025)

    Wang, J., Aage, N., Wu, J., Sigmund, O., Westermann, R.: Efficient large-scale 3d topology optimization with matrix-free mat- lab code. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization68(9), 1–16 (2025)

    2025

  6. [6]

    https://www.topopt.mek.dtu

    Aage, N.: Topology optimization using PETSc. https://www.topopt.mek.dtu. dk/-/media/subsites/topopt/apps/ dokumenter-og-filer-til-apps/petsc-1-.pdf (2014)

    2014

  7. [7]

    Struc- tural and multidisciplinary optimization41, 453–464 (2010)

    Challis, V.J.: A discrete level-set topology optimization code written in matlab. Struc- tural and multidisciplinary optimization41, 453–464 (2010)

    2010

  8. [8]

    Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization53(6), 1243–1260 (2016)

    Zhang, W., Yuan, J., Zhang, J., Guo, X.: A new topology optimization approach based on moving morphable components (mmc) and the ersatz material model. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization53(6), 1243–1260 (2016)

    2016

Show all 108 references
  1. [9]

    Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization58(4), 1541–1558 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00158-018-1904-8

    Wei, P., Wang, M., Chen, S., Wang, M., Wang, X.: An 88-line matlab code for the parameterized level set method based topology optimization. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization58(4), 1541–1558 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00158-018-1904-8

    2018

  2. [10]

    International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering122(13), 3241–3272 (2021)

    Amir, O.: Efficient stress-constrained topol- ogy optimization using inexact design sensi- tivities. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering122(13), 3241–3272 (2021)

    2021

  3. [11]

    Optimization and Engineering 23(3), 1733–1757 (2022)

    Deng, H., Vulimiri, P.S., To, A.C.: An effi- cient 146-line 3d sensitivity analysis code of stress-based topology optimization written in matlab. Optimization and Engineering 23(3), 1733–1757 (2022)

    2022

  4. [12]

    Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization63(4), 2065–2097 (2021)

    Giraldo-Londo˜ no, O., Paulino, G.H.: Polystress: a matlab implementation for local stress-constrained topology opti- mization using the augmented lagrangian method. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization63(4), 2065–2097 (2021)

  5. [13]

    https://arxiv.org/pdf/2207

    Alexandersen, J.: A detailed introduction to density-based topology optimisation of fluid flow problems with implementation in MATLAB. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2207. 13695 (2022)

    2022

  6. [14]

    https://www.dolfin-adjoint.org/en/ release/documentation/stokes-topology/ stokes-topology.html

    dolfin-adjoint developers: Topology optimisation of fluids in Stokes flow (tuto- rial). https://www.dolfin-adjoint.org/en/ release/documentation/stokes-topology/ stokes-topology.html. Accessed 2025-10-12 (2023)

    2025

  7. [15]

    Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization49(4), 621– 642 (2014)

    Tavakoli, R., Mohseni, S.M.: Alternating active-phase algorithm for multimaterial topology optimization problems: a 115- line matlab implementation. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization49(4), 621– 642 (2014)

    2014

  8. [16]

    Applied Sciences14(2), 657 (2024)

    Zheng, R., Yi, B., Peng, X., Yoon, G.-H.: An efficient code for the multi-material topology optimization of 2d/3d continuum structures written in matlab. Applied Sciences14(2), 657 (2024)

    2024

  9. [17]

    Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization63, 1135–1149 (2021) https: //doi.org/10.1007/s00158-020-02748-4

    Chandrasekhar, A., Suresh, K.: Tounn: Topology optimization using neural net- works. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization63, 1135–1149 (2021) https: //doi.org/10.1007/s00158-020-02748-4

    2021 doi

  10. [18]

    https://github.com/elingaard/ deep-topopt (2020–2025)

    Lingaard, E., contributors: deep-topopt: deep learning-based topology optimization (PyTorch). https://github.com/elingaard/ deep-topopt (2020–2025)

    2020

  11. [19]

    In: System Modeling and 42 Optimization: Proceedings of the 10th IFIP Conference New York City, USA, August 31–September 4, 1981, pp

    Pironneau, O.: Optimal shape design for elliptic systems. In: System Modeling and 42 Optimization: Proceedings of the 10th IFIP Conference New York City, USA, August 31–September 4, 1981, pp. 42–66 (2005). Springer

    1981

  12. [20]

    Sokolowski, J., Zol´ esio, J.-P.: Introduction to Shape Optimization, pp. 5–12. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (1992)

    1992

  13. [21]

    Haftka, R.T., G¨ urdal, Z.: Elements of Struc- tural Optimization vol. 11. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2012)

    2012

  14. [22]

    Computer meth- ods in applied mechanics and engineering 71(2), 197–224 (1988)

    Bendsøe, M.P., Kikuchi, N.: Generating optimal topologies in structural design using a homogenization method. Computer meth- ods in applied mechanics and engineering 71(2), 197–224 (1988)

    1988

  15. [23]

    Control and cybernetics 34(1), 59–80 (2005)

    Allaire, G., Gournay, F.d., Jouve, F., Toader, A.-M.: Structural optimization using topological and shape sensitivity via a level set method. Control and cybernetics 34(1), 59–80 (2005)

    2005

  16. [24]

    Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering196(41-44), 4354–4364 (2007)

    Novotny, A.A., Feij´ oo, R.A., Taroco, E., Padra, C.: Topological sensitivity analy- sis for three-dimensional linear elasticity problem. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering196(41-44), 4354–4364 (2007)

    2007

  17. [25]

    Springer (1997)

    Xie, Y.M., Steven, G.P.: Basic evolutionary structural optimization. Springer (1997)

    1997

  18. [26]

    Springer (2004)

    Bendsøe, M.P., Sigmund, O.: Topology opti- mization: theory, methods, and applications. Springer (2004)

    2004

  19. [27]

    Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimiza- tion62(4), 2211–2228 (2020)

    Ferrari, F., Sigmund, O.: A new generation 99 line matlab code for compliance topol- ogy optimization and its extension to 3d. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimiza- tion62(4), 2211–2228 (2020)

    2020

  20. [28]

    Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization62, 1579–1594 (2020) https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00158-020-02552-0

    Smith, H., Norato, J.A.: A MATLAB code for topology optimization using the geometry projection method. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization62, 1579–1594 (2020) https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00158-020-02552-0

    2020

  21. [29]

    Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering, 1–38 (2019)

    Coniglio, S., Morlier, J., Gogu, C., Amargier, R.: Generalized geometry pro- jection: a unified approach for geometric feature based topology optimization. Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering, 1–38 (2019)

    2019

  22. [30]

    Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization64(3), 1669–1700 (2021)

    Gao, J., Wang, L., Luo, Z., Gao, L.: Igatop: an implementation of topology optimization for structures using iga in matlab. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization64(3), 1669–1700 (2021)

    2021

  23. [31]

    Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization59(5), 1863–1879 (2019)

    Chen, Q., Zhang, X., Zhu, B.: A 213- line topology optimization code for geo- metrically nonlinear structures. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization59(5), 1863–1879 (2019)

    2019

  24. [32]

    Structural and Multidisci- plinary Optimization64(2), 957–990 (2021)

    Giraldo-Londono, O., Paulino, G.H.: Poly- dyna: a matlab implementation for topol- ogy optimization of structures subjected to dynamic loads. Structural and Multidisci- plinary Optimization64(2), 957–990 (2021)

    2021

  25. [33]

    Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization63(6), 3045–3066 (2021)

    Ferrari, F., Sigmund, O., Guest, J.K.: Topol- ogy optimization with linearized buckling criteria in 250 lines of matlab. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization63(6), 3045–3066 (2021)

    2021

  26. [34]

    Huang, X.: A matlab code of topology opti- mization by imposing the implicit floating projection constraint (2023)

    2023

  27. [35]

    Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization60(6), 2621–2651 (2019)

    Gao, J., Luo, Z., Xia, L., Gao, L.: Con- current topology optimization of multiscale composite structures in matlab. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization60(6), 2621–2651 (2019)

    2019

  28. [36]

    Journal of the Optical Society of Amer- ica B38(2), 510–520 (2021)

    Christiansen, R.E., Sigmund, O.: Compact 200 line matlab code for inverse design in photonics by topology optimization: tuto- rial. Journal of the Optical Society of Amer- ica B38(2), 510–520 (2021)

    2021

  29. [37]

    https://comet-fenics.readthedocs.io/ en/latest/demo/topology optimization/ simp topology optimization.html

    FEniCS Project: Topology optimiza- tion using the SIMP method (demo). https://comet-fenics.readthedocs.io/ en/latest/demo/topology optimization/ simp topology optimization.html. Accessed 43 2025-10-12 (2024)

    2025

  30. [38]

    https: //github.com/zfergus/fenics-topopt (2019– 2025)

    Ferguson, Z., contributors: fenics-topopt: Topology optimization with FEniCS. https: //github.com/zfergus/fenics-topopt (2019– 2025)

    2019

  31. [39]

    https://www.topopt

    TopOpt Group, DTU: Topology opti- mization codes written in Python (educational). https://www.topopt. mek.dtu.dk/apps-and-software/ topology-optimization-codes-written-in-python. Accessed 2025-10-12 (2018)

    2025

  32. [40]

    https://juliatopopt.github.io/ TopOpt.jl/ (2021–2025)

    Huang, Y., contributors: TopOpt.jl Doc- umentation. https://juliatopopt.github.io/ TopOpt.jl/ (2021–2025)

    2021

  33. [41]

    https://github.com/JuliaTopOpt/ TopOpt.jl (2021–2025)

    contributors, J.: TopOpt.jl GitHub repos- itory. https://github.com/JuliaTopOpt/ TopOpt.jl (2021–2025)

    2021

  34. [42]

    https://juliapackages.com/ p/topopt jl

    Packages, J.: TopOpt jl: Julia package (port of top88). https://juliapackages.com/ p/topopt jl. Accessed 2025-10-12 (2022)

    2025

  35. [43]

    Struc- tural and Multidisciplinary Optimization 48, 437–472 (2013)

    Van Dijk, N.P., Maute, K., Langelaar, M., Van Keulen, F.: Level-set methods for struc- tural topology optimization: a review. Struc- tural and Multidisciplinary Optimization 48, 437–472 (2013)

    2013

  36. [44]

    Structural and multidisciplinary optimiza- tion48(6), 1031–1055 (2013)

    Sigmund, O., Maute, K.: Topology opti- mization approaches: A comparative review. Structural and multidisciplinary optimiza- tion48(6), 1031–1055 (2013)

    2013

  37. [45]

    Eschenauer, H.A., Olhoff, N.: Topology opti- mization of continuum structures: a review. Appl. Mech. Rev.54(4), 331–390 (2001)

    2001

  38. [46]

    Structural and multidisciplinary optimization37(3), 217–237 (2009)

    Rozvany, G.I.: A critical review of estab- lished methods of structural topology opti- mization. Structural and multidisciplinary optimization37(3), 217–237 (2009)

    2009

  39. [47]

    Structural and multidisciplinary optimization49(1), 1– 38 (2014)

    Deaton, J.D., Grandhi, R.V.: A survey of structural and multidisciplinary continuum topology optimization: post 2000. Structural and multidisciplinary optimization49(1), 1– 38 (2014)

    2000

  40. [48]

    Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization63(3), 1455–1480 (2021)

    Wu, J., Sigmund, O., Groen, J.P.: Topol- ogy optimization of multi-scale structures: a review. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization63(3), 1455–1480 (2021)

    2021

  41. [49]

    Structural optimization1, 193–202 (1989)

    Bendsøe, M.P.: Optimal shape design as a material distribution problem. Structural optimization1, 193–202 (1989)

    1989

  42. [50]

    Structural and multidisciplinary optimization21, 120–127 (2001)

    Sigmund, O.: A 99 line topology optimiza- tion code written in matlab. Structural and multidisciplinary optimization21, 120–127 (2001)

    2001

  43. [51]

    Archive of applied mechanics69, 635–654 (1999)

    Bendsøe, M.P., Sigmund, O.: Material inter- polation schemes in topology optimization. Archive of applied mechanics69, 635–654 (1999)

    1999

  44. [52]

    Computers & Structures49(5), 885–896 (1993) https://doi.org/10.1016/ 0045-7949(93)90035-C

    Xie, Y.M., Steven, G.P.: A simple evo- lutionary procedure for structural opti- mization. Computers & Structures49(5), 885–896 (1993) https://doi.org/10.1016/ 0045-7949(93)90035-C . Accessed 2014-12- 02

    1993

  45. [53]

    Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization28(2), 87– 98 (2004)

    Allaire, G., Jouve, F., Maillot, H.: Topology optimization for minimum stress design with the homogenization method. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization28(2), 87– 98 (2004)

    2004

  46. [54]

    Applications of computa- tional mechanics in structures and fluids (2005)

    Feijoo, R., Novotny, A., Taroco, E., Padra, C.: The topological-shape sensitivity method in two-dimensional linear elasticity topology design. Applications of computa- tional mechanics in structures and fluids (2005)

    2005

  47. [55]

    Journal of computational physics 194(1), 344–362 (2004)

    Burger, M., Hackl, B., Ring, W.: Incorpo- rating topological derivatives into level set methods. Journal of computational physics 194(1), 344–362 (2004)

    2004

  48. [56]

    Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids45(6), 1037–1067 (1997)

    Sigmund, O., Torquato, S.: Design of materi- als with extreme thermal expansion using a three-phase topology optimization method. Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids45(6), 1037–1067 (1997)

    1997

  49. [57]

    Structural and Multidisci- plinary Optimization53(2), 253–270 (2016)

    Deaton, J.D., Grandhi, R.V.: Stress-based 44 design of thermal structures via topol- ogy optimization. Structural and Multidisci- plinary Optimization53(2), 253–270 (2016)

    2016

  50. [58]

    Applied Ther- mal Engineering112, 841–854 (2017)

    Dbouk, T.: A review about the engineer- ing design of optimal heat transfer systems using topology optimization. Applied Ther- mal Engineering112, 841–854 (2017)

    2017

  51. [59]

    Interna- tional journal for numerical methods in fluids41(1), 77–107 (2003)

    Borrvall, T., Petersson, J.: Topology opti- mization of fluids in stokes flow. Interna- tional journal for numerical methods in fluids41(1), 77–107 (2003)

    2003

  52. [60]

    Journal of Mechani- cal Design137(8), 081402 (2015)

    Lin, S., Zhao, L., Guest, J.K., Weihs, T.P., Liu, Z.: Topology optimization of fixed- geometry fluid diodes. Journal of Mechani- cal Design137(8), 081402 (2015)

    2015

  53. [61]

    Fluids5(1), 29 (2020) https:// doi.org/10.3390/fluids5010029

    Alexandersen, J., Andreasen, C.S.: A review of topology optimisation for fluid-based problems. Fluids5(1), 29 (2020) https:// doi.org/10.3390/fluids5010029

    2020 doi

  54. [62]

    Structural and Multidisci- plinary Optimization60(2), 779–801 (2019)

    Dilgen, C.B., Dilgen, S.B., Aage, N., Jensen, J.S.: Topology optimization of acoustic mechanical interaction problems: a com- parative review. Structural and Multidisci- plinary Optimization60(2), 779–801 (2019)

    2019

  55. [63]

    Journal of sound and vibration317(3-5), 557–575 (2008)

    D¨ uhring, M.B., Jensen, J.S., Sigmund, O.: Acoustic design by topology optimization. Journal of sound and vibration317(3-5), 557–575 (2008)

    2008

  56. [64]

    Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization54(5), 1315–1344 (2016)

    Yi, G., Youn, B.D.: A comprehensive sur- vey on topology optimization of phononic crystals. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization54(5), 1315–1344 (2016)

    2016

  57. [65]

    Philosophi- cal Transactions of the Royal Society of Lon- don

    Sigmund, O., Jensen, J.: Systematic design of phononic band–gap materials and struc- tures by topology optimization. Philosophi- cal Transactions of the Royal Society of Lon- don. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences361(1806), 1001–1019 (2003)

    2003

  58. [66]

    IEEE Access10, 98593–98611 (2022)

    Lucchini, F., Torchio, R., Cirimele, V., Alotto, P., Bettini, P.: Topology optimiza- tion for electromagnetics: A survey. IEEE Access10, 98593–98611 (2022)

    2022

  59. [67]

    Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering293, 266–282 (2015)

    Zhou, M., Lazarov, B.S., Wang, F., Sig- mund, O.: Minimum length scale in topol- ogy optimization by geometric constraints. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering293, 266–282 (2015)

    2015

  60. [68]

    Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimiza- tion33(4), 401–424 (2007)

    Sigmund, O.: Morphology-based black and white filters for topology optimization. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimiza- tion33(4), 401–424 (2007)

    2007

  61. [69]

    Structural and multidisciplinary optimization57(6), 2457– 2483 (2018)

    Liu, J., Gaynor, A.T., Chen, S., Kang, Z., Suresh, K., Takezawa, A., Li, L., Kato, J., Tang, J., Wang, C.C.,et al.: Current and future trends in topology optimization for additive manufacturing. Structural and multidisciplinary optimization57(6), 2457– 2483 (2018)

    2018

  62. [70]

    Computer- Aided Design81, 1–13 (2016)

    Mirzendehdel, A.M., Suresh, K.: Support structure constrained topology optimiza- tion for additive manufacturing. Computer- Aided Design81, 1–13 (2016)

    2016

  63. [71]

    Additive Manufactur- ing19, 104–113 (2018)

    Mirzendehdel, A.M., Rankouhi, B., Suresh, K.: Strength-based topology optimization for anisotropic parts. Additive Manufactur- ing19, 104–113 (2018)

    2018

  64. [72]

    Computer-Aided Design122, 102825 (2020)

    Mirzendehdel, A.M., Behandish, M., Nela- turi, S.: Topology optimization with acces- sibility constraint for multi-axis machin- ing. Computer-Aided Design122, 102825 (2020)

    2020

  65. [73]

    Computer-Aided Design142, 103117 (2022)

    Mirzendehdel, A.M., Behandish, M., Nela- turi, S.: Topology optimization for man- ufacturing with accessible support struc- tures. Computer-Aided Design142, 103117 (2022)

    2022

  66. [74]

    Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization47(1), 49–61 (2013)

    Suresh, K.: Efficient generation of large- scale pareto-optimal topologies. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization47(1), 49–61 (2013)

    2013

  67. [75]

    Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimiza- tion49(2), 315–325 (2014) 45

    Challis, V.J., Roberts, A.P., Grotowski, J.F.: High resolution topology optimiza- tion using graphics processing units (gpus). Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimiza- tion49(2), 315–325 (2014) 45

    2014

  68. [76]

    Advances in Engi- neering Software157, 103006 (2021)

    Herrero-P´ erez, D., Castej´ on, P.J.M.: Multi- gpu acceleration of large-scale density-based topology optimization. Advances in Engi- neering Software157, 103006 (2021)

    2021

  69. [77]

    Interna- tional Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM)18(10), 7459–7476 (2024)

    Iyer, N., Mirzendehdel, A.M., Raghavan, S., Jiao, Y., Ulu, E., Behandish, M., Nelaturi, S., Robinson, D.: Pato: producibility-aware topology optimization using deep learning for metal additive manufacturing. Interna- tional Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJID...

    2024

  70. [78]

    Computer-Aided Design156, 103449 (2023)

    Chandrasekhar, A., Mirzendehdel, A., Behandish, M., Suresh, K.: Frc-tounn: Topology optimization of continuous fiber reinforced composites using neural net- work. Computer-Aided Design156, 103449 (2023)

    2023

  71. [79]

    Journal of Computa- tional Design and Engineering10(4), 1736– 1766 (2023)

    Shin, S., Shin, D., Kang, N.: Topology opti- mization via machine learning and deep learning: a review. Journal of Computa- tional Design and Engineering10(4), 1736– 1766 (2023)

    2023

  72. [80]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.09154 (2025)

    Padhy, R.K., Chandrasekhar, A., Mirzen- dehdel, A.M.: Pilltop: Multi-material topol- ogy optimization of polypills for pre- scribed drug-release kinetics. arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.09154 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  73. [81]

    Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization63(3), 1135–1149 (2021)

    Chandrasekhar, A., Suresh, K.: Tounn: topology optimization using neural net- works. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization63(3), 1135–1149 (2021)

    2021

  74. [82]

    Journal of Mechanical Design144(7), 071704 (2022)

    Regenwetter, L., Nobari, A.H., Ahmed, F.: Deep generative models in engineering design: A review. Journal of Mechanical Design144(7), 071704 (2022)

    2022

  75. [83]

    Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization67(11), 192 (2024)

    Herrmann, L., Sigmund, O., Li, V.M., Vogl, C., Kollmannsberger, S.: On neural net- works for generating better local optima in topology optimization. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization67(11), 192 (2024)

    2024

  76. [84]

    Struc- tural and Multidisciplinary Optimization 65(10), 294 (2022)

    Woldseth, R.V., Aage, N., Bærentzen, J.A., Sigmund, O.: On the use of artificial neural networks in topology optimisation. Struc- tural and Multidisciplinary Optimization 65(10), 294 (2022)

    2022

  77. [85]

    Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering 25(2), 437–478 (2018)

    Xia, L., Xia, Q., Huang, X., Xie, Y.M.: Bi-directional evolutionary structural opti- mization on advanced structures and mate- rials: a comprehensive review. Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering 25(2), 437–478 (2018)

    2018

  78. [86]

    Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization42(5), 665–679 (2010)

    Suresh, K.: A 199-line matlab code for pareto-optimal tracing in topology opti- mization. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization42(5), 665–679 (2010)

    2010

  79. [87]

    International jour- nal for numerical methods in engineering 61(2), 238–254 (2004)

    Guest, J.K., Pr´ evost, J.H., Belytschko, T.: Achieving minimum length scale in topology optimization using nodal design variables and projection functions. International jour- nal for numerical methods in engineering 61(2), 238–254 (2004)

    2004

  80. [88]

    International journal for numerical methods in engineering86(6), 765–781 (2011)

    Lazarov, B.S., Sigmund, O.: Filters in topol- ogy optimization based on helmholtz-type differential equations. International journal for numerical methods in engineering86(6), 765–781 (2011)

    2011

  81. [89]

    IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics24(2), 1127–1140 (2017)

    Wu, J., Aage, N., Westermann, R., Sigmund, O.: Infill optimization for additive manufac- turing—approaching bone-like porous struc- tures. IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics24(2), 1127–1140 (2017)

    2017

  82. [90]

    Springer (2018)

    Zhang, X., Zhu, B.: Topology optimization of compliant mechanisms. Springer (2018)

    2018

  83. [91]

    Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization58(3), 1297–1310 (2018)

    Ansola Loyola, R., Querin, O.M., Garaig- ordobil Jim´ enez, A., Alonso Gordoa, C.: A sequential element rejection and admission (sera) topology optimization code written in matlab. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization58(3), 1297–1310 (2018)

    2018

  84. [92]

    Structural and Multidis- ciplinary Optimization (2024) https://doi

    Zhuang, Z., Zhang, W., Zhang, Y., Li, Z., Shu, C.: A 262-line matlab code for the level set topology optimization based on the estimated gradient field in the body-fitted mesh. Structural and Multidis- ciplinary Optimization (2024) https://doi. 46 org/10.1007/s00158-024-03891-y

    2024 doi

  85. [93]

    Structural and Mul- tidisciplinary Optimization62(2), 685–707 (2020)

    Andreasen, C.S., Elingaard, M.O., Aage, N.: Level set topology and shape optimization by density methods using cut elements with length scale control. Structural and Mul- tidisciplinary Optimization62(2), 685–707 (2020)

    2020

  86. [94]

    GitHub (2017)

    Hunter, W., et al.: ToPy - Topology opti- mization with Python. GitHub (2017)

    2017

  87. [95]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.10421 (2025)

    Uihlein, A., Sigmund, O., Stingl, M.: A 140 line matlab code for topology optimiza- tion problems with probabilistic parameters. arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.10421 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  88. [96]

    Structural and multidisciplinary optimiza- tion52(6), 1229–1241 (2015)

    Xia, L., Breitkopf, P.: Design of materials using topology optimization and energy- based homogenization approach in matlab. Structural and multidisciplinary optimiza- tion52(6), 1229–1241 (2015)

    2015

  89. [97]

    John Wiley & Sons (2010)

    Huang, X., Xie, M.: Evolutionary topology optimization of continuum structures: meth- ods and applications. John Wiley & Sons (2010)

    2010

  90. [98]

    PloS one10(12), 0145041 (2015)

    Biyikli, E., To, A.C.: Proportional topology optimization: a new non-sensitivity method for solving stress constrained and minimum compliance problems and its implementa- tion in matlab. PloS one10(12), 0145041 (2015)

    2015

  91. [99]

    Struc- tural and Multidisciplinary Optimization 61(1), 411–431 (2020)

    Liang, Y., Cheng, G.: Further elaborations on topology optimization via sequential inte- ger programming and canonical relaxation algorithm and 128-line matlab code. Struc- tural and Multidisciplinary Optimization 61(1), 411–431 (2020)

    2020

  92. [100]

    Najafabadi, H., G

    R. Najafabadi, H., G. Goto, T., Fal- heiro, M.S., C. Martins, T., Barari, A., SG Tsuzuki, M.: Smart topology optimiza- tion using adaptive neighborhood simulated annealing. Applied Sciences11(11), 5257 (2021)

    2021

  93. [101]

    Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering387, 114159 (2021)

    Liu, Y., Yang, C., Wei, P., Zhou, P., Du, J.: An ode-driven level-set density method for topology optimization. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering387, 114159 (2021)

    2021

  94. [102]

    Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimiza- tion64(6), 4325–4342 (2021)

    Wang, Y., Kang, Z.: Matlab implementa- tions of velocity field level set method for topology optimization: an 80-line code for 2d and a 100-line code for 3d problems. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimiza- tion64(6), 4325–4342 (2021)

    2021

  95. [103]

    https: //arxiv.org/abs/2204.06682 (2022)

    Chandrasekhar, A., Sridhara, S., Suresh, K.: GM-TOuNN: Graded Multiscale Topology Optimization using Neural Networks. https: //arxiv.org/abs/2204.06682 (2022)

    2022 arXiv

  96. [104]

    Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization62(4), 2229–2254 (2020)

    Lin, H., Xu, A., Misra, A., Zhao, R.: An ansys apdl code for topology optimization of structures with multi-constraints using the beso method with dynamic evolution rate (der-beso). Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization62(4), 2229–2254 (2020)

    2020

  97. [105]

    Nature communica- tions13(1), 388 (2022)

    Deng, C., Wang, Y., Qin, C., Fu, Y., Lu, W.: Self-directed online machine learning for topology optimization. Nature communica- tions13(1), 388 (2022)

    2022

  98. [106]

    Advances in Engineering Software 85, 1–11 (2015)

    Zuo, Z.H., Xie, Y.M.: A simple and compact python code for complex 3d topology opti- mization. Advances in Engineering Software 85, 1–11 (2015)

    2015

  99. [107]

    Advances in Engineering Software 198, 103790 (2024)

    Ibhadode, O., Fu, Y.-F., Qureshi, A.: Freeto- freeform 3d topology optimization using a structured mesh with smooth boundaries in matlab. Advances in Engineering Software 198, 103790 (2024)

    2024

  100. [108]

    Jia, Y., Wang, C., Zhang, X.S.: Fenitop: a simple fenicsx implementation for 2d and 3d topology optimization supporting par- allel computing. Structural and Multidisci- plinary Optimization67(8), 140 (2024) A List of Open-Source Software for Topology Optimization 47 T able 7: ...

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 2, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.