The Radius of Metric Subregularity

There is a basic paradigm, called here the radius of well-posedness, which quantifies the "distance" from a given well-posed problem to the set of ill-posed problems of the same kind. In variational analysis, well-posedness is often understood as a regularity property, which is usually employed to measure the effect of perturbations and approximations of a problem on its solutions. In this paper we focus on evaluating the radius of the property of metric subregularity which, in contrast to its siblings, metric regularity, strong regularity and strong subregularity, exhibits a more complicated behavior under various perturbations. We consider three kinds of perturbations: by Lipschitz continuous functions, by semismooth functions, and by smooth functions, obtaining different expressions/bounds for the radius of subregularity, which involve generalized derivatives of set-valued mappings. We also obtain different expressions when using either Frobenius or Euclidean norm to measure the radius. As an application, we evaluate the radius of subregularity of a general constraint system. Examples illustrate the theoretical findings.Comment: 20 page

Well-Behavior, Well-Posedness and Nonsmooth Analysis

AMS subject classification: 90C30, 90C33.We survey the relationships between well-posedness and well-behavior. The latter notion means that any critical sequence (xn) of a lower semicontinuous function f on a Banach space is minimizing. Here “critical” means that the remoteness of the subdifferential ∂f(xn) of f at xn (i.e. the distance of 0 to ∂f(xn)) converges to 0. The objective function f is not supposed to be convex or smooth and the subdifferential ∂ is not necessarily the usual Fenchel subdifferential. We are thus led to deal with conditions ensuring that a growth property of the subdifferential (or the derivative) of a function implies a growth property of the function itself. Both qualitative questions and quantitative results are considered

Advances in Optimization and Nonlinear Analysis

The present book focuses on that part of calculus of variations, optimization, nonlinear analysis and related applications which combines tools and methods from partial differential equations with geometrical techniques. More precisely, this work is devoted to nonlinear problems coming from different areas, with particular reference to those introducing new techniques capable of solving a wide range of problems. The book is a valuable guide for researchers, engineers and students in the field of mathematics, operations research, optimal control science, artificial intelligence, management science and economics

Well-Posedness, Conditioning and Regularization of Minimization, Inclusion and Fixed-Point Problems

AMS subject classification: 65K10, 49M07, 90C25, 90C48.Well-posedness, conditioning and regularization of fixed-point problems are studied in connexion with well-posedness, conditioning and Tikhonov regularization of minimization and inclusion problems. Equivalence theorems are proved. Coupling iteration and well-posedness as well as iteration and regularization are also considered

Pointwise well-posedness in vector optimization and variational inequalities

In this note we consider some notions of well-posedness for scalar and vector variational inequalities and we recall their connections with optimization problems. Subsequently, we investigate similar connections between well-posedness of a vector optimization problem and a related variational inequality problem and we present an result obtained with scalar characterizations of vector optimality concepts

Several Approaches for the Derivation of Stationary Conditions for Elliptic MPECs with Upper-Level Control Constraints

The derivation of multiplier-based optimality conditions for elliptic mathematical programs with equilibrium constraints (MPEC) is essential for the characterization of solutions and development of numerical methods. Though much can be said for broad classes of elliptic MPECs in both polyhedric and non-polyhedric settings, the calculation becomes significantly more complicated when additional constraints are imposed on the control. In this paper we develop three derivation methods for constrained MPEC problems: via concepts from variational analysis, via penalization of the control constraints, and via penalization of the lower-level problem with the subsequent regularization of the resulting nonsmoothness. The developed methods and obtained results are then compared and contrasted