Mathematical Programming

, Volume 8, Issue 1, pp 54–83 | Cite as

Analysis of mathematical programming problems prior to applying the simplex algorithm

  • A. L. Brearley
  • G. Mitra
  • H. P. Williams


Large practical linear and integer programming problems are not always presented in a form which is the most compact representation of the problem. Such problems are likely to posses generalized upper bound(GUB) and related structures which may be exploited by algorithms designed to solve them efficiently.

The steps of an algorithm which by repeated application reduces the rows, columns, and bounds in a problem matrix and leads to the freeing of some variables are first presented. The ‘unbounded solution’ and ‘no feasible solution’ conditions may also be detected by this. Computational results of applying this algorithm are presented and discussed.

An algorithm to detect structure is then described. This algorithm identifies sets of variables and the corresponding constraint relationships so that the total number of GUB-type constraints is maximized. Comparisons of computational results of applying different heuristics in this algorithm are presented and discussed.


Feasible Solution Mathematical Method Programming Problem Computational Result Mathematical Programming 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    APEX II, User Information Manual, 59158100 Rev. Control Data Corporation, Minneapolis, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    E. Balas, “An additive algorithm for solving linear programs with zero–one variables”,Operations Research 13 (1965) 517–546.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    E.M.I. Beale, “Advanced algorithmic features for general mathematical programming systems”, in: J. Abadie, ed., Integer and nonlinear programming (North Holland, Amsterdam, 1970) pp. 119–138.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    G.B. Dantzig and R.M. VanSlyke, “Generalized upper bounded techniques for linear programming”, I, II, Operations Research Centre, University of California, Berkeley, Calif., ORC 64-17, 18.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    J. Haldi, “25 integer programming test problems”, Working Paper No. 43, Graduate School of Business, Stanford University, Stanford, Calif. (1964).Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    A. Land and S. Powell, “FORTRAN codes for mathematical programming, linear, quadratic and discrete problems (Wiley, New York, 1973).Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Mathematical Programming System Extended (MPSX), Program Number 5734 XM4, IBM Trade Corporation, New York (1971).Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    G. Mitra, “A generalized row elimination algorithm for exclusive row structure problems”, ICL/DATASKIL Internal Rept. (1972).Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    S. Senju and Y. Toyoda, “An approach to linear programming with 0–1 variables”,Management Science (4) (1968) B196–B207.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    H.P. Williams, “Experiments in the formulation of integer programming problems”, to appear.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    F.P. Wyman, “Binary programming: a decision rule for selecting optimal vs heuristic techniques”,Computer Journal 16 (2) (1973) 135–140.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    G. Zoutendijk, “A product form algorithm using contracted transformation vectors”, in: J. Abadie, ed., Integer and nonlinear programming (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1970) pp. 511–523.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Mathematical Programming Society 1975

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. L. Brearley
    • 1
  • G. Mitra
    • 2
    • 3
  • H. P. Williams
    • 4
  1. 1.School of Industrial and Business StudiesUniversity of WarwickCoventryUK
  2. 2.Dept. of Statistics & Operational ResearchBrunel UniversityMiddlesexUK
  3. 3.UNICOM ConsultantsU.K. Ltd.UK
  4. 4.Dept. of Operational ResearchUniversity of SussexFalmer, BrightonUK

Personalised recommendations