Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Unified complexity analysis for Newton LP methods

  • Published:
Mathematical Programming Submit manuscript

Abstract

We show that a theorem of Smale can be used to unify the polynomial-time bound proofs of several of the recent interior algorithms for linear programming and convex quadratic programming.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. D. Bayer and J.C. Lagarias, “The nonlinear geometry of linear programming, I. Affine and projective scaling trajectories, II. Legendre transform coordinates and central trajectories,”Transactions of the American Mathematical Society 2 (1989) 499–526.

    Google Scholar 

  2. J. Curry, “On zero finding methods of higher order from data at one point,”Journal of Complexity 5 (1989) 219–237.

    Google Scholar 

  3. M.B. Daya and C.M. Shetty, “Polynomial barrier function algorithms for linear programming,” School of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology (Atlanta, GA, 1987).

    Google Scholar 

  4. M.B. Daya and C.M. Shetty, “Polynomial barrier function algorithms for convex quadratic programming,” School of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology (Atlanta, GA, 1988).

    Google Scholar 

  5. P. Deuflhard and G. Heindl, “Affine invariant convergence theorems for Newton's method and extensions to related methods,”SIAM Journal of Numerical Analysis 16 (1979) 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  6. D. Goldfarb and S. Liu, “An O(n 3 L) primal interior point algorithm for convex quadratic programming,”Mathematical Programming 49 (1991) 325–340.

    Google Scholar 

  7. C.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, New York, 1988) pp. 1–28.

    Google Scholar 

  8. M. Kim, “On approximate roots and rootfinding algorithms for a complex polynomial,”Mathematics of Computation 51 (1988) 707–719.

    Google Scholar 

  9. 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, New York, 1988) pp. 29–47.

    Google Scholar 

  10. M. Kojima, S. Mizuno and A. Yoshise, “A polynomial-time algorithm for a class of linear complementarity problems,”Mathematical Programming 44 (1989) 1–26.

    Google Scholar 

  11. N. Megiddo, “Pathways to the optimal set in linear programming,” in: N. Megiddo, ed.,Progress in Mathematical Programming, Interior Point and Related Methods (Springer, New York, 1988) pp. 131–158.

    Google Scholar 

  12. N. Megiddo and M. Shub, “Boundary behaviour of interior point algorithms in linear programming,”Mathematics of Operations Research 14 (1989) 97–146.

    Google Scholar 

  13. R.C. Monteiro and I. Adler, “Interior path following primal-dual algorithms, I. Linear programming, II. Convex quadratic programming,”Mathematical Programming 44 (1989) 27–66.

    Google Scholar 

  14. J. Renegar, “A polynomial-time algorithm, based on Newton's method, for linear programming,”Mathematical Programming 40 (1988) 59–93.

    Google Scholar 

  15. W.C. Rheinboldt, “On a theorem of S. Smale about Newton's method for analytic mappings,”Applied Mathematics Letters 1 (1988) 69–72.

    Google Scholar 

  16. H.W. Royden, “Newton's method,” Department of Mathematics, Stanford University (Stanford, CA, 1986).

    Google Scholar 

  17. S. Smale, “Newton's method estimates from data at one point,” in:The Merging of Disciplines in Pure, Applied, and Computational Mathematics (Springer, New York-Berlin, 1986) pp. 185–196.

    Google Scholar 

  18. S. Smale, “Algorithms for solving equations,”Proceedings of the International Congress of Mathematicians (Berkeley, CA, 1986) pp. 87–121.

  19. G. Sonnevend, “An ‘Analytic Center’ for polyhedrons and new classes of global algorithms for linear (smooth, convex) programming,” in:Lecture Notes in Control and Information Sciences No. 84 (Springer, Berlin, 1986) pp. 866–876.

    Google Scholar 

  20. P. Vaidya, “An algorithm for linear programming that requires O(((m+n)n 2 +(m+n) 1.5 n)L) arithmetic operations,”Proceedings of the Nineteenth ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing (1987) pp. 29–38.

  21. Y. Ye, “Further developments on an interior algorithm for convex quadratic programming,” unpublished manuscript.

  22. Ju. E. Nesterov and A.S. Nemirovsky,Self-Concordant Functions and Polynomial-Time Methods in Convex Programming (Central Economic and Mathematical Institute, USSR Academy of Sciences, Moscow, 1989).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Operations Research and Industrial Engineering, Cornell University, 14853, Ithaca, NY, USA

    James Renegar

  2. IBM T.J. Watson Research Center, P.O. Box 218, 10598, Yorktown Heights, NY, USA

    Michael Shub

Authors
  1. James Renegar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael Shub
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

This research is supported by NSF grants.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Renegar, J., Shub, M. Unified complexity analysis for Newton LP methods. Mathematical Programming 53, 1–16 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01585691

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01585691

Key words

Search

Navigation