IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/oropre/v52y2004i3p368-383.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Nonconvex Structures in Nonlinear Programming

Author

Listed:
  • Stefan Scholtes

    (Judge Institute of Management, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 1AG, United Kingdom)

Abstract

Nonsmoothness and nonconvexity in optimization problems often arise because a combinatorial structure is imposed on smooth or convex data. The combinatorial aspect can be explicit, e.g., through the use of “max,” “min,” or “if” statements in a model; or implicit, as in the case of bilevel optimization, where the combinatorial structure arises from the possible choices of active constraints in the lower-level problem. In analyzing such problems, it is desirable to decouple the combinatorial aspect from the nonlinear aspect and deal with them separately. This paper suggests a problem formulation that explicitly decouples the two aspects. A suitable generalization of the traditional Lagrangian framework allows an extension of the popular sequential quadratic programming (SQP) methodology to such structurally nonconvex nonlinear programs. We show that the favorable local convergence properties of SQP are retained in this setting and illustrate the potential of the approach in the context of optimization problems with max-min constraints that arise, for example, in robust optimization.

Suggested Citation

  • Stefan Scholtes, 2004. "Nonconvex Structures in Nonlinear Programming," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 52(3), pages 368-383, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:oropre:v:52:y:2004:i:3:p:368-383
    DOI: 10.1287/opre.1030.0102
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/opre.1030.0102
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/opre.1030.0102?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Holger Scheel & Stefan Scholtes, 2000. "Mathematical Programs with Complementarity Constraints: Stationarity, Optimality, and Sensitivity," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 25(1), pages 1-22, February.
    2. Stefan Scholtes & Michael Stöhr, 2001. "How Stringent is the Linear Independence Assumption for Mathematical Programs with Complementarity Constraints?," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 26(4), pages 851-863, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bjarne Grimstad & Brage R. Knudsen, 2020. "Mathematical programming formulations for piecewise polynomial functions," Journal of Global Optimization, Springer, vol. 77(3), pages 455-486, July.
    2. A. F. Izmailov & M. V. Solodov, 2009. "Mathematical Programs with Vanishing Constraints: Optimality Conditions, Sensitivity, and a Relaxation Method," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 142(3), pages 501-532, September.
    3. Jong-Shi Pang & Meisam Razaviyayn & Alberth Alvarado, 2017. "Computing B-Stationary Points of Nonsmooth DC Programs," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 42(1), pages 95-118, January.
    4. Smimou, K., 2014. "International portfolio choice and political instability risk: A multi-objective approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 234(2), pages 546-560.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Andreas Ehrenmann & Karsten Neuhoff, 2009. "A Comparison of Electricity Market Designs in Networks," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 57(2), pages 274-286, April.
    2. Aram V. Arutyunov & Alexey F. Izmailov, 2005. "Sensitivity Analysis for Cone-Constrained Optimization Problems Under the Relaxed Constraint Qualifications," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(2), pages 333-353, May.
    3. Filippo Pecci & Edo Abraham & Ivan Stoianov, 2017. "Penalty and relaxation methods for the optimal placement and operation of control valves in water supply networks," Computational Optimization and Applications, Springer, vol. 67(1), pages 201-223, May.
    4. A. Izmailov & M. Solodov, 2009. "Examples of dual behaviour of Newton-type methods on optimization problems with degenerate constraints," Computational Optimization and Applications, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 231-264, March.
    5. Daniel Ralph & Oliver Stein, 2011. "The C-Index: A New Stability Concept for Quadratic Programs with Complementarity Constraints," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 36(3), pages 504-526, August.
    6. Hu, X. & Ralph, R., 2006. "Using EPECs to model bilevel games in restructured electricity markets with locational prices," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0619, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    7. Dussault, Jean-Pierre & Marcotte, Patrice & Roch, Sebastien & Savard, Gilles, 2006. "A smoothing heuristic for a bilevel pricing problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 174(3), pages 1396-1413, November.
    8. Gemayqzel Bouza & Georg Still, 2007. "Mathematical Programs with Complementarity Constraints: Convergence Properties of a Smoothing Method," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(2), pages 467-483, May.
    9. Hongxia Yin & Jianzhong Zhang, 2006. "Global Convergence of a Smooth Approximation Method for Mathematical Programs with Complementarity Constraints," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 64(2), pages 255-269, October.
    10. Xinmin Hu & Daniel Ralph, 2007. "Using EPECs to Model Bilevel Games in Restructured Electricity Markets with Locational Prices," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 55(5), pages 809-827, October.
    11. Iasson Karafyllis, 2014. "Feedback Stabilization Methods for the Solution of Nonlinear Programming Problems," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 161(3), pages 783-806, June.
    12. Stein, Oliver, 2012. "How to solve a semi-infinite optimization problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 223(2), pages 312-320.
    13. Birbil, S.I. & Bouza, G. & Frenk, J.B.G. & Still, G.J., 2003. "Equilibrium Constrained Optimization Problems," Econometric Institute Research Papers ERS-2003-085-LIS, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Erasmus School of Economics (ESE), Econometric Institute.
    14. Zhang, Fang & Lu, Jian & Hu, Xiaojian & Meng, Qiang, 2023. "Integrated deployment of dedicated lane and roadside unit considering uncertain road capacity under the mixed-autonomy traffic environment," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    15. Gui-Hua Lin & Mei-Ju Luo & Jin Zhang, 2016. "Smoothing and SAA method for stochastic programming problems with non-smooth objective and constraints," Journal of Global Optimization, Springer, vol. 66(3), pages 487-510, November.
    16. Lei Guo & Gui-Hua Lin & Jane J. Ye, 2015. "Solving Mathematical Programs with Equilibrium Constraints," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 166(1), pages 234-256, July.
    17. Tao Tan & Yanyan Li & Xingsi Li, 2011. "A Smoothing Method for Zero–One Constrained Extremum Problems," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 150(1), pages 65-77, July.
    18. S. Dempe & S. Franke, 2016. "On the solution of convex bilevel optimization problems," Computational Optimization and Applications, Springer, vol. 63(3), pages 685-703, April.
    19. A. F. Izmailov & M. V. Solodov, 2002. "The Theory of 2-Regularity for Mappings with Lipschitzian Derivatives and its Applications to Optimality Conditions," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(3), pages 614-635, August.
    20. Ilker Birbil, S. & Gürkan, G. & Listes, O.L., 2004. "Simulation-Based Solution of Stochastic Mathematical Programs with Complementarity Constraints : Sample-Path Analysis," Discussion Paper 2004-25, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:oropre:v:52:y:2004:i:3:p:368-383. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.