# An interior point potential reduction method for constrained equations

- Received:
- Revised:

## Abstract

We study the problem of solving a constrained system of nonlinear equations by a combination of the classical damped Newton method for (unconstrained) smooth equations and the recent interior point potential reduction methods for linear programs, linear and nonlinear complementarity problems. In general, constrained equations provide a unified formulation for many mathematical programming problems, including complementarity problems of various kinds and the Karush-Kuhn-Tucker systems of variational inequalities and nonlinear programs. Combining ideas from the damped Newton and interior point methods, we present an iterative algorithm for solving a constrained system of equations and investigate its convergence properties. Specialization of the algorithm and its convergence analysis to complementarity problems of various kinds and the Karush-Kuhn-Tucker systems of variational inequalities are discussed in detail. We also report the computational results of the implementation of the algorithm for solving several classes of convex programs.

### Keywords

Constrained equations Interior point methods Potential reduction Complementarity problem Variational inequality Convex programs## Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

### References

- [1]A. Ambrosetti and G. Prodi,
*A Primer of Nonlinear Analysis*(Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1993).Google Scholar - [2]D. Bayer and J. C. Lagarias, “The nonlinear geometry of linear programming I: Affine and projective trajectories,”
*Transactions of the American Mathematical Society*314 (1989) 499–526.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [3]D. Bayer and J. C. Lagarias, “The nonlinear geometry of linear programming II: Legendre transform coordinates and central trajectories,”
*Transactions of the American Mathematical Society*314 (1989) 527–581.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [4]J. F. Bonnans and C. C. Gonzaga, “Convergence of interior point algorithms for the monotone linear complementarity problem,” manuscript, INRIA, Rocquencourt (1993).Google Scholar
- [5]R. S. Dembo, “A set of geometric programming test problems and their solutions,”
*Mathematical Programming*10 (1976) 192–213.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [6]J. E. Dennis Jr. and R. B. Schnabel,
*Numerical Methods for Unconstrained Optimization and Nonlinear Equations*(Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1983).MATHGoogle Scholar - [7]J. Dongarra, J. R. Bunch, C. B. Moler and G. W. Stewart,
*LINPACK Users Guide*(SIAM, Philadelphia, CA, 1978).Google Scholar - [8]A. V. Fiacco and A. Ghaemi, “Sensitivity analysis of a nonlinear water pollution control model using an upper Hudson River data base,”
*Operations Research*30 (1982) 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [9]A. V. Fiacco and A. Ghaemi, “A sensitivity and parametric bound analysis of an electric power generator GP model: optimal steam turbine exhaust annulus and condenser sizes,” Serial T-437 (Department of Operations Research, The George Washington University, 1981).Google Scholar
- [10]A. V. Fiacco and G. McCormick,
*Nonlinear Programming: Sequential Unconstrained Minimization Techniques*(Wiley, New York, 1968) reprinted: SIAM Classics in Applied Mathematics, Vol. 4 (SIAM, Philadelphia, PA, 1990).MATHGoogle Scholar - [11]K. R. Frisch, “The logarithmic potential method of convex programming,” Technical report, University Institute of Economics, Oslo, Norway (1955).Google Scholar
- [12]C. Gonzaga, “An algorithm for solving linear programming problems in O(
*n*^{3}*L*) operations, in: N. Megiddo, ed.,*Progress in Mathematical Programming—Interior Point and Related Methods*(Springer, Berlin, 1989) pp. 1–28.Google Scholar - [13]C. Gonzaga, “Path-following methods for linear programming,”
*SIAM Review*34 (1992) 167–224.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [14]N.I.M. Gould, “An algorithm for large-scale quadratic programming,”
*IMA Journal of Numerical Analysis*11 (1991) 299–324.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [15]W. Hock and K. Schittkowski,
*Test Examples for Nonlinear Programming Codes*(Springer, Berlin, 1981).MATHGoogle Scholar - [16]A. J. Hoffman, “On approximate solutions of systems of linear inequalities,”
*Journal of Research of the National Bureau of Standards*49 (1952) 263–265.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [17]J. Ji, F. Potra, R. A. Tapia and Y. Zhang, “An interior-point method with polynomial complexity and superlinear convergence of linear complementarity problems,” Technical report 91-23, Department of Mathematical Sciences, Rice University (1991).Google Scholar
- [18]N. Karmarkar, “A new polynomial algorithm for linear programming,”
*Combinatorica*4 (1984) 373–395.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [19]M. Kojima, N. Megiddo and S. Mizuno, “A primal-dual infeasible-interior-point algorithm for linear programming,”
*Mathematical Programming*61 (1993) 263–280.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [20]M. Kojima, N. Megiddo, T. Noma “Homotopy continuation methods for nonlinear complementarity problems,”
*Mathematics of Operations Research*16 (1991) 754–774.MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [21]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 Vol. 538 (Springer, Berlin, 1991).Google Scholar - [22]M. Kojima, N. Megiddo and Y. Ye, “An interior point potential reduction algorithm for the linear complementarity problem,”
*Mathematical Programming*54 (1992) 267–279.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [23]M. Kojima, S. Mizuno and A. Yoshise, A primal-dual interior-point method for linear programming, in: N. Megiddo, ed.,
*Progress in Mathematical Programming—Interior Point and Related Methods*(Springer, Berlin, 1989) 29–47.Google Scholar - [24]M. Kojima, S. Mizuno and A. Yoshise, “An\(O(\sqrt n L)\) iteration potential reduction algorithm for linear complementarity problems,”
*Mathematical Programming*50 (1991) 331–342.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [25]M. Kojima, T. Noma and A. Yoshise, “Global convergence in infeasible interior-point algorithms,”
*Mathematical Programming*65 (1994) 43–72.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [26]K. O. Kortanek and H. No, “A second order affine scaling algorithm for the geometric programming dual with logarithmic barrier,”
*Optimization*23 (1992) 303–322.MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [27]I. J. Lustig, “Feasibility issues in a primal-dual interior-point method for linear programming,”
*Mathematical Programming*49 (1990/1991) 145–162.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [28]I.J. Lustig, R. Marsten and D. Shanno, “An implementation of a primal-dual interior point method for linear programming,”
*Linear Algebra and its Applications*152(1991) 191–222.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [29]I. J. Lustig, R. Marsten and D. Shanno, “Interior point methods for linear programming: Computational state of the art,”
*ORSA Journal on Computing*6 (1994) 1–14.MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [30]O. L. Mangasarian and J. S. Pang, “The extended linear complementarity problem,”
*SIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and Applications*, to appear.Google Scholar - [31]L. McLinden, “The complementarity problem for maximal monotone multifunction,” in: R. W. Cottle, F. Giannessi and J. L. Lions, eds.,
*Variational Inequalities and Complementarity Problems*(Wiley, New York, 1980) 251–270.Google Scholar - [32]N. Megiddo, “Pathways to the optimal set in linear programming,” in: N. Megiddo, ed.,
*Progress in Mathematical Programming—Interior Point and Related Methods*, (Springer, Berlin, 1989) 131–158.Google Scholar - [33]S. Mizuno and M.J. Todd, “An O(
*n*^{3}*L*) long step path following algorithm for a linear complementarity problem,” Technical report No. 23, Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Tokyo Institute of Technology (1989).Google Scholar - [34]R.D.C. Monteiro, “A globally convergent primal-dual interior point algorithm for convex programming”,
*Mathematical Programming*64 (1994) 123–147.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [35]R.D.C. Monteiro and I. Adler, “Interior path following primal-dual algorithms. Part I: linear programming,”
*Mathematical Programming*44 (1989) 27–41.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [36]R. D. C. Monteiro and J. S. Pang, “Properties of an interior point mapping for mixed complementarity problems,”
*Mathematics of Operations Research*, to appear.Google Scholar - [37]R. D. C. Monteiro, J. S. Pang and T. Wang, “A positive algorithm for the nonlinear complementarity problem,”
*SIAM Journal on Optimization*5 (1995) 129–148.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [38]R. D. C. Monteiro and T. Tsuchiya, “Limiting behavior of the derivatives of certain trajectory associated with a monotone horizontal linear complementarity problem,” manuscript, Department of Systems and Industrial Engineering, University of Arizona (1992).Google Scholar
- [39]Y. E. Nesterov and A. S. Nemirovsky,
*Interior Point Polynomial Methods in Convex Programming: Theory and Algorithms*(SIAM, Philadelphia, PA, 1994).Google Scholar - [40]J. M. Ortega and W. C. Rheinboldt,
*Iterative Solution of Nonlinear Equations in Several Variables*(Academic Press, San Diego, CA, 1970).MATHGoogle Scholar - [41]J. S. Pang, “Complementarity problems,” in: P. Pardalos and R. Horst, eds.,
*Handbook of Global Optimization*(Kluwer, 1995) 271–338.Google Scholar - [42]F. A. Potra, “An infeasible interior-point predictor-corrector algorithm for linear programming,”
*SIAM Journal on Optimization*, to appear.Google Scholar - [43]F. A. Potra and Y. Ye, “Interior point methods for nonlinear complementarity problems,”
*Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications*to appear.Google Scholar - [44]J. Renegar, A polynomial-time algorithm based on Newton's method for linear programming,
*Mathematical Programming*40 (1988) 59–94.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [45]M. J. Rijckaert and X. M. Martens, “Comparison of generalized geometric programming algorithms,” in: M. Avriel, ed.,
*Advances in Geometric Programming*(Plenum, New York, 1980) 283–320.Google Scholar - [46]R. T. Rockafellar,
*Convex Analysis*(Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1970).MATHGoogle Scholar - [47]G. Sonnevend, “An “analytical centre” for polyhedrons and new class of global algorithms for linear (smooth, convex) programming,” in: Lecture Notes in Control and Information Sciences, Vol. 84 (Springer, New York, 1985) pp. 866–876.Google Scholar
- [48]M. J. Todd, “Theory and practice for interior-point methods,”
*ORSA Journal on Computing*6 (1994) 28–31.MATHGoogle Scholar - [49]M. J. Todd and Y. Ye, “A centered projective algorithm for linear programming,”
*Mathematics of Operations Research*15 (1990) 508–529.MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [50]J. C. Trinkle, J. S. Pang, S. Sudarsky and G. Lo, “On dynamic multi-rigid-body contact problems with Coulomb friction,” manuscript. Department of Mathematical Sciences, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD (1995).Google Scholar
- [51]R. J. Vanderbei, “Symmetric quasidefinite matrices,”
*SIAM Journal on Optimization*5 (1995) 100–113.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [52]J.-P. Vial, “Computational experience with a primal-dual interior-point method for smooth convex programming,” University of Geneva (1992).Google Scholar
- [53]S. Wright, “An infeasible interior point algorithm for linear complementarity problems,” Technical report MCS-P331-1092, Mathematics and Computer Science Division, Argonne National Laboratory (1992).Google Scholar
- [54]S. Wright and D. Ralph, “A superlinear infeasible interior point algorithm for monotone nonlinear complementarity problems,” Technical report MCS-P344-1292, Mathematics and Computer Science Division, Argonne National Laboratory (1993).Google Scholar
- [55]Y. Ye, “An O(
*n*^{3}*L*) potential reduction algorithm for linear programming,”*Mathematical Programming*50 (1991) 239–258.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [56]Y. Ye, “A fully polynomial-time approximation algorithm for computing a stationary point of the general linear complementarity problem,”
*Mathematics of Operations Research*18 (1993) 334–345.MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [57]Y. Ye and K. Anstreicher, “On quadratic and\(O(\sqrt n L)\) convergence of a predictor-corrector algorithm for LCP,”
*Mathematical Programming*62 (1993) 537–551.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [58]Y. Ye and P. Pardalos, “A class of linear complementarity problems solvable in polynomial time,”
*Linear Algebra and its Applications*152 (1991) 3–17.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [59]Y. Zhang, “On the convergence of an infeasible interior-point algorithm for linear programming and other problems,”
*SIAM Journal on Optimization*4 (1994) 208–227.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - [60]Y. Zhang, R. Tapia and F. Potra, “On the superlinear convergence of interior point algorithms for a general class of problems,”
*SIAM Journal on Optimization*3 (1993) 413–422.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar