Loading…

Two computationally efficient polynomial-iteration infeasible interior-point algorithms for linear programming

Since the beginning of the development of interior-point methods, there exists a puzzling gap between the results in theory and the observations in numerical experience, i.e., algorithms with good polynomial bound are not computationally efficient and algorithms demonstrated efficiency in computatio...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:arXiv.org 2018-03
Main Author: Yang, Yaguang
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page
container_title arXiv.org
container_volume
creator Yang, Yaguang
description Since the beginning of the development of interior-point methods, there exists a puzzling gap between the results in theory and the observations in numerical experience, i.e., algorithms with good polynomial bound are not computationally efficient and algorithms demonstrated efficiency in computation do not have a good or any polynomial bound. Todd raised a question in 2002: "Can we find a theoretically and practically efficient way to reoptimize?" This paper is an effort to close the gap. We propose two arc-search infeasible interior-point algorithms with infeasible central path neighborhood wider than all existing infeasible interior-point algorithms that are proved to be convergent. We show that the first algorithm is polynomial and its simplified version, if it terminates in finite iterations, has a complexity bound equal to the best known complexity bound for all (feasible or infeasible) interior-point algorithms. We demonstrate the computational efficiency of the proposed algorithms by testing all Netlib linear programming problems in standard form and comparing the numerical results to those obtained by Mehrotra's predictor-corrector algorithm and a recently developed more efficient arc-search algorithm (the convergence of these two algorithms is unknown). We conclude that the newly proposed algorithms are not only polynomial but also computationally competitive comparing to both Mehrotra's predictor-corrector algorithm and the efficient arc-search algorithm.
doi_str_mv 10.48550/arxiv.1609.00694
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2071678312</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2071678312</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a522-3ff5d08624cb3c21974deabab4182c0976fda15625cb7b209c2f626c24c386543</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNotj01LAzEYhIMgWGp_gLeA563Jm4_dPUrxCwpeei_vpklNySZrsqv237toTzMMDzMMIXecrWWjFHvA_OO_1lyzds2YbuUVWYAQvGokwA1ZlXJijIGuQSmxIHH3nahJ_TCNOPoUMYQztc55420c6ZDCOabeY6j8aPMfQn10Fovvgp3tnPqUqyHNlmI4puzHj75QlzINPlrMdMjpmLHvfTzekmuHodjVRZdk9_y027xW2_eXt83jtkIFUAnn1IE1GqTphAHe1vJgscNO8gYMa2vtDsiVBmW6ugPWGnAatJl50WglxZLc_9fO05-TLeP-lKY8nyt7YDXXdSM4iF-Gxl2q</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2071678312</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Two computationally efficient polynomial-iteration infeasible interior-point algorithms for linear programming</title><source>Publicly Available Content (ProQuest)</source><creator>Yang, Yaguang</creator><creatorcontrib>Yang, Yaguang</creatorcontrib><description>Since the beginning of the development of interior-point methods, there exists a puzzling gap between the results in theory and the observations in numerical experience, i.e., algorithms with good polynomial bound are not computationally efficient and algorithms demonstrated efficiency in computation do not have a good or any polynomial bound. Todd raised a question in 2002: "Can we find a theoretically and practically efficient way to reoptimize?" This paper is an effort to close the gap. We propose two arc-search infeasible interior-point algorithms with infeasible central path neighborhood wider than all existing infeasible interior-point algorithms that are proved to be convergent. We show that the first algorithm is polynomial and its simplified version, if it terminates in finite iterations, has a complexity bound equal to the best known complexity bound for all (feasible or infeasible) interior-point algorithms. We demonstrate the computational efficiency of the proposed algorithms by testing all Netlib linear programming problems in standard form and comparing the numerical results to those obtained by Mehrotra's predictor-corrector algorithm and a recently developed more efficient arc-search algorithm (the convergence of these two algorithms is unknown). We conclude that the newly proposed algorithms are not only polynomial but also computationally competitive comparing to both Mehrotra's predictor-corrector algorithm and the efficient arc-search algorithm.</description><identifier>EISSN: 2331-8422</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.1609.00694</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Ithaca: Cornell University Library, arXiv.org</publisher><subject>Algorithms ; Complexity ; Computational efficiency ; Computing time ; Convergence ; Iterative methods ; Linear programming ; Polynomials ; Predictor-corrector methods ; Search algorithms</subject><ispartof>arXiv.org, 2018-03</ispartof><rights>2018. This work is published under http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2071678312?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml></links><search><creatorcontrib>Yang, Yaguang</creatorcontrib><title>Two computationally efficient polynomial-iteration infeasible interior-point algorithms for linear programming</title><title>arXiv.org</title><description>Since the beginning of the development of interior-point methods, there exists a puzzling gap between the results in theory and the observations in numerical experience, i.e., algorithms with good polynomial bound are not computationally efficient and algorithms demonstrated efficiency in computation do not have a good or any polynomial bound. Todd raised a question in 2002: "Can we find a theoretically and practically efficient way to reoptimize?" This paper is an effort to close the gap. We propose two arc-search infeasible interior-point algorithms with infeasible central path neighborhood wider than all existing infeasible interior-point algorithms that are proved to be convergent. We show that the first algorithm is polynomial and its simplified version, if it terminates in finite iterations, has a complexity bound equal to the best known complexity bound for all (feasible or infeasible) interior-point algorithms. We demonstrate the computational efficiency of the proposed algorithms by testing all Netlib linear programming problems in standard form and comparing the numerical results to those obtained by Mehrotra's predictor-corrector algorithm and a recently developed more efficient arc-search algorithm (the convergence of these two algorithms is unknown). We conclude that the newly proposed algorithms are not only polynomial but also computationally competitive comparing to both Mehrotra's predictor-corrector algorithm and the efficient arc-search algorithm.</description><subject>Algorithms</subject><subject>Complexity</subject><subject>Computational efficiency</subject><subject>Computing time</subject><subject>Convergence</subject><subject>Iterative methods</subject><subject>Linear programming</subject><subject>Polynomials</subject><subject>Predictor-corrector methods</subject><subject>Search algorithms</subject><issn>2331-8422</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><recordid>eNotj01LAzEYhIMgWGp_gLeA563Jm4_dPUrxCwpeei_vpklNySZrsqv237toTzMMDzMMIXecrWWjFHvA_OO_1lyzds2YbuUVWYAQvGokwA1ZlXJijIGuQSmxIHH3nahJ_TCNOPoUMYQztc55420c6ZDCOabeY6j8aPMfQn10Fovvgp3tnPqUqyHNlmI4puzHj75QlzINPlrMdMjpmLHvfTzekmuHodjVRZdk9_y027xW2_eXt83jtkIFUAnn1IE1GqTphAHe1vJgscNO8gYMa2vtDsiVBmW6ugPWGnAatJl50WglxZLc_9fO05-TLeP-lKY8nyt7YDXXdSM4iF-Gxl2q</recordid><startdate>20180301</startdate><enddate>20180301</enddate><creator>Yang, Yaguang</creator><general>Cornell University Library, arXiv.org</general><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>PHGZM</scope><scope>PHGZT</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PKEHL</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQGLB</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20180301</creationdate><title>Two computationally efficient polynomial-iteration infeasible interior-point algorithms for linear programming</title><author>Yang, Yaguang</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a522-3ff5d08624cb3c21974deabab4182c0976fda15625cb7b209c2f626c24c386543</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Algorithms</topic><topic>Complexity</topic><topic>Computational efficiency</topic><topic>Computing time</topic><topic>Convergence</topic><topic>Iterative methods</topic><topic>Linear programming</topic><topic>Polynomials</topic><topic>Predictor-corrector methods</topic><topic>Search algorithms</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Yang, Yaguang</creatorcontrib><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic (New)</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Applied &amp; Life Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering collection</collection><jtitle>arXiv.org</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Yang, Yaguang</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Two computationally efficient polynomial-iteration infeasible interior-point algorithms for linear programming</atitle><jtitle>arXiv.org</jtitle><date>2018-03-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><eissn>2331-8422</eissn><abstract>Since the beginning of the development of interior-point methods, there exists a puzzling gap between the results in theory and the observations in numerical experience, i.e., algorithms with good polynomial bound are not computationally efficient and algorithms demonstrated efficiency in computation do not have a good or any polynomial bound. Todd raised a question in 2002: "Can we find a theoretically and practically efficient way to reoptimize?" This paper is an effort to close the gap. We propose two arc-search infeasible interior-point algorithms with infeasible central path neighborhood wider than all existing infeasible interior-point algorithms that are proved to be convergent. We show that the first algorithm is polynomial and its simplified version, if it terminates in finite iterations, has a complexity bound equal to the best known complexity bound for all (feasible or infeasible) interior-point algorithms. We demonstrate the computational efficiency of the proposed algorithms by testing all Netlib linear programming problems in standard form and comparing the numerical results to those obtained by Mehrotra's predictor-corrector algorithm and a recently developed more efficient arc-search algorithm (the convergence of these two algorithms is unknown). We conclude that the newly proposed algorithms are not only polynomial but also computationally competitive comparing to both Mehrotra's predictor-corrector algorithm and the efficient arc-search algorithm.</abstract><cop>Ithaca</cop><pub>Cornell University Library, arXiv.org</pub><doi>10.48550/arxiv.1609.00694</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier EISSN: 2331-8422
ispartof arXiv.org, 2018-03
issn 2331-8422
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2071678312
source Publicly Available Content (ProQuest)
subjects Algorithms
Complexity
Computational efficiency
Computing time
Convergence
Iterative methods
Linear programming
Polynomials
Predictor-corrector methods
Search algorithms
title Two computationally efficient polynomial-iteration infeasible interior-point algorithms for linear programming
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-03-06T03%3A16%3A12IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Two%20computationally%20efficient%20polynomial-iteration%20infeasible%20interior-point%20algorithms%20for%20linear%20programming&rft.jtitle=arXiv.org&rft.au=Yang,%20Yaguang&rft.date=2018-03-01&rft.eissn=2331-8422&rft_id=info:doi/10.48550/arxiv.1609.00694&rft_dat=%3Cproquest%3E2071678312%3C/proquest%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a522-3ff5d08624cb3c21974deabab4182c0976fda15625cb7b209c2f626c24c386543%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2071678312&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true