Mathematical Programming

, Volume 147, Issue 1–2, pp 171–206 | Cite as

Trust-region problems with linear inequality constraints: exact SDP relaxation, global optimality and robust optimization

  • V. JeyakumarEmail author
  • G. Y. Li
Full Length Paper Series A


The trust-region problem, which minimizes a nonconvex quadratic function over a ball, is a key subproblem in trust-region methods for solving nonlinear optimization problems. It enjoys many attractive properties such as an exact semi-definite linear programming relaxation (SDP-relaxation) and strong duality. Unfortunately, such properties do not, in general, hold for an extended trust-region problem having extra linear constraints. This paper shows that two useful and powerful features of the classical trust-region problem continue to hold for an extended trust-region problem with linear inequality constraints under a new dimension condition. First, we establish that the class of extended trust-region problems has an exact SDP-relaxation, which holds without the Slater constraint qualification. This is achieved by proving that a system of quadratic and affine functions involved in the model satisfies a range-convexity whenever the dimension condition is fulfilled. Second, we show that the dimension condition together with the Slater condition ensures that a set of combined first and second-order Lagrange multiplier conditions is necessary and sufficient for global optimality of the extended trust-region problem and consequently for strong duality. Through simple examples we also provide an insightful account of our development from SDP-relaxation to strong duality. Finally, we show that the dimension condition is easily satisfied for the extended trust-region model that arises from the reformulation of a robust least squares problem (LSP) as well as a robust second order cone programming model problem (SOCP) as an equivalent semi-definite linear programming problem. This leads us to conclude that, under mild assumptions, solving a robust LSP or SOCP under matrix-norm uncertainty or polyhedral uncertainty is equivalent to solving a semi-definite linear programming problem and so, their solutions can be validated in polynomial time.

Mathematics Subject Classification

90C20 90C22 90C26 49N30 


  1. 1.
    Alizadeh, F., Goldfarb, D.: Second-order cone programming. Math. Program. Ser. B 95, 351–370 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Burer, S., Anstreicher, K.M.: Second-order cone constraints for extended trust-region problems. Preprint, Optimization online, March (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Beck, A., Eldar, Y.C.: Strong duality in nonconvex quadratic optimization with two quadratic constraints. SIAM J. Optim. 17, 844–860 (2006)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Beck, A.: Convexity properties associated with nonconvex quadratic matrix functions and applications to quadratic programming. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 142, 1–29 (2009)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ben-Tal, A., Nemirovski, A.: Lectures on Modern Convex Optimization: Analysis, Algorithms and Engineering Applications. SIAM-MPS, Philadelphia (2000)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ben-Tal, A., Ghaoui, L.E., Nemirovski, A.: Robust Optimization. Princeton Series in Applied Mathematics (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ben-Tal, A., Nemirovski, A., Roos, C.: Robust solutions of uncertain quadratic and conic quadratic problems. SIAM J. Optim. 13(2), 535–560 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bertsimas, D., Brown, D., Caramanis, C.: Theory and applications of robust optimization. SIAM Rev. 53, 464–501 (2011)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bertsimas, D., Pachamanova, D., Sim, M.: Robust linear optimization under general norms. Oper. Res. Lett. 32, 510–516 (2004)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Conn, A.R., Gould, N.I.M., Toint, P.L.: Trust-Region Methods. MPS-SIAM Series in Optimization, SIAM, Philadelphia, PA (2000)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dines, L.L.: On the mapping of quadratic forms. Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 47, 494–498 (1941)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fradkov, A.L., Yakubovich, V.A.: The S-procedure and duality relations in nonconvex problems of quadratic programming. Leningrad, Russia. Vestn. Leningr. Univ. 6, 101–109 (1979)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    El Ghaoui, L., Lebret, H.: Robust solution to least-squares problems with uncertain data. SIAM J. Matrix Anal. Appl. 18(4), 1035–1064 (1997)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jeyakumar, V., Lee, G.M., Li, G.Y.: Alternative theorems for quadratic inequality systems and global quadratic optimization. SIAM J. Optim. 20(2), 983–1001 (2009)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jeyakumar, V., Li, G.: Strong duality in robust convex programming: complete characterizations. SIAM J. Optim. 20, 3384–3407 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jeyakumar, V., Li, G.: Exact SDP Relaxations for classes of nonlinear semidefinite programming problems. Oper. Res. Lett. (2012). doi: 10.1016/j.orl.2012.09.006
  17. 17.
    Jeyakumar, V., Huy, N.Q., Li, G.: Necessary and sufficient conditions for S-lemma and nonconvex quadratic optimization. Optim. Eng. 10, 491–503 (2009)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jeyakumar, V., Li, G.: A robust von-Neumann minimax theorem for zero-sum games under bounded payoff uncertainty. Oper. Res. Lett. 39(2), 109–114 (2011)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jeyakumar, V., Rubinov, A.M., Wu, Z.Y.: Non-convex quadratic minimization problems with quadratic constraints: global optimality conditions. Math. Program. Ser. A 110, 521–541 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jeyakumar, V., Wolkowicz, H.: Zero duality gaps in infinite-dimensional programming. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 67, 87–108 (1990)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    More, J.J.: Generalizations of the trust region subproblem. Optim. Methods Softw. 2, 189–209 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pardalos, P., Romeijn, H.: Handbook in Global Optimization, vol. 2. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Peng, J.M., Yuan, Y.X.: Optimality conditions for the minimization of a quadratic with two quadratic constraints. SIAM J. Optim. 7, 579–594 (1997)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pólik, I., Terlaky, T.: A survey of the S-Lemma. SIAM Rev. 49, 371–418 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Polyak, B.T.: Convexity of quadratic transformation and its use in control and optimization. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 99, 563–583 (1998)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Powell, M.J.D., Yuan, Y.: A trust region algorithm for equality constrained optimization. Math. Program. 49(91), 189–211 (1990)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Stern, R.J., Wolkowicz, H.: Indefinite trust region subproblems and nonsymmetric eigenvalue perturbations. SIAM J. Optim. 5, 286–313 (1995)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sturm, J.F., Zhang, S.Z.: On cones of nonnegative quadratic functions. Math. Oper. Res. 28, 246–267 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Yakubovich, Y.A.: The S-procedure in nonlinear control theory. Vestn. Leningr. Univ. 4(1), 62–77 (1971)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ye, Y.Y., Zhang, S.Z.: New results of quadratic minimization. SIAM J. Optim. 14, 245–267 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Yuan, Y.X.: On a subproblem of trust region algorithms for constrained optimization. Math. Program. 47, 53–63 (1990)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg and Mathematical Optimization Society 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Applied MathematicsUniversity of New South WalesSydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations