# Bilevel and multilevel programming: A bibliography review

- 2.2k Downloads
- 284 Citations

## Abstract

This paper contains a bibliography of all references central to bilevel and multilevel programming that the authors know of. It should be regarded as a dynamic and permanent contribution since all the new and appropriate references that are brought to our attention will be periodically added to this bibliography. Readers are invited to suggest such additions, as well as corrections or modifications, and to obtain a copy of the LaTeX and BibTeX files that constitute this manuscript, using the guidelines contained in this paper.

To classify some of the references in this bibliography a short overview of past and current research in bilevel and multilevel programming is included. For those who are interested in but unfamiliar with the references in this area, we hope that this bibliography facilitates and encourages their research.

## Key words

Bilevel (two level) three level and multilevel programming static Stackelberg problems hierarchical optimization minimax problems## Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

## References

- 1.E. Aiyoshi and K. Shimizu. Hierarchical decentralized systems and its new solution by a barrier method.
*IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics*, 11:444–449, 1981.Google Scholar - 2.E. Aiyoshi and K. Shimizu. A solution method for the static constrained Stackelberg problem via penalty method.
*IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control*, 29:1111–1114, 1984.Google Scholar - 3.F. Al-Khayyal, R. Horst, and P. Pardalos. Global optimization of concave functions subject to quadratic constraints: an application in nonlinear bilevel programming.
*Annals of Operations Research*, 34:125–147, 1992.Google Scholar - 4.G. Anandalingam. An analysis of information and incentives in bi-level programming. In
*IEEE 1985*Proceedings of the International Conference on Cybernetics and Society, pages 925–929, 1985.Google Scholar - 5.G. Anandalingam. A mathematical programming model of decentralized multi-level systems.
*Journal of the Operational Research Society*, 39:1021–1033, 1988.Google Scholar - 6.G. Anandalingam and V. Aprey. Multi-level programming and conflict resolution.
*European Journal of Operational Research*, 51:233–247, 1991.Google Scholar - 7.G. Anandalingam and T. Friesz. Hierarchical optimization: an introduction.
*Annals of Operations Research*, 34:1–11, 1992.Google Scholar - 8.G. Anandalingam, R. Mathieu, L. Pittard, and N. Sinha. Artificial intelligence based approaches for solving hierarchical optimization problems. In R. Sharda, B. Golden, E. Wasil, O. Balci and W. Stewart, editor,
*Impacts of Recent Computer Advances on Operations Research*, pages 289–301. Elsevier Science Publishing Co., Inc., 1983.Google Scholar - 9.G. Anandalingam and D. White. A solution method for the linear static Stackelberg problem using penalty functions.
*IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control*, 35:1170–1173, 1990.Google Scholar - 10.J. Bard. A grid search algorithm for the linear bilevel programming problem. In
*Proceedings of the 14th Annual Meeting of the American Institute for Decision Science*, pages 256–258, 1982.Google Scholar - 11.J. Bard. An algorithm for solving the general bilevel programming problem.
*Mathematics of Operations Research*, 8:260–272, 1983.Google Scholar - 12.J. Bard. Coordination of a multidivisional organization through two levels of management.
*OMEGA*, 11:457–468, 1983.Google Scholar - 13.J. Bard. An efficient point algorithm for a linear two-stage optimization problem.
*Operations Research*, 31:670–684, 1983.Google Scholar - 14.J. Bard. An investigation of the linear three level programming problem.
*IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics*, 14:711–717, 1984.Google Scholar - 15.J. Bard. Optimality conditions for the bilevel programming problem.
*Naval Research Logistics Quarterly*, 31:13–26, 1984.Google Scholar - 16.J. Bard. Geometric and algorithm developments for a hierarchical planning problem.
*European Journal of Operational Research*, 19:372–383, 1985.Google Scholar - 17.J. Bard. Convex two-level optimization.
*Mathematical Programming*, 40:15–27, 1988.Google Scholar - 18.J. Bard. Some properties of the bilevel programming problem.
*Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications*, 68:371–378, 1991. Technical Note.Google Scholar - 19.J. Bard and J. Falk. An explicit solution to the multi-level programming problem.
*Computers and Operations Research*, 9:77–100, 1982.Google Scholar - 20.J. Bard and J. Moore. A branch and bound algorithm for the bilevel programming problem.
*SIAM Journal on Scientific and Statistical Computing*, 11:281–292, 1990.Google Scholar - 21.J. Bard and J. Moore. An algorithm for the discrete bilevel programming problem.
*Naval Research Logistics*, 39:419–35, 1992.Google Scholar - 22.O. Ben-Ayed.
*Bilevel linear programming: analysis and application to the network design problem.*PhD thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1988.Google Scholar - 23.O. Ben-Ayed. A bilevel linear programming model applied to the Tunisian inter-regional network design problem.
*Revue Tunisienne d'Économie et de Gestion*, 5:235–279, 1990.Google Scholar - 24.O. Ben-Ayed. Bilevel linear programming.
*Computers and Operations Research*, 20:485–501, 1993.Google Scholar - 25.O. Ben-Ayed and C. Blair. Computational difficulties of bilevel linear programming.
*Operations Research*, 38:556–560, 1990.Google Scholar - 26.O. Ben-Ayed, C. Blair, D. Boyce, and L. LeBlanc. Construction of a real-world bilevel linear programming model of the highway design problem.
*Annals of Operations Research*, 34:219–254, 1992.Google Scholar - 27.O. Ben-Ayed, D. Boyce, and C. Blair. A general bilevel linear programming formulation of the network design problem.
*Transportation Research*, 22 B:311–318, 1988.Google Scholar - 28.H. Benson. On the structure and properties of a linear multilevel programming problem.
*Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications*, 60:353–373, 1989.Google Scholar - 29.Z. Bi.
*Numerical methods for bilevel programming problems.*PhD thesis, Department of Systems Design Engineering, University of Waterloo, 1992.Google Scholar - 30.Z. Bi and P. Calamai. Optimality conditions for a class of bilevel programming problems. Technical Report #191-O-191291, Department of Systems Design Engineering, University of Waterloo, 1991.Google Scholar
- 31.Z. Bi, P. Calamai, and A. Conn. An exact penalty function approach for the linear bilevel programming problem. Technical Report #167-O-310789, Department of Systems Design Engineering, University of Waterloo, 1989.Google Scholar
- 32.Z. Bi, P. Calamai, and A. Conn. An exact penalty function approach for the nonlinear bilevel programming problem. Technical Report #180-O-170591, Department of Systems Design Engineering, University of Waterloo, 1991.Google Scholar
- 33.W. Bialas and M. Karwan. Multilevel linear programming. Technical Report 78-1, Operations Research Program, State University of New York at Buffalo, 1978.Google Scholar
- 34.W. Bialas and M. Karwan. On two-level optimization.
*IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control*, 27:211–214, 1982.Google Scholar - 35.W. Bialas and M. Karwan. Two-level linear programming.
*Management Science*, 30:1004–1020, 1984.Google Scholar - 36.W. Bialas, M. Karwan, and J. Shaw. A parametric complementary pivot approach for two-level linear programming. Technical Report 80-2, Operations Research Program, State University of New York at Buffalo, 1980.Google Scholar
- 37.J. Bisschop, W. Candler, J. Duloy, and G. O'Mara. The indus basin model: a special application of two-level linear programming.
*Mathematical Programming Study*, 20:30–38, 1982.Google Scholar - 38.C. Blair. The computational complexity of multi-level linear programs.
*Annals of Operations Research*, 34:13–19, 1992.Google Scholar - 39.J. Bracken, J. Falk, and J. McGill. Equivalence of two mathematical programs with optimization problems in the constraints.
*Operations Research*, 22:1102–1104, 1974.Google Scholar - 40.J. Bracken and J. McGill. Mathematical programs with optimization problems in the constraints.
*Operations Research*, 21:37–44, 1973.Google Scholar - 41.J. Bracken and J. McGill. Defense applications of mathematical programs with optimization problems in the constraints.
*Operations Research*, 22:1086–1096, 1974.Google Scholar - 42.J. Bracken and J. McGill. A method for solving mathematical programs with nonlinear programs in the constraints.
*Operations Research*, 22:1097–1101, 1974.Google Scholar - 43.J. Bracken and J. McGill. Production and marketing decisions with multiple objectives in a competitive environment.
*Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications*, 24:449–458, 1978.Google Scholar - 44.P. Calamai and L. Vicente. Generating linear and linear-quadratic bilevel programming problems.
*SIAM Journal on Scientific and Statistical Computing*, 14:770–782, 1993.Google Scholar - 45.P. Calamai and L. Vicente. Algorithm 728: Fortran subroutines for generating quadratic bilevel programming problems.
*ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software*, 20:120–123, 1994.Google Scholar - 46.P. Calamai and L. Vicente. Generating quadratic bilevel programming problems.
*ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software*, 20:103–119, 1994.Google Scholar - 47.W. Candler. A linear bilevel programming algorithm: A comment.
*Computers and Operations Research*, 15:297–298, 1988.Google Scholar - 48.W. Candler, J. Fortuny-Amat, and B. McCarl. The potential role of multilevel programming in agricultural economics.
*American Journal of Agricultural Economics*, 63:521–531, 1981.Google Scholar - 49.W. Candler and R. Norton. Multilevel programming. Technical Report 20, World Bank Development Research Center, Washington D.C., 1977.Google Scholar
- 50.W. Candler and R. Norton. Multilevel programming and development policy. Technical Report 258, World Bank Staff, Washington D.C., 1977.Google Scholar
- 51.W. Candler and R. Townsley. A linear two-level programming problem.
*Computers and Operations Research*, 9:59–76, 1982.Google Scholar - 52.R. Cassidy, M. Kirby, and W. Raike. Efficient distribution of resources through three levels of government.
*Management Science*, 17:462–473, 1971.Google Scholar - 53.M. Cellis, J. Dennis, and R. Tapia. A trust region strategy for nonlinear equality constrained optimization. In
*Numerical Optimization 1984*, Proceedings 20, pages 71–82. SIAM, Philadelphia, 1985.Google Scholar - 54.Y. Chen.
*Bilevel programming problems: analysis, algorithms and applications.*PhD thesis, Université de Montréal, 1993.Google Scholar - 55.Y. Chen and M. Florian. The nonlinear bilevel programming problem: a general formulation and optimality conditions. Technical Report CRT-794, Centre de Recherche sur les Transports, 1991.Google Scholar
- 56.Y. Chen and M. Florian. On the geometry structure of linear bilevel programs: a dual approach. Technical Report CRT-867, Centre de Recherche sur les Transports, 1992.Google Scholar
- 57.Y. Chen and M. Florian. The nonlinear bilevel programming problem: formulations, regularity and optimality conditions. Technical Report CRT-794, Centre de Recherche sur les Transports, 1993.Google Scholar
- 58.Y. Chen, M. Florian, and S. Wu. A descent dual approach for linear bilevel programs. Technical Report CRT-866, Centre de Recherche sur les Transports, 1992.Google Scholar
- 59.P. Clarke and A. Westerberg. A note on the optimality conditions for the bilevel programming problem.
*Naval Research Logistics*, 35:413–418, 1988.Google Scholar - 60.S. Dempe. A simple algorithm for the linear bilevel programming problem.
*Optimization*, 18:373–385, 1987.Google Scholar - 61.S. Dempe. On one optimality condition for bilevel optimization.
*Vestnik Leningrad Gos. University*, pages 10–14, 1989. Serija I, in Russian, translation Vestnik Leningrad University, Math., 22:11–16, 1989.Google Scholar - 62.S. Dempe. A necessary and a sufficient optimality condition for bilevel programming problems.
*Optimization*, 25:341–354, 1992.Google Scholar - 63.S. Dempe. Optimality conditions for bilevel programming problems. In P. Kall, editor,
*System modelling and optimization, pages*17–24. Springer-Verlag, 1992.Google Scholar - 64.A. deSilva.
*Sensitivity formulas for nonlinear factorable programming and their application to the solution of an implicitly defined optimization model of US crude oil production.*PhD thesis, George Washington University, 1978.Google Scholar - 65.A. deSilva and G. McCormick. Implicitly defined optimization problems.
*Annals of Operations Research*, 34:107–124, 1992.Google Scholar - 66.Y. Dirickx and L. Jennegren.
*Systems analysis by multi-level methods: with applications to economics and management*. John Wiley, New York, 1979.Google Scholar - 67.T. Edmunds.
*Algorithms for nonlinear bilevel mathematical programs.*PhD thesis, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Texas at Austin, 1988.Google Scholar - 68.T. Edmunds and J. Bard. Algorithms for nonlinear bilevel mathematical programming.
*IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics*, 21:83–89, 1991.Google Scholar - 69.T. Edmunds and J. Bard. An algorithm for the mixed-integer nonlinear bilevel programming problem.
*Annals of Operations Research*, 34:149–162, 1992.Google Scholar - 70.M. Florian and Y. Chen. A bilevel programming approach to estimating O-D matrix by traffic counts. Technical Report CRT-750, Centre de Recherche sur les Transports, 1991.Google Scholar
- 71.M. Florian and Y. Chen. A coordinate descent method for bilevel O-D matrix estimation problems. Technical Report CRT-807, Centre de Recherche sur les Transports, 1993.Google Scholar
- 72.J. Fortuny-Amat and B. McCarl. A representation and economic interpretation of a two-level programming problem.
*Journal of the Operational Research Society*, 32:783–792, 1981.Google Scholar - 73.T. Friesz, C. Suwansirikul, and R. Tobin. Equilibrium decomposition optimization: a heuristic for the continuous equilibrium network design problem.
*Transportation Science*, 21:254–263, 1987.Google Scholar - 74.T. Friesz, R. Tobin, H. Cho, and N. Mehta. Sensitivity analysis based heuristic algorithms for mathematical programs with variational inequality constraints.
*Mathematical Programming*, 48:265–284, 1990.Google Scholar - 75.G. Gallo and A. Ülkücü. Bilinear programming: an exact algorithm.
*Mathematical Programming*, 12:173–194, 1977.Google Scholar - 76.P. Hansen, B. Jaumard, and G. Savard. New branch-and-bound rules for linear bilevel programming.
*SIAM Journal on Scientific and Statistical Computing*, 13:1194–1217, 1992.Google Scholar - 77.P. Harker and J.-S. Pang. Existence of optimal solutions to mathematical programs with equilibrium constraints.
*Operations Research Letters*, 7:61–64, 1988.Google Scholar - 78.A. Haurie, R. Loulou, and G. Savard. A two-level systems analysis model of power cogeneration under asymmetric pricing. Technical Report G-89-34, Groupe d'Études et de Recherche en Analyse des Décisions, 1989.Google Scholar
- 79.A. Haurie, G. Savard, and D. White. A note on: an efficient point algorithm for a linear two-stage optimization problem.
*Operations Research*, 38:553–555, 1990.Google Scholar - 80.B. Hobbs and S. Nelson. A nonlinear bilevel model for analysis of electric utility demand-side planning issues.
*Annals of Operations Research*, 34:255–274, 1992.Google Scholar - 81.Y. Ishizuka. Optimality conditions for quasi-differentiable programs with applications to two-level optimization.
*SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization*, 26:1388–1398, 1988.Google Scholar - 82.Y. Ishizuka and E. Aiyoshi. Double penalty method for bilevel optimization problems.
*Annals of Operations Research*, 34:73–88, 1992.Google Scholar - 83.R. Jan and M. Chern. Multi-level nonlinear integer programming. 1990. (Preprint from the Department of Computer and Information Science, National Chiao Tung University).Google Scholar
- 84.R. Jeroslow. The polynomial hierarchy and a simple model for competitive analysis.
*Mathematical Programming*, 32:146–164, 1985.Google Scholar - 85.J. Júdice and A. Faustino. The solution of the linear bilevel programming problem by using the linear complementarity problem.
*Investigação Operacional*, 8:77–95, 1988.Google Scholar - 86.J. Júdice and A. Faustino. A sequential LCP method for bilevel linear programming.
*Annals of Operations Research*, 34:89–106, 1992.Google Scholar - 87.J. Júdice and A. Faustino. The linear-quadratic bilevel programming problem.
*INFOR*, 32:87–98, 1994.Google Scholar - 88.T. Kim and S. Suh. Toward developing a national transportation planning model: a bilevel programming approach for Korea.
*Annals of Regional Science*, 22:65–80, 1988.Google Scholar - 89.M. Kocvara and J. Outrata. A nondifferentiable approach to the solution of optimum design problems with variational inequalities. In P. Kall, ed.,
*System Modelling and Optimization*, Lecture Notes in Control and Information Sciences 180, pages 364–373. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1992.Google Scholar - 90.M. Kocvara and J. Outrata. A numerical solution of two selected shape optimization problems. Technical Report DFG (German Scientific Foundation) Research Report 464, University of Bayreuth, 1993.Google Scholar
- 91.C. Kolstad. A review of the literature on bi-level mathematical programming. Technical Report LA-10284-MS, US-32, Los Alamos National Laboratory, 1985.Google Scholar
- 92.C. Kolstad and L. Lasdon. Derivative evaluation and computational experience with large bilevel mathematical programs.
*Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications*, 65:485–499, 1990.Google Scholar - 93.M. Labbé, P. Marcotte, and G. Savard. A bilevel model of taxation and its application to optimal highway policy. 1993. Preprint.Google Scholar
- 94.L. Leblanc and D. Boyce. A bilevel programming algorithm for exact solution of the network design problem with user-optimal flows.
*Transportation Research*, 20B:259–265, 1986.Google Scholar - 95.P. Loridan and J. Morgan. Approximate solutions for two-level optimization problems. In K. Hoffman, J. Hiriart-Urruty, C. Lamerachal and J. Zowe, editor,
*Trends in Mathematical Optimization, volume 84 of International Series of Numerical Mathematics*, pages 181–196. Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, 1988.Google Scholar - 96.P. Loridan and J. Morgan. A theoretical approximation scheme for Stackelberg problems.
*Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications*, 61:95-l10, 1989.Google Scholar - 97.P. Loridan and J. Morgan. ε-Regularized two-level optimization problems: approximation and existence results. In
*Optimization -Fifth French-German Conference*, Lecture Notes in Mathematics 1405, pages 99–113. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1989.Google Scholar - 98.P. Loridan and J. Morgan. New results on approximate solutions in two-level optimization.
*Optimization*, 20:819–836, 1989.Google Scholar - 99.P. Loridan and J. Morgan.
*Quasi convex lower level problem and applications in two level optimization, volume 345 of Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems*, pages 325–341. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1990.Google Scholar - 100.P. Luh, T.-S. Chang, and T. Ning. Three-level Stackelberg decision problems.
*IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control*, 29:280–282, 1984.Google Scholar - 101.Z.-Q. Luo, J.-S. Pang, and S. Wu. Exact penalty functions for mathematical programs and bilevel programs with analytic constraints. 1993. Preprint from the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, McMaster University.Google Scholar
- 102.P. Marcotte. Network optimization with continuous control parameters.
*Transportation Science*, 17:181–197, 1983.Google Scholar - 103.P. Marcotte. Network design problem with congestion effects: a case of bilevel programming.
*Mathematical Programming*, 34:142–162, 1986.Google Scholar - 104.P. Marcotte. A note on bilevel programming algorithm by LeBlanc and Boyce.
*Transportation Research*, 22 B:233–237, 1988.Google Scholar - 105.P. Marcotte and G. Marquis. Efficient implementation of heuristics for the continuous network design problem.
*Annals of Operations Research*, 34:163–176, 1992.Google Scholar - 106.P. Marcotte and G. Savard. A note on the pareto optimality of solutions to the linear bilevel programming problem.
*Computers and Operations Research*, 18:355–359, 1991.Google Scholar - 107.P. Marcotte and G. Savard. Novel approaches to the discrimination problem.
*ZOR — Methods and Models of Operations Research*, 36:517–545, 1992.Google Scholar - 108.P. Marcotte and D. Zhu. Exact and inexact penalty methods for the generalized bilevel programming problem. Technical Report CRT-920, Centre de Recherche sur les Transports, 1992.Google Scholar
- 109.R. Mathieu, L. Pittard, and G. Anandalingam. Genetic algorithm based approach to bi-level linear programming.
*RAIRO: Recherche Operationelle*, (forthcoming).Google Scholar - 110.M. Mesanovic, D. Macko, and Y. Takahara.
*Theory of hierarchical, multilevel systems*. Academic Press, New York and London, 1970.Google Scholar - 111.T. Miller, T. Friesz, and R. Tobin. Heuristic algorithms for delivered price spatially competitive network facility location problems.
*Annals of Operations Research*, 34:177–202, 1992.Google Scholar - 112.J. Moore.
*Extensions to the multilevel linear programming problem*. PhD thesis, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Texas, Austin, 1988.Google Scholar - 113.J. Moore and J. Bard. The mixed integer linear bilevel programming problem.
*Operations Research*, 38:911–921, 1990.Google Scholar - 114.S. Narula and A. Nwosu. A dynamic programming solution for the hierarchical linear programming problem. Technical Report 37–82, Department of Operations Research and Statistics, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, 1982.Google Scholar
- 115.S. Narula and A. Nwosu. Two-level hierarchical programming problems. In P. Hansen, editor,
*Essays and surveys on multiple criteria decision making*, pages 290–299. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1983.Google Scholar - 116.S. Narula and A. Nwosu. An algorithm to solve a two-level resource control pre-emptive hierarchical programming problem. In P. Serafini, editor,
*Mathematics of multiple-objective programming*. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1985.Google Scholar - 117.P. Neittaanmäki and A. Stachurski. Solving some optimal control problems using the barrier penalty function method. In H.-J. Sebastian and K. Tammer, editors,
*Proceedings of the 14th 1F1P Conference on System Modelling and Optimization, Leipzig 1989*, pages 358–367. Springer, 1990.Google Scholar - 118.A. Nwosu.
*Pre-emptive hierarchical programming problem: a decentralized decision model.*PhD thesis, Department of Operations Research and Statistics, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, 1983.Google Scholar - 119.H. Önal. Computational experience with a mixed solution method for bilevel linear/quadratic programs. 1992. (Preprint from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign).Google Scholar
- 120.H. Önal. A modified simplex approach for solving bilevel linear programming problems.
*European Journal of Operational Research*, 67:126–135, 1993.Google Scholar - 121.J. Outrata. On the numerical solution of a class of Stackelberg problems.
*ZOR-Methods and Models of Operations Research*, 34:255–277, 1990.Google Scholar - 122.J. Outrata. Necessary optimality conditions for Stackelberg problems.
*Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications*, 76:305–320, 1993.Google Scholar - 123.J. Outrata. On optimization problems with variational inequality constraints.
*SIAM Journal on Optimization*, (forthcoming).Google Scholar - 124.J. Outrata and J. Zowe. A numerical approach to optimization problems with variational inequality constraints. Technical Report DFG (German Scientific Foundation) Research Report 463, University of Bayreuth, 1993.Google Scholar
- 125.G. Papavassilopoulos. Algorithms for static Stackelberg games with linear costs and polyhedral constraints. In
*Proceedings of the 21st IEEE Conference on Decisions and Control*, pages 647–652, 1982.Google Scholar - 126.F. Parraga.
*Hierarchical programming and applications to economic policy.*PhD thesis, Systems and Industrial Engineering Department, University of Arizona, 1981.Google Scholar - 127.G. Savard.
*Contributions à la programmation mathématique deux niveaux.*PhD thesis, École Polytechnique, Université de Montréal, 1989.Google Scholar - 128.G. Savard and J. Gauvin. The steepest descent direction for the nonlinear bilevel programming problem. Technical Report G-90-37, Groupe d'Études et de Recherche en Analyse des Décisions, 1990.Google Scholar
- 129.G. Schenk. A multilevel programming model for determining regional effluent charges. Master's thesis, Department of Industrial Engineering, State University of New York at Buffalo, 1980.Google Scholar
- 130.R. Segall. Bi-level geometric programming: a new optimization model. 1989. (Preprint from the Department of Mathematics, University of Lowell Olsen Hall).Google Scholar
- 131.J. Shaw. A parametric complementary pivot approach to multilevel programming. Master's thesis, Department of Industrial Engineering, State University of New York at Buffalo, 1980.Google Scholar
- 132.H. Sherali. A multiple leader Stackelberg model and analysis.
*Operations Research*, 32:390–404, 1984.Google Scholar - 133.K. Shimizu.
*Two-level decision problems and their new solution methods by a penalty method*, volume 2 of*Control science and technology for the progress of society*, pages 1303–1308. IFAC, 1982.Google Scholar - 134.K. Shimizu and E. Aiyoshi. A new computational method for Stackelberg and min-max problems by use of a penalty method.
*IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control*, 26:460–466, 1981.Google Scholar - 135.K. Shimizu and E. Aiyoshi. Optimality conditions and algorithms for parameter design problems with two-level structure.
*IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control*, 30:986–993, 1985.Google Scholar - 136.M. Simaan. Stackelberg optimization of two-level systems.
*IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics*, 7:554–557, 1977.Google Scholar - 137.H. Stackelberg.
*The theory of the market economy.*Oxford University Press, 1952.Google Scholar - 138.S. Suh and T. Kim. Solving nonlinear bilevel programming models of the equilibrium network design problem: a comparative review.
*Annals of Operations Research*, 34:203–218, 1992.Google Scholar - 139.C. Suwansirikul, T. Friesz, and R. Tobin. Equilibrium decomposed optimization: a heuristic for the continuous equilibrium network design problem.
*Transportation Science*, 21:254–263, 1987.Google Scholar - 140.T. Tanino and T. Ogawa. An algorithm for solving two-level convex optimization problems.
*International Journal of Systems Science*, 15:163–174, 1984.Google Scholar - 141.R. Tobin and T. Friesz. Spatial competition facility location models: definition, formulation and solution approach.
*Annals of Operations Research*, 6:49–74, 1986.Google Scholar - 142.H. Tuy, A. Migdalas, and P. Värbrand. A global optimization approach for the linear two-level program.
*Journal of Global Optimization*, 3:1–23, 1993.Google Scholar - 143.G. Ünlü. A linear bilevel programming algorithm based on bicriteria programming.
*Computers and Operations Research*, 14:173–179, 1987.Google Scholar - 144.L. Vicente. Bilevel programming. Master's thesis, Department of Mathematics, University of Coimbra, 1992. Written in Portuguese.Google Scholar
- 145.L. Vicente and P. Calamai. Geometry and local optimality conditions for bilevel programs with quadratic strictly convex lower levels. Technical Report #198-O-150294, Department of Systems Design Engineering, University of Waterloo, 1994.Google Scholar
- 146.L. Vicente, G. Savard, and J. Júdice. Descent approaches for quadratic bilevel programming.
*Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications*, (forthcoming).Google Scholar - 147.U. Wen.
*Mathematical methods for multilevel linear programming*. PhD thesis, Department of Industrial Engineering, State University of New York at Buffalo, 1981.Google Scholar - 148.U. Wen. The “Kth-Best” algorithm for multilevel programming. 1981. (Preprint from the Department of Operations Research, State University of New York at Buffalo).Google Scholar
- 149.U. Wen. A solution procedure for the resource control problem in two-level hierarchical decision processes.
*Journal of Chinese Institute of Engineers*, 6:91–97, 1983.Google Scholar - 150.U. Wen and W. Bialas. The hybrid algorithm for solving the three-level linear programming problem.
*Computers and Operations Research*, 13:367–377, 1986.Google Scholar - 151.U. Wen and S. Hsu. A note on a linear bilevel programming algorithm based on bicriteria programming.
*Computers and Operations Research*, 16:79–83, 1989.Google Scholar - 152.U. Wen and S. Hsu. Efficient solutions for the linear bilevel programming problem.
*European Journal of Operational Research*, 62:354–362, 1991.Google Scholar - 153.U. Wen and S. Hsu. Linear bi-level programming problems — a review.
*Journal of the Operational Research Society*, 42:125–133, 1991.Google Scholar - 154.U. Wen and Y. Yang. Algorithms for solving the mixed integer two-level linear programming problem.
*Computers and Operations Research*, 17:133–142, 1990.Google Scholar - 155.D. White and G. Anandalingam. A penalty function approach for solving bi-level linear programs.
*Journal of Global Optimization*, 3:397–419, 1993.Google Scholar - 156.S. Wu, P. Marcotte, and Y. Chen. A cutting plane method for linear bilevel programs. 1993. (Preprint from the Centre de Research sur les Transports).Google Scholar
- 157.J. Ye and D. Zhu. Optimality conditions for bilevel programming problems. Technical Report DMS-618-IR, Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Victoria, 1993. 1992, Revised 1993.Google Scholar
- 158.J. Ye, D. Zhu, and Q. Zhu. Generalized bilevel programming problems. Technical Report DMS-646-IR, Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Victoria, 1993.Google Scholar