# Global convergence in infeasible-interior-point algorithms

- 115 Downloads
- 32 Citations

## Abstract

This paper presents a wide class of globally convergent interior-point algorithms for the nonlinear complementarity problem with a continuously differentiable monotone mapping in terms of a unified global convergence theory given by Polak in 1971 for general nonlinear programs. The class of algorithms is characterized as: Move in a Newton direction for approximating a point on the path of centers of the complementarity problem at each iteration. Starting from a strictly positive but infeasible initial point, each algorithm in the class either generates an approximate solution with a given accuracy or provides us with information that the complementarity problem has no solution in a given bounded set. We present three typical examples of our interior-point algorithms, a horn neighborhood model, a constrained potential reduction model with the use of the standard potential function, and a pure potential reduction model with the use of a new potential function.

## Keywords

Monotone complementarity problem Interior-point algorithm Potential reduction algorithm Infeasibility Global convergence## Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

## References

- [1]R.W. Cottle, “Note on a fundamental theorem on quadratic programming,”
*SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics*12 (1964) 663–665.Google Scholar - [2]A.V. Fiacco and G.P. McCormick,
*Nonlinear Programming: Sequential Unconstrained Minimization Techniques*(John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1968).Google Scholar - [3]K.R. Frish, “The logarithmic potential method of convex programming,” Technical report, University Institute of Economics, Oslo, Norway, 1955.Google Scholar
- [4]O. Güler, “Existence of interior points and interior paths in nonlinear monotone complementarity problems,”
*Mathematics of Operations Research*18 (1993) 128–147.Google Scholar - [5]N. Karmarkar, “A new polynomial-time algorithm for linear programming,”
*Combinatorica*4 (1984) 373–395.Google Scholar - [6]M. Kojima, N. Megiddo and S. Mizuno, “A general framework of continuation methods for complementarity problems,”
*Mathematics of Operations Research*18 (1993) 945–963.Google Scholar - [7]M. Kojima, N. Megiddo and S. Mizuno, “A primal-dual infeasible-interior-point algorithm for linear programming,”
*Mathematical Programming*61 (1993) 263–280.Google Scholar - [8]M. Kojima, N. Megiddo and T. Noma, “Homotopy continuation methods for nonlinear complementarity problems,”
*Mathematics of Operations Research*16 (1991) 754–774.Google Scholar - [9]M. Kojima, N. Megiddo, T. Noma and A. Yoshise,
*A Unified Approach to Interior Point Algorithms for Linear Complementarity Problems*, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 538 (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1991).Google Scholar - [10]M. Kojima, N. Megiddo and Y. Ye, “An interior point potential reduction algorithm for the linear complementarity problem,”
*Mathematical Programming*54 (1992) 267–279.Google Scholar - [11]M. Kojima, S. Mizuno and A. Yoshise, “A primal-dual interior point algorithm for linear programming,” in: N. Megiddo, ed.,
*Progress in Mathematical Programming, Interior-Point and Related Methods*(Springer-Verlag, New York, 1989) 29–47.Google Scholar - [12]M. Kojima, S. Mizuno and A. Yoshise, “A polynomial-time algorithm for a class of linear complementary problems,”
*Mathematical Programming*44 (1989) 1–26.Google Scholar - [13]M. Kojima, S. Mizuno and A. Yoshise, “An O\((\sqrt {nL} )\) iteration potential reduction algorithm for linear complementarity problems,”
*Mathematical Programming*50 (1991) 331–342.Google Scholar - [14]M. Kojima, S. Mizuno and A. Yoshise, “A little theorem of the big
*ℳ*in interior point algorithms,”*Mathematical Programming*, 59 (1993) 361–375.Google Scholar - [15]K.O. Kortanek and J. Zhu, “A polynomial algorithm for convex programming problems satisfying a scaled Lipschitz condition,” Working Paper Series No. 90-17, Dept. of Management Sciences, College of Business Administration, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 52242, 1990.Google Scholar
- [16]I.J. Lustig, “Feasibility issues in a primal-dual interior-point method for linear programming,”
*Mathematical Programming*49 (1990/91) 145–162.Google Scholar - [17]L. McLinden, “The complementarity problem for maximal monotone multifunctions,” in: R.W. Cottle, F. Giannessi and J.L. Lions, eds.,
*Variational Inequalities and Complementarity Problems*(John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1980) 251–270.Google Scholar - [18]K. A. McShane, C.L. Monma and D.F. Shanno, “An implementation of a primal-dual interior point method for linear programming,”
*ORSA Journal on Computing*1 (1989) 70–83.Google Scholar - [19]N. Megiddo, “A monotone complementarity problem with feasible solutions but no complementary solutions,”
*Mathematical Programming*12 (1977) 131–132.Google Scholar - [20]N. Megiddo, “Pathways to the optimal set in linear programming,” in: N. Megiddo, ed.,
*Progress in Mathematical Programming, Interior-Point and Related Methods*, (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1989) 131–158.Google Scholar - [21]S. Mizuno, “Polynomiality of Kojima—Megiddo—Mizuno infeasible interior point algorithm for linear programming,” Technical report, The Institute of Statistical Mathematics, Minami-Azabu, Minato-ku, Tokyo, 106, Japan, 1992.Google Scholar
- [22]S. Mizuno, M. Kojima and M.J. Todd, “Infeasible-interior-point primal-dual potential-reduction algorithms for linear programming,”
*Siam Journal on Optimization*, to appear.Google Scholar - [23]S. Mizuno and A. Nagasawa, “A primal-dual affine scaling potential reduction algorithm for linear programming,”
*Mathematical Programming*62 (1993) 119–131.Google Scholar - [24]S. Mizuno, M.J. Todd and Y. Ye, “On adaptive-step primal-dual interior-point algorithms for linear programming,”
*Mathematics of Operations Research*18 (1993) 964–981.Google Scholar - [25]S. Mizuno, M.J. Todd and Y. Ye, “A surface of analytic centers and infeasible-interior-point algorithms for linear programming,” Technical Report, School of Operations Research and Industrial Engineering, Cornell University (Ithaca, NY 14853, December 1992).Google Scholar
- [26]R.D.C. Monteiro, “A globally convergent primal-dual interior point algorithm for convex programming,” Technical report, Systems and Industrial Engineering, University Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721, 1991.Google Scholar
- [27]R.D.C. Monteiro and I. Adler, “Interior path following primal-dual algorithms. Part I: linear programming,”
*Mathematical Programming*44 (1989) 27–41.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]R.D.C. Monteiro and I. Adler, “An extension of Karmarkar type algorithm to a class of convex separable programming problems with global linear rate of convergence,”
*Mathematics of Operations Research*15 (1990) 408–422.Google Scholar - [30]R.D.C. Monteiro and S.J. Wright, “A globally and superlinearly convergent potential reduction interior point method for convex programming,” Technical report, Systems and Industrial Engineering, University Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721, 1992.Google Scholar
- [31]J.J. More, Class of functions and feasibility conditions in nonlinear complementarity problem,
*Mathematical Programming*6 (1974) 327–338.Google Scholar - [32]T. Noma, “A globally convergent iterative algorithm for complementarity problems — a modification of interior point algorithms for linear complementarity problems —”, Dr. Thesis, Dept. of Systems Sciences, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Oh-Okayama, Meguro-ku, Tokyo 152, Japan, 1991.Google Scholar
- [33]E. Polak,
*Computational Methods in Optimization: Approach*(Academic Press, New York, 1971).Google Scholar - [34]F.A. Potra, “An infeasible interior-point predictor-corrector algorithm for linear programming,” Technical report, Dept. of Mathematics, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 52242, 1992.Google Scholar
- [35]F.A. Potra and Y. Ye, “Interior point methods for nonlinear complementarity problems,” Technical report, Dept. of Mathematics, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 52242, 1991.Google Scholar
- [36]J. Renegar, “Incorporating condition measures into the complexity theory of linear programming,” Technical report, School of Operations Research and Industrial Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853-3801, 1993.Google Scholar
- [37]G. Sonnevend, “An ‘analytical centre’ for polyhedrons and new classes of global algorithms for linear (smooth, convex) programming,” in:
*Lecture Notes in Control and Information Sciences 84*(Springer, New York, 1985) 866–876.Google Scholar - [38]K. Tanabe, “Complementarity-enforcing centered Newton method for mathematical programming,” in: K. Tone, ed.,
*New Methods for Linear Programming*(The Institute of Statistical Mathematics, Minamiazabu, Minato-ku, Tokyo 106, Japan, 1987) 118–144.Google Scholar - [39]K. Tanabe, “Centered Newton method for mathematical programming,” in: M. Iri and K. Yajima, eds,
*System Modelling and Optimization*(Springer-Verlag, New York, 1988) 197–206.Google Scholar - [40]M.J. Todd, “Projected scaled steepest descent in Kojima—Mizuno—Yoshise's potential reduction algorithm for the linear complementarity problem,” Technical Report No. 950, School of Operations Research and Industrial Engineering, College of Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853-3801, 1990.Google Scholar
- [41]M.J. Todd and Y. Ye, “A centered projective algorithm for linear programming,”
*Mathematics of Operations Research*15 (1990) 508–529.Google Scholar - [42]L. Tunçel, “Constant potential primal-dual algorithm: a framework,” Working Paper, School of Operations Research and Industrial Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853, July 1992.Google Scholar
- [43]Y. Ye and K. Anstreicher, “On quadratic and O\((\sqrt {nL} )\) convergence of a predictor- corrector algorithm for LCP,” Research Report, Dept. of Management Sciences, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242, November 1991.Google Scholar
- [44]Y. Ye, O. Güler, R.A. Tapia and Y. Zhang, “A quadratically convergent O\((\sqrt {nL} )\)-iteration algorithm for linear programming,” TR91-26, Dept. of Mathematical Sciences, Rice University, Houston, TX 77251-1892, August 1991.Google Scholar
- [45]Y. Ye, M.J. Todd and S. Mizuno, “An O\((\sqrt {nL} )\)-iteration homogeneous and self-dual linear programming algorithm,” Research Report, Dept. of Management Sciences, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242, June 1992.Google Scholar
- [46]W.I. Zangwill,
*Nonlinear Programming: A Unified Approach*(Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N. J., 1969).Google Scholar - [47]Y. Zhang, “On the convergence of an infeasible interior-point algorithm for linear programming and other problems,”
*Siam Journal on Optimization*, to appear.Google Scholar - [48]J. Zhu, “A path following algorithm for a class of convex programming problems,”
*Zeitschrift für Operations Research — Methods and Models of Operations Research*36 (1992) 539–577.Google Scholar