A sequential semidefinite programming method and an application in passive reduced-order modeling

We consider the solution of nonlinear programs with nonlinear semidefiniteness constraints. The need for an efficient exploitation of the cone of positive semidefinite matrices makes the solution of such nonlinear semidefinite programs more complicated than the solution of standard nonlinear programs. In particular, a suitable symmetrization procedure needs to be chosen for the linearization of the complementarity condition. The choice of the symmetrization procedure can be shifted in a very natural way to certain linear semidefinite subproblems, and can thus be reduced to a well-studied problem. The resulting sequential semidefinite programming (SSP) method is a generalization of the well-known SQP method for standard nonlinear programs. We present a sensitivity result for nonlinear semidefinite programs, and then based on this result, we give a self-contained proof of local quadratic convergence of the SSP method. We also describe a class of nonlinear semidefinite programs that arise in passive reduced-order modeling, and we report results of some numerical experiments with the SSP method applied to problems in that class

Conic Optimization Theory: Convexification Techniques and Numerical Algorithms

Optimization is at the core of control theory and appears in several areas of this field, such as optimal control, distributed control, system identification, robust control, state estimation, model predictive control and dynamic programming. The recent advances in various topics of modern optimization have also been revamping the area of machine learning. Motivated by the crucial role of optimization theory in the design, analysis, control and operation of real-world systems, this tutorial paper offers a detailed overview of some major advances in this area, namely conic optimization and its emerging applications. First, we discuss the importance of conic optimization in different areas. Then, we explain seminal results on the design of hierarchies of convex relaxations for a wide range of nonconvex problems. Finally, we study different numerical algorithms for large-scale conic optimization problems.Comment: 18 page

Projection methods in conic optimization

There exist efficient algorithms to project a point onto the intersection of a convex cone and an affine subspace. Those conic projections are in turn the work-horse of a range of algorithms in conic optimization, having a variety of applications in science, finance and engineering. This chapter reviews some of these algorithms, emphasizing the so-called regularization algorithms for linear conic optimization, and applications in polynomial optimization. This is a presentation of the material of several recent research articles; we aim here at clarifying the ideas, presenting them in a general framework, and pointing out important techniques

On barrier and modified barrier multigrid methods for 3d topology optimization

One of the challenges encountered in optimization of mechanical structures, in particular in what is known as topology optimization, is the size of the problems, which can easily involve millions of variables. A basic example is the minimum compliance formulation of the variable thickness sheet (VTS) problem, which is equivalent to a convex problem. We propose to solve the VTS problem by the Penalty-Barrier Multiplier (PBM) method, introduced by R.\ Polyak and later studied by Ben-Tal and Zibulevsky and others. The most computationally expensive part of the algorithm is the solution of linear systems arising from the Newton method used to minimize a generalized augmented Lagrangian. We use a special structure of the Hessian of this Lagrangian to reduce the size of the linear system and to convert it to a form suitable for a standard multigrid method. This converted system is solved approximately by a multigrid preconditioned MINRES method. The proposed PBM algorithm is compared with the optimality criteria (OC) method and an interior point (IP) method, both using a similar iterative solver setup. We apply all three methods to different loading scenarios. In our experiments, the PBM method clearly outperforms the other methods in terms of computation time required to achieve a certain degree of accuracy