Results 1 - 10
of
219
Interior-point Methods
, 2000
"... The modern era of interior-point methods dates to 1984, when Karmarkar proposed his algorithm for linear programming. In the years since then, algorithms and software for linear programming have become quite sophisticated, while extensions to more general classes of problems, such as convex quadrati ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 363 (16 self)
- Add to MetaCart
The modern era of interior-point methods dates to 1984, when Karmarkar proposed his algorithm for linear programming. In the years since then, algorithms and software for linear programming have become quite sophisticated, while extensions to more general classes of problems, such as convex quadratic programming, semidefinite programming, and nonconvex and nonlinear problems, have reached varying levels of maturity. We review some of the key developments in the area, including comments on both the complexity theory and practical algorithms for linear programming, semidefinite programming, monotone linear complementarity, and convex programming over sets that can be characterized by self-concordant barrier functions.
Determinant maximization with linear matrix inequality constraints
- SIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and Applications
, 1998
"... constraints ..."
An Interior-Point Algorithm For Nonconvex Nonlinear Programming
- COMPUTATIONAL OPTIMIZATION AND APPLICATIONS
, 1997
"... The paper describes an interior-point algorithm for nonconvex nonlinear programming which is a direct extension of interior--point methods for linear and quadratic programming. Major modifications include a merit function and an altered search direction to ensure that a descent direction for the mer ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 116 (12 self)
- Add to MetaCart
The paper describes an interior-point algorithm for nonconvex nonlinear programming which is a direct extension of interior--point methods for linear and quadratic programming. Major modifications include a merit function and an altered search direction to ensure that a descent direction for the merit function is obtained. Preliminary numerical testing indicates that the method is robust. Further, numerical comparisons with MINOS and LANCELOT show that the method is efficient, and has the promise of greatly reducing solution times on at least some classes of models.
Asymptotics for Lasso-type estimators
, 2000
"... this paper, we consider the asymptotic behaviour of regression estimators that minimize the residual sum of squares plus a penalty proportional to ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 95 (3 self)
- Add to MetaCart
this paper, we consider the asymptotic behaviour of regression estimators that minimize the residual sum of squares plus a penalty proportional to
Optimization by direct search: New perspectives on some classical and modern methods
- SIAM Review
, 2003
"... Abstract. Direct search methods are best known as unconstrained optimization techniques that do not explicitly use derivatives. Direct search methods were formally proposed and widely applied in the 1960s but fell out of favor with the mathematical optimization community by the early 1970s because t ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 72 (14 self)
- Add to MetaCart
Abstract. Direct search methods are best known as unconstrained optimization techniques that do not explicitly use derivatives. Direct search methods were formally proposed and widely applied in the 1960s but fell out of favor with the mathematical optimization community by the early 1970s because they lacked coherent mathematical analysis. Nonetheless, users remained loyal to these methods, most of which were easy to program, some of which were reliable. In the past fifteen years, these methods have seen a revival due, in part, to the appearance of mathematical analysis, as well as to interest in parallel and distributed computing. This review begins by briefly summarizing the history of direct search methods and considering the special properties of problems for which they are well suited. Our focus then turns to a broad class of methods for which we provide a unifying framework that lends itself to a variety of convergence results. The underlying principles allow generalization to handle bound constraints and linear constraints. We also discuss extensions to problems with nonlinear constraints.
Stochastic Ranking for Constrained Evolutionary Optimization
, 2000
"... Penalty functions are often used in constrained optimization. However, it is very difficult to strike the right balance between objective and penalty functions. This paper introduces a novel approach to balance objective and penalty functions stochastically, i.e., stochastic ranking, and presents a ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 70 (9 self)
- Add to MetaCart
Penalty functions are often used in constrained optimization. However, it is very difficult to strike the right balance between objective and penalty functions. This paper introduces a novel approach to balance objective and penalty functions stochastically, i.e., stochastic ranking, and presents a new view on penalty function methods in terms of the dominance of penalty and objective functions. Some of the pitfalls of naive penalty methods are discussed in these terms. The new ranking method is tested using a (µ, ) evolution strategy on 13 benchmark problems. Our results show that suitable ranking alone (i.e., selection), without the introduction of complicated and specialized variation operators, is capable of improving the search performance significantly.
Interior-point methods for nonconvex nonlinear programming: Filter methods and merit functions
- Computational Optimization and Applications
, 2002
"... Abstract. In this paper, we present global and local convergence results for an interior-point method for nonlinear programming and analyze the computational performance of its implementation. The algorithm uses an ℓ1 penalty approach to relax all constraints, to provide regularization, and to bound ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 64 (5 self)
- Add to MetaCart
Abstract. In this paper, we present global and local convergence results for an interior-point method for nonlinear programming and analyze the computational performance of its implementation. The algorithm uses an ℓ1 penalty approach to relax all constraints, to provide regularization, and to bound the Lagrange multipliers. The penalty problems are solved using a simplified version of Chen and Goldfarb’s strictly feasible interior-point method [12]. The global convergence of the algorithm is proved under mild assumptions, and local analysis shows that it converges Q-quadratically for a large class of problems. The proposed approach is the first to simultaneously have all of the following properties while solving a general nonconvex nonlinear programming problem: (1) the convergence analysis does not assume boundedness of dual iterates, (2) local convergence does not require the Linear Independence Constraint Qualification, (3) the solution of the penalty problem is shown to locally converge to optima that may not satisfy the Karush-Kuhn-Tucker conditions, and (4) the algorithm is applicable to mathematical programs with equilibrium constraints. Numerical testing on a set of general nonlinear programming problems, including degenerate problems and infeasible problems, confirm the theoretical results. We also provide comparisons to a highly-efficient nonlinear solver and thoroughly analyze the effects of enforcing theoretical convergence guarantees on the computational performance of the algorithm. 1.
An interior point algorithm for large scale nonlinear programming
- SIAM Journal on Optimization
, 1999
"... The design and implementation of a new algorithm for solving large nonlinear programming problems is described. It follows a barrier approach that employs sequential quadratic programming and trust regions to solve the subproblems occurring in the iteration. Both primal and primal-dual versions of t ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 62 (16 self)
- Add to MetaCart
The design and implementation of a new algorithm for solving large nonlinear programming problems is described. It follows a barrier approach that employs sequential quadratic programming and trust regions to solve the subproblems occurring in the iteration. Both primal and primal-dual versions of the algorithm are developed, and their performance is illustrated in a set of numerical tests. Key words: constrained optimization, interior point method, large-scale optimization, nonlinear programming, primal method, primal-dual method, successive quadratic programming, trust region method.
Implementation of Interior Point Methods for Large Scale Linear Programming
- in Interior Point Methods in Mathematical Programming
, 1996
"... In the past 10 years the interior point methods (IPM) for linear programming have gained extraordinary interest as an alternative to the sparse simplex based methods. This has initiated a fruitful competition between the two types of algorithms which has lead to very efficient implementations on bot ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 56 (18 self)
- Add to MetaCart
In the past 10 years the interior point methods (IPM) for linear programming have gained extraordinary interest as an alternative to the sparse simplex based methods. This has initiated a fruitful competition between the two types of algorithms which has lead to very efficient implementations on both sides. The significant difference between interior point and simplex based methods is reflected not only in the theoretical background but also in the practical implementation. In this paper we give an overview of the most important characteristics of advanced implementations of interior point methods. First, we present the infeasible-primal-dual algorithm which is widely considered the most efficient general purpose IPM. Our discussion includes various algorithmic enhancements of the basic algorithm. The only shortcoming of the "traditional" infeasible-primal-dual algorithm is to detect a possible primal or dual infeasibility of the linear program. We discuss how this problem can be solve...

