Annals of Operations Research

, Volume 22, Issue 1, pp 55–70 | Cite as

A unified view of interior point methods for linear programming

  • David F. Shanno
  • Ansuman Bagchi


The paper shows how various interior point methods for linear programming may all be derived from logarithmic barrier methods. These methods include primal and dual projective methods, affine methods, and methods based on the method of centers. In particular, the paper demonstrates that Karmarkar's algorithm is equivalent to a classical logarithmic barrier method applied to a problem in standard form.


Standard Form Interior Point Projective Method Point Method Interior Point Method 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    I. Adler, N. Karmarkar, M.G.C. Resende and G. Veiga, An implementation of Karmarkar's algorithm for linear programming, Report 86-8, Operations Research Center, University of California at Berkeley, CA (1986).Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    E.R. Barnes, A variation on Karmarkar's algorithm for solving linear programming problems, Math. Progr. 36(1986)174–182.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    I.I. Dikin, Iterative solution of problems of linear and quadratic programming, Sov. Math. Doklady 8(1967)674–675.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    A.V. Fiacco and G.P. McCormick,Nonlinear Programming: Sequential Unconstrained Minimization Techniques (Wiley, New York, 1968).Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    K.R. Frisch, The logarithmic potential method of convex programming, Technical Report, University Institute of Economics, Oslo, Norway (1955).Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    D.M. Gay, A variant of Karmarkar's linear programming algorithm for problems in standard form, Math. Progr. 37(1987)81–90.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    D.M. Gay, Pictures of Karmarkar's linear programming algorithm, Computer Science Technical Report 136, AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill, NJ (1987).Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    P.E. Gill, W. Murray, M.A. Saunders, J.A. Tomlin and M.H. Wright, On projected Newton methods for linear programming and equivalence to Karmarkar's projective method, Math. Progr. 36(1986)183–209.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    C.C. Gonzaga, An algorithm for solving linear programming inO(n 3 L) operations, Technical Report UCB/ERL M87/10, Electronics Research Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley, CA (March 1987).Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    C.C. Gonzaga, Search directions for interior linear programming methods, Memorandum No. UCB/ERL M87/44, Electronics Research Laboratory, College of Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, CA (1987).Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    M. Iri and H. Imai, A multiplicative barrier method for linear programming, Algorithmica 1(1986)455–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    N.K. Karmarkar, A new polynomial-time algorithm for linear programming, Combinatorica 4(1984)373–395.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    M. Kojima, S. Mizuno and A. Yoshise, A primal-dual interior point algorithm for linear programming, Technical Report, Department of Information Sciences, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Tokyo, Japan (February 1987).Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    K.A. McShane, C.N. Monma and D.F. Shanno, An implementation of a primal-dual interior point method for linear programming, RUTCOR Research Report 24-88, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ (1988).Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    N. Megiddo, Pathways to the optimal set in linear programming, Technical Report RJ 5295, IBM Almaden Research Center, San Jose, CA (1986).Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    N. Megiddo and M. Shub, Boundary behaviour of interior point algorithms in linear programming, Technical Report RJ 5319, IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights, NY (1986).Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    J.E. Mitchell and M.J. Todd, On the relationship between the search directions in the affine and projective variants of Karmarkar's linear programming algorithm, Technical Report No. 725, School of Operations Research and Industrial Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY (1986).Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    R.D.C. Monteiro and I. Adler, Interior path following primal-dual algorithms — Part I: Linear programming, Technical Report, Department of Industrial Engineering and Operations Research, University of California, Berkeley, CA (1987).Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    J. Renegar, A polynomial-time algorithm based on Newton's method for linear programming, Math. Progr. 40(1988)59–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    M.J. Todd and B.P. Burrell, An extension to Karmarkar's algorithm for linear programming using dual variables, Algorithmica 1(1986)409–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    R.J. Vanderbei, M.S. Meketon and B.A. Freedman, A modification of Karmarkar's algorithm, Algorithmica 1(1986)395–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    H. Yamashita, A polynomially and quadratically convergent method for linear programming, Technical Report, Mathematical Systems Institute, Inc., Tokyo, Japan (1986).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© J.C. Baltzer AG, Scientific Publishing Company 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • David F. Shanno
    • 1
  • Ansuman Bagchi
    • 1
  1. 1.RUTCOR, Rutgers UniversityNew BrunswickUSA

Personalised recommendations