We study four measures of problem instance behavior that might account for the observed differences in interior-point method (IPM) iterations when these methods are used to solve semidefinite programming (SDP) problem instances: (i) an aggregate geometry measure related to the primal and dual feasible regions (aspect ratios) and norms of the optimal solutions, (ii) the (Renegar-) condition measure C(d) of the data instance, (iii) a measure of the near-absence of strict complementarity of the optimal solution, and (iv) the level of degeneracy of the optimal solution. We compute these measures for the SDPLIB suite problem instances and measure the sample correlation (CORR) between these measures and IPM iteration counts (solved using the software SDPT3) when these measures have finite values. Our conclusions are roughly as follows: the aggregate geometry measure is highly correlated with IPM iterations (CORR = 0.901), and provides a very good explanation of IPM iterations, particularly for problem instances with solutions of small norm and aspect ratio. The condition measure C(d) is also correlated with IPM iterations, but less so than the aggregate geometry measure (CORR = 0.630). The near-absence of strict complementarity is weakly correlated with IPM iterations (CORR = 0.423). The level of degeneracy of the optimal solution is essentially uncorrelated with IPM iterations.
Behavioral measure Condition number Degeneracy Complementarity Interior-point method Semi-definite programming
Mathematics Subject Classification (2000)
90-04 90C22 90C60 90C51
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Freund R.M., Vera J.R. (1999): Some characterizations and properties of the “distance to ill-posedness" and the condition measure of a conic linear system. Math. Program. 86(2): 225–260CrossRefMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
Freund R.M., Vera J.R. (2003): On the complexity of computing estimates of condition measures of a conic linear system. Math. Oper. Rese. 28(4): 625–648CrossRefMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
Kojima M., Shida M., Shindoh S. (1998): Local convergence of predictor–corrector infeasible-interior-point algorithms for sdps and sdlcps. Math. Program. 80(2): 129–160CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Lu Z., Monteiro R. (2005): Error bounds and limiting behavior of weighted paths associated with the sdp map X1/2SX1/2. SIAM J. Optim. 15(2): 348–374CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Luo Z.Q., Sturm J., Zhang S. (1998): Superlinear convergence of a symmetric primal-dual path following algorithm for semidefinite programming. SIAM J. Optim. 8(1): 59–81CrossRefMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
Ordóñez F., Freund R.M. (2003): Computational experience and the explanatory value of condition measures for linear optimization. SIAM J. Optim. 14(2): 307–333CrossRefMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar