Annals of Operations Research

, Volume 20, Issue 1, pp 233–248 | Cite as

The basis suppression method

  • Bruce W. Patty
  • Richard V. Helgason
Article
  • 30 Downloads

Abstract

The Basis Suppression algorithm is a simplex-based procedure which allows the efficient extension of current special structure algorithms to problems of special structure except for a single complicating side variable. A basis free of the complicating variable is maintained in this algorithm. Various properties of the algorithm are presented, including a proof of convergence. Computational effectiveness is discussed and has been verified by using the procedure to solve the maximal concurrent flow problem.

Keywords

Special Structure Flow Problem Structure Algorithm Side Variable Suppression Method 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    A. Ali and J. Kennington, LISS: An in-core primal simplex code for solving linear programs, Technical Report No. 80015, Department of Operations Research, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas (1980).Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    A. Ali and J. Kennington, Network structure in linear programs: A computational study, Technical Report 83-OR-1, Department of Operations Research, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas (1983).Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    M.S. Bazaraa and J.J. Jarvis,Linear Programming and Network Flows (Wiley, New York, 1977).Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    E.M.L. Beale, The simplex method using pseudo-basic variables for structured linear programming problems,Recent Advances in Mathematical Programming, ed. R. Graves and P. Wolfe (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1963).Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    J.M. Bennett, An approach to some structured linear programming problems, Oper. Res. 14(1966)636.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    R.G. Bland, New finite pivoting rules for the simplex method, Math. Oper. Res. 2(1977)103.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    A. Charnes and W.W. Cooper,Management Models and Industrial Applications of Linear Programming, Vol. 2 (Wiley, New York, 1961).Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    V. Chvatal,Linear Programming (Freeman, New York, 1983).Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    R. Dial, F. Glover, D. Karney and D. Klingman, A computational analysis of alternative algorithms and labeling techniques for finding shortest path trees, Research Report CCS 291, Center for Cybernetic Studies, University of Texas, Austin, Texas (1977).Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    S.I. Gass, The Dualplex method for large-scale linear programs, ORC 66-15, Operations Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, California (1966).Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    F. Glover and D. Klingman, The simplex SON algorithm for LP/embedded network problems, CCS 317, Center for Cybernetic Studies, University of Texas, Austin, Texas (1977).Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    G. Hadley,Linear Algebra (Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts, 1961).Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    J.K. Hartman and L. Lasdon, A generalized upper bounding method for doubly coupled linear programs, NRLQ 17(1970)411.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    J.K. Hartman and L. Lasdon, A generalized upper bounding algorithm for multicommodity network flow problems, Networks 1(1972)333.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    A.R.G. Heesterman, Special simplex algorithm for multisector problems, Numerische Mathematik 12(1968)288.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    R. Helgason, Solving the maximum concurrent flow problem using linear programming and network codes, presented at ORSA/TIMS Conference in Orlando, Florida, November 1983.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    R. Helgason and J. Kennington, A product form representation of the inverse of a multicommodity cycle matrix, Networks 7(1977)297.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    R. Helgason and J. Kennington, Spike swapping in basis reinversion, NRLQ 27(1980)697.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    R. Helgason, D. Matula and B. Patty, Linear programming solution of the maximum concurrent flow and sparsest cut problem, Working Paper, Department of Operations Research, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas (1985).Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    E. Hellerman and D. Rarick, Reinversion with the preassigned pivot procedure, Math. Progr. 1(1971)195.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    P.A. Jensen and J.W. Barnes,Network Flow Programming (Wiley, New York, 1980).Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    J. Kalan, Aspects of large-scale in-core linear programming, Proc. ACM (1971)304.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    R.N. Kaul, An extension of generalized upper bounded techniques for linear programming, ORC 65-27, Operations Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, California (1965).Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    J. Kennington, A primal partitioning code for solving multicommodity network flow problems, Technical Report No. 79008, Department of Operations Research, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas (1979).Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    R.E. Marsten and F. Shepardson, A double basis simplex method for linear programs with complicating variables. Technical Report 531, Department of M.I.S., University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona (1978).Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    D.W. Matula, Cluster validity by concurrent chaining,Numerical Taxonomy, ed. J. Felsenstein, NATO ASI Series G, No. 1 (Springer-verlag, New York, 1983).Google Scholar
  27. [27]
    R.D. McBride, Solving embedded generalized network problems, Working Paper, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California (1983).Google Scholar
  28. [28]
    W. Orchard-Hays, An exercise in basis inversion, SIGMAP Newsletter 15 (1973).Google Scholar
  29. [29]
    B.W. Patty, The basis suppression method for linear programs with special structure excluded by an objective side column, Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Operations Research, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas (1984).Google Scholar
  30. [30]
    J.B. Rosen, Primal partition programming for block diagonal matrices, Numerische Mathematik 6(1964)250.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© J.C. Baltzer AG, Scientific Publishing Company 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bruce W. Patty
    • 1
  • Richard V. Helgason
    • 2
  1. 1.American Airlines Decision Technologies, DFW AirportUSA
  2. 2.Department of Operations ResearchSouthern Methodist UniversityDallasUSA

Personalised recommendations