3,709 research outputs found
On the Number of Iterations for Dantzig-Wolfe Optimization and Packing-Covering Approximation Algorithms
We give a lower bound on the iteration complexity of a natural class of
Lagrangean-relaxation algorithms for approximately solving packing/covering
linear programs. We show that, given an input with random 0/1-constraints
on variables, with high probability, any such algorithm requires
iterations to compute a
-approximate solution, where is the width of the input.
The bound is tight for a range of the parameters .
The algorithms in the class include Dantzig-Wolfe decomposition, Benders'
decomposition, Lagrangean relaxation as developed by Held and Karp [1971] for
lower-bounding TSP, and many others (e.g. by Plotkin, Shmoys, and Tardos [1988]
and Grigoriadis and Khachiyan [1996]). To prove the bound, we use a discrepancy
argument to show an analogous lower bound on the support size of
-approximate mixed strategies for random two-player zero-sum
0/1-matrix games
Orbitopal Fixing
The topic of this paper are integer programming models in which a subset of
0/1-variables encode a partitioning of a set of objects into disjoint subsets.
Such models can be surprisingly hard to solve by branch-and-cut algorithms if
the order of the subsets of the partition is irrelevant, since this kind of
symmetry unnecessarily blows up the search tree. We present a general tool,
called orbitopal fixing, for enhancing the capabilities of branch-and-cut
algorithms in solving such symmetric integer programming models. We devise a
linear time algorithm that, applied at each node of the search tree, removes
redundant parts of the tree produced by the above mentioned symmetry. The
method relies on certain polyhedra, called orbitopes, which have been
introduced bei Kaibel and Pfetsch (Math. Programm. A, 114 (2008), 1-36). It
does, however, not explicitly add inequalities to the model. Instead, it uses
certain fixing rules for variables. We demonstrate the computational power of
orbitopal fixing at the example of a graph partitioning problem.Comment: 22 pages, revised and extended version of a previous version that has
appeared under the same title in Proc. IPCO 200
An asymptotically superlinearly convergent semismooth Newton augmented Lagrangian method for Linear Programming
Powerful interior-point methods (IPM) based commercial solvers, such as
Gurobi and Mosek, have been hugely successful in solving large-scale linear
programming (LP) problems. The high efficiency of these solvers depends
critically on the sparsity of the problem data and advanced matrix
factorization techniques. For a large scale LP problem with data matrix
that is dense (possibly structured) or whose corresponding normal matrix
has a dense Cholesky factor (even with re-ordering), these solvers may require
excessive computational cost and/or extremely heavy memory usage in each
interior-point iteration. Unfortunately, the natural remedy, i.e., the use of
iterative methods based IPM solvers, although can avoid the explicit
computation of the coefficient matrix and its factorization, is not practically
viable due to the inherent extreme ill-conditioning of the large scale normal
equation arising in each interior-point iteration. To provide a better
alternative choice for solving large scale LPs with dense data or requiring
expensive factorization of its normal equation, we propose a semismooth Newton
based inexact proximal augmented Lagrangian ({\sc Snipal}) method. Different
from classical IPMs, in each iteration of {\sc Snipal}, iterative methods can
efficiently be used to solve simpler yet better conditioned semismooth Newton
linear systems. Moreover, {\sc Snipal} not only enjoys a fast asymptotic
superlinear convergence but is also proven to enjoy a finite termination
property. Numerical comparisons with Gurobi have demonstrated encouraging
potential of {\sc Snipal} for handling large-scale LP problems where the
constraint matrix has a dense representation or has a dense
factorization even with an appropriate re-ordering.Comment: Due to the limitation "The abstract field cannot be longer than 1,920
characters", the abstract appearing here is slightly shorter than that in the
PDF fil
- …