[go: up one dir, main page]
Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

A primal—dual potential reduction method for problems involving matrix inequalities

  • Published:
Mathematical Programming Submit manuscript

Abstract

We describe a potential reduction method for convex optimization problems involving matrix inequalities. The method is based on the theory developed by Nesterov and Nemirovsky and generalizes Gonzaga and Todd's method for linear programming. A worst-case analysis shows that the number of iterations grows as the square root of the problem size, but in practice it appears to grow more slowly. As in other interior-point methods the overall computational effort is therefore dominated by the least-squares system that must be solved in each iteration. A type of conjugate-gradient algorithm can be used for this purpose, which results in important savings for two reasons. First, it allows us to take advantage of the special structure the problems often have (e.g., Lyapunov or algebraic Riccati inequalities). Second, we show that the polynomial bound on the number of iterations remains valid even if the conjugate-gradient algorithm is not run until completion, which in practice can greatly reduce the computational effort per iteration.

We describe in detail how the algorithm works for optimization problems withL Lyapunov inequalities, each of sizem. We prove an overallworst-case operation count of O(m 5.5L1.5). Theaverage-case complexity appears to be closer to O(m 4L1.5). This estimate is justified by extensive numerical experimentation, and is consistent with other researchers' experience with the practical performance of interior-point algorithms for linear programming.

This result means that the computational cost of extending current control theory based on the solution of Lyapunov or Riccatiequations to a theory that is based on the solution of (multiple, coupled) Lyapunov or Riccatiinequalities is modest.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. I. Adler, M.G.C. Resende, G. Veiga and N. Karmarkar, “An implementation of Karmarkar's algorithm for linear programming,”Mathematical Programming 44 (1989) 297–335.

    Google Scholar 

  2. F. Alizadeh, “Combinatorial optimization with interior point methods and semi-definite matrices,” Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. Minnesota, 1991.

  3. F. Alizadeh, “Optimization over the positive-definite cone: interior point methods and combinatorial applications,” in: P. Pardalos, ed.,Advances in Optimization and Parallel Computing (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1992).

    Google Scholar 

  4. K.M. Anstreicher, “A combined phase I-phase II scaled potential algorithm for linear programming,”Mathematical Programming 52 (1991) 429–439.

    Google Scholar 

  5. W.F. Arnold and A.J. Laub, “Generalized eigenproblem algorithms and software for algebraic Riccati equations,”Proceedings of the IEEE 72 (1984) 1746–1754.

    Google Scholar 

  6. R. Bellman and K. Fan, “On systems of linear inequalities in Hermitian matrix variables,” in: V.L. Klee, ed.,Convexity, Proceedings of Symposia in Pure Mathematics 7 (American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1963) 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  7. A. Ben Tal and A. Nemirovskii, “Interior point polynomial time methods for truss topology design,” Technical Report 3/92, Faculty of Industrial Engineering and Management, Technion, Israel Institute of Technology, 1992.

  8. S. Boyd and L. El Ghaoui, “Method of centers for minimizing generalized eigenvalues,”Linear Algebra and Applications 188 (1993) 63–111 (special issue on Numerical Linear Algebra Methods in Control, Signals and Systems).

    Google Scholar 

  9. S. Boyd, L. El Ghaoui, E. Feron and V. Balakrishnan,Linear Matrix Inequalities in System and Control Theory, Studies in Applied Mathematics 15 (SIAM, Philadelphia, PA, 1994).

    Google Scholar 

  10. D. Den Hertog, C. Roos and T. Terlaky, “A large-step analytic center method for a class of smooth convex programming problems,”SIAM Journal on Optimization 2 (1992) 55–70.

    Google Scholar 

  11. I. Dikin, “Iterative solution of problems of linear and quadratic programming”,Soviet Mathematics Doklady 8 (1967) 674–675.

    Google Scholar 

  12. R. Fletcher, “A nonlinear programming problem in statistics (educational testing),”SIAM Journal on Scientific and Statistical Computing 2 (1981) 257–267.

    Google Scholar 

  13. R. Fletcher, “Semidefinite matrix constraints in optimization,”SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization 23 (1985) 493–513.

    Google Scholar 

  14. R.M. Freund, “A potential-function reduction algorithm for solving a linear program directly from an infeasible warm start,”Mathematical Programming 52 (1991) 441–466.

    Google Scholar 

  15. J.D. Gardiner, A.J. Laub, J.J. Amato and C.B. Moler, “Solution of the Sylvester matrix equationAXB T+CXD T=E,”ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software 18 (1992) 223–231.

    Google Scholar 

  16. P.E. Gill, W. Murray, M.A. Saunders, J.A. Tomlin and M.H. Wright, “On projected Newton barrier methods for linear programming and an equivalence to Karmarkar's projective method,”Mathematical Programming Studies 36 (1986) 183–209.

    Google Scholar 

  17. D. Goldfarb and S. Mehrotra, “A relaxed version of Karmarkar's method,”Mathematical Programming 40 (1988) 289–315.

    Google Scholar 

  18. D. Goldfarb and S. Mehrotra, “A self-correcting version of Karmarkar's algorithm,”SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis 26 (1989) 1006–1015.

    Google Scholar 

  19. G. Golub and C. Van Loan,Matrix Computations (Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, Baltimore, MD, 1989).

    Google Scholar 

  20. G. Golub, S. Nash and C. Van Loan, “A Hessenberg-Schur method for the matrix problemAX+XB=C,”IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 24 (1979) 909–913.

    Google Scholar 

  21. C.C. Gonzaga, “Path-following methods for linear programming,”SIAM Review 34 (1992) 167–224.

    Google Scholar 

  22. C.C. Gonzaga and M.J. Todd, “An\(O(\sqrt n L)\)-iteration large-step primal-dual affine algorithm for linear programming,”SIAM Journal on Optimization 2 (1992) 349–359.

    Google Scholar 

  23. M. Grötschel, L. Lovász and A. Schrijver,Geometric Algorithms and Combinatorial Optimization, Algorithms and Combinatorics 2 (Springer, Berlin, 1988).

    Google Scholar 

  24. F. Jarre, “An interior-point method for minimizing the maximum eigenvalue of a linear combination of matrices,”SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization 31 (1993) 1360–1377.

    Google Scholar 

  25. K. Kim and J.L. Nazareth, “Implementation of a primal null-space affine scaling method and its extensions,” Technical Report, Department of Pure and Applied Mathematics, Washington State Univ., 1992.

  26. I.J. Lustig, “Feasibility issues in a primal-dual interior-point method for linear programming,”Mathematical Programming 49 (1991) 145–162.

    Google Scholar 

  27. S. Mehrotra, “Implementations of affine scaling methods: approximate solutions of systems of linear equations using preconditioned conjugate gradient methods,”ORSA Journal on Computing 4 (1992) 103–118.

    Google Scholar 

  28. R.D.C. Monteiro and I. Adler, “Interior path-following primal-dual algorithms. Part II; Convex quadratic programming,”Mathematical Programming 44 (1989) 43–66.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Yu. Nesterov and A. Nemirovsky,Optimization over Positive Semidefinite Matrices: Mathematical Background and User's Manual (USSR Acad. Sci. Center. Econ. & Math. Inst., Moscow, 1990).

    Google Scholar 

  30. Yu. Nesterov and A. Nemirovsky,Interior-point Polynomial Methods in Convex Programming, Studies in Applied Mathematics 13 (SIAM, Philadelphia, PA, 1994).

    Google Scholar 

  31. M. Overton, “On minimizing the maximum eigenvalue of a symmetric matrix,”SIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and Applications 9 (1988) 256–268.

    Google Scholar 

  32. M. Overton, “Large-scale optimization of eigenvalues,”SIAM Journal on Optimization 2 (1992) 88–120.

    Google Scholar 

  33. C.C. Paige and M.S. Saunders, “LSQR: An algorithm for sparse linear equations and sparse least squares,”ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software 8 (1982) 43–71.

    Google Scholar 

  34. J.-P. Vial, “Computational experience with a primal-dual interior-point method for smooth convex programming,” Technical Report, Département d'Économie Commerciale et Industrielle, Univ. Genève, 1992.

  35. G.A. Watson, “Algorithms for minimum trace factor analysis,”SIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and Applications 13 (1992) 1039–1053.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Y. Ye, “An O(n 3L) potential reduction algorithm for linear programming,”Mathematical Programming 50 (1991) 239–258.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departement Elektrotechniek, Afdeling ESAT, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, K. Mercierlaan 94, 3001, Leuven, Belgium

    Lieven Vandenberghe

  2. Information Systems Laboratory, Electrical Engineering Department, Stanford University, 94305, Stanford, CA, USA

    Stephen Boyd

Authors
  1. Lieven Vandenberghe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stephen Boyd
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Supported by the Belgian National Fund for Scientific Research (NFWO). Research supported in part by the Belgian program on Interuniversity Attraction Poles (IUAP 17 and 50) initiated by the Belgian State, Prime Minister's Office, Science Policy Programming.

Research supported in part by AFOSR (under F49620-92-J-0013), NSF (under ECS-9222391) and ARPA (under F49620-93-1-0085).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Vandenberghe, L., Boyd, S. A primal—dual potential reduction method for problems involving matrix inequalities. Mathematical Programming 69, 205–236 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01585558

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01585558

Keywords

Search

Navigation