Mathematical Programming

, Volume 173, Issue 1–2, pp 117–149 | Cite as

An extension of Chubanov’s algorithm to symmetric cones

  • Bruno F. LourençoEmail author
  • Tomonari Kitahara
  • Masakazu Muramatsu
  • Takashi Tsuchiya
Full Length Paper Series A


In this work we present an extension of Chubanov’s algorithm to the case of homogeneous feasibility problems over a symmetric cone \( {\mathcal {K}}\). As in Chubanov’s method for linear feasibility problems, the algorithm consists of a basic procedure and a step where the solutions are confined to the intersection of a half-space and \( {\mathcal {K}}\). Following an earlier work by Kitahara and Tsuchiya on second order cone feasibility problems, progress is measured through the volumes of those intersections: when they become sufficiently small, we know it is time to stop. We never have to explicitly compute the volumes, it is only necessary to keep track of the reductions between iterations. We show this is enough to obtain concrete upper bounds to the minimum eigenvalues of a scaled version of the original feasibility problem. Another distinguishing feature of our approach is the usage of a spectral norm that takes into account the way that \( {\mathcal {K}}\) is decomposed as simple cones. In several key cases, including semidefinite programming and second order cone programming, these norms make it possible to obtain better complexity bounds for the basic procedure when compared to a recent approach by Peña and Soheili. Finally, in the appendix, we present a translation of the algorithm to the homogeneous feasibility problem in semidefinite programming.


Symmetric cone Feasibility problem Chubanov’s method 

Mathematics Subject Classification

90C25 90C22 65K05 



We thank the referees for their helpful and insightful comments, which helped to improve the paper. This article benefited from an e-mail discussion with Prof. Javier Peña, which helped clarify some points regarding [23]. T. Kitahara is supported by Grant-in-Aid for Young Scientists (B) 15K15941. M. Muramatsu and T. Tsuchiya are supported in part with Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C) 26330025. M. Muramatsu is also partially supported by the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (B)26280005. T. Tsuchiya is also partially supported by the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (B)15H02968.

Supplementary material


  1. 1.
    Alizadeh, F., Goldfarb, D.: Second-order cone programming. Math. Program. 95(1), 3–51 (2003)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Basescu, V.L., Mitchell, J.E.: An analytic center cutting plane approach for conic programming. Math. Oper. Res. 33(3), 529–551 (2008)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chubanov, S.: A strongly polynomial algorithm for linear systems having a binary solution. Math. Program. 134(2), 533–570 (2012)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chubanov, S.: A polynomial projection algorithm for linear feasibility problems. Math. Program. 153(2), 687–713 (2015)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Faraut, J., Korányi, A.: Analysis on Symmetric Cones. Oxford Mathematical Monographs. Clarendon Press, Oxford (1994)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Faybusovich, L.: Euclidean Jordan algebras and interior-point algorithms. Positivity 1(4), 331–357 (1997)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Faybusovich, L.: A Jordan-algebraic approach to potential-reduction algorithms. Math. Z. 239(1), 117–129 (2002)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Faybusovich, L.: Several Jordan-algebraic aspects of optimization. Optimization 57(3), 379–393 (2008)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Goffin, J.-L., Vial, J.-P.: Convex nondifferentiable optimization: a survey focused on the analytic center cutting plane method. Optim. Methods Softw. 17(5), 805–867 (2002)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hirzerbruch, U.: Der min–max-satz von E. Fischer für formal-reelle Jordan-algebren. Math. Ann. 186, 65–69 (1970)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Karmarkar, N.: A new polynomial-time algorithm for linear programming. Combinatorica 4(4), 373–395 (1984)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Khachiyan, L.: Polynomial algorithms in linear programming. USSR Comput. Math. Math. Phys. 20(1), 53–72 (1980)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kitahara, T., Tsuchiya, T.: An extension of Chubanov’s polynomial-time linear programming algorithm to second-order cone programming. Optim. Methods Softw. (2017).
  14. 14.
    Li, D., Roos, K., Terlaky, T.: A polynomial column-wise rescaling von Neumann algorithm. Optimization Online. (June 2015)
  15. 15.
    Luo, Z., Sturm, J.F., Zhang, S.: Duality results for conic convex programming. Technical Report, Econometric Institute, Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands (1997)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Luo, Z.-Q., Sun, J.: A polynomial cutting surfaces algorithm for the convex feasibility problem defined by self-concordant inequalities. Comput. Optim. Appl. 15(2), 167–191 (2000)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Maxima: Maxima, a computer algebra system. Version 5.36.1. (2015)
  18. 18.
    Monteiro, R.D., Tsuchiya, T.: Polynomial convergence of primal-dual algorithms for the second-order cone program based on the MZ-family of directions. Math. Program. 88(1), 61–83 (2000)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Muramatsu, M.: On a commutative class of search directions for linear programming over symmetric cones. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 112(3), 595–625 (2002)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nemirovski, A.S., Todd, M.J.: Interior-point methods for optimization. Acta Numer. 17, 191–234 (2008)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Nesterov, Y., Nemirovskii, A.: Interior-Point Polynomial Algorithms in Convex Programming. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia (1994)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Oskoorouchi, M.R., Goffin, J.-L.: An interior point cutting plane method for the convex feasibility problem with second-order cone inequalities. Math. Oper. Res. 30(1), 127–149 (2005)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Peña, J., Soheili, N.: Solving conic systems via projection and rescaling. Mathematical Programming, e-prints (to appear) (Dec. 2015). arXiv:1512.06154
  24. 24.
    Rockafellar, R.T.: Convex Analysis. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1997)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Roos, K.: An improved version of Chubanov’s method for solving a homogeneous feasibility problem. Optimization Online. (2016)
  26. 26.
    Schmieta, S., Alizadeh, F.: Extension of primal-dual interior point algorithms to symmetric cones. Math. Program. 96(3), 409–438 (2003)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Soheili, N., Peña, J.: A smooth perceptron algorithm. SIAM J. Optim. 22(2), 728–737 (2012)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sturm, J.F.: Similarity and other spectral relations for symmetric cones. Linear Algebra Appl. 312(1–3), 135–154 (2000)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sun, J., Toh, K.-C., Zhao, G.: An analytic center cutting plane method for semidefinite feasibility problems. Math. Oper. Res. 27(2), 332–346 (2002)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Toh, K.-C., Zhao, G., Sun, J.: A multiple-cut analytic center cutting plane method for semidefinite feasibility problems. SIAM J. Optim. 12(4), 1126–1146 (2002)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Tsuchiya, T.: A convergence analysis of the scaling-invariant primal-dual path-following algorithms for second-order cone programming. Optim. Methods Softw. 11(1–4), 141–182 (1999)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany and Mathematical Optimization Society 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bruno F. Lourenço
    • 1
    Email author
  • Tomonari Kitahara
    • 2
  • Masakazu Muramatsu
    • 3
  • Takashi Tsuchiya
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Computer and Information Science, Faculty of Science and TechnologySeikei UniversityTokyoJapan
  2. 2.Graduate School of Decision Science and TechnologyTokyo Institute of TechnologyTokyoJapan
  3. 3.Department of Computer ScienceThe University of Electro-CommunicationsTokyoJapan
  4. 4.National Graduate Institute for Policy StudiesTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations