Numerical Algorithms

, Volume 25, Issue 1–4, pp 387–406 | Cite as

Adaptive use of iterative methods in predictor–corrector interior point methods for linear programming

  • Weichung Wang
  • Dianne P. O'Leary
Article

Abstract

In this work we devise efficient algorithms for finding the search directions for interior point methods applied to linear programming problems. There are two innovations. The first is the use of updating of preconditioners computed for previous barrier parameters. The second is an adaptive automated procedure for determining whether to use a direct or iterative solver, whether to reinitialize or update the preconditioner, and how many updates to apply. These decisions are based on predictions of the cost of using the different solvers to determine the next search direction, given costs in determining earlier directions. We summarize earlier results using a modified version of the OB1-R code of Lustig, Marsten, and Shanno, and we present results from a predictor–corrector code PCx modified to use adaptive iteration. If a direct method is appropriate for the problem, then our procedure chooses it, but when an iterative procedure is helpful, substantial gains in efficiency can be obtained.

interior point methods linear programming iterative methods for linear systems adaptive algorithms self-timing algorithms 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    E.D. Andersen, J. Gondzio, C. Mészáros and X. Xu, Implementation of interior point methods for large scale linear programming, Technical Report 1996.3, Logilab, HEC Geneva, Section of Management Studies, University of Geneva, Switzerland (January 1997).Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    R. Bartels and L. Kaufman, Cholesky factor updating techniques for rank 2 matrix modifications, SIAM J. Matrix Anal. Appl. 10(4) (1989) 557–592.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    T.J. Carpenter and D.F. Shanno, An interior point method for quadratic programs based on conjugate projected gradients, Comput. Optim. Appl. 2 (1993) 5–28.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    P. Chin and A. Vannelli, Computational methods for an LP model of the placement problem, Technical Report UWE&CE–94–02, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Waterloo (November 1994).Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    P. Chin and A. Vannelli, Iterative methods for the augmented equations in large-scale linear programming, Technical Report UWE&CE–94–01, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Waterloo (October 1994).Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    I.C. Choi, C.L. Monma and D.F. Shanno, Further development of a primal-dual interior point method, ORSA J. Comput. 2(4) (1990) 304–311.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    J. Czyzyk, S. Mehrotra and S.J. Wright, PCx user guide, Technical Report ANL/MCS-TM-217, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL (1997).Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    J.J. Dongarra, J.R. Bunch, C.B. Moler and G.W. Stewart, LINPACK User's Guide (SIAM, Philadelphia, PA, 1979).Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    I.S. Duff, A.M. Erisman and J.K. Reid, Direct Methods for Sparse Matrices (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1986).Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    A.V. Fiacco and G.P. McCormick, Nonlinear Programming: Sequential Unconstrained Minimization Techniques (Wiley, New York, 1968). Reprint: SIAMClassics in Applied Mathematics, Vol. 4 (SIAM Philadelphia, PA, 1990).Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    R.W. Freund and F. Jarre, A QMR-based interior-point algorithm for solving linear programs, Technical Report, AT&T Bell Laboratories and Institut für Angewandte Mathematik und Statistik (1995).Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    M. Frigo and S.G. Johnson, The fastest Fourier transform in the west, Technical Report MIT-LCSTR-728, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (September 1997).Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    D.M. Gay, Electronic mail distribution of linear programming test problems, Mathematical Programming Soc. COAL Newsletter (1985).Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    P.E. Gill and W. Murray, Newton-type methods for unconstrained and linearly constrained optimization, Math. Programming 7 (1974) 311–350.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    P.E. Gill, W. Murray, M.A. Saunders, J.A. Tomlin and M.H. Wright, On projected Newton barrier methods for linear programming and an equivalence to Karmarkar's projective method, Math. Programming 36 (1986) 183–209.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    P.E. Gill, W. Murray and M.H. Wright, Practical Optimization (Academic Press, New York, 1981).Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    D. Goldfarb and S. Mehrotra, A relaxed version of Karmarkar's method, Math. Programming 40(3) (1988) 289–315.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    G.H. Golub and C.F. Van Loan, Matrix Computations, 2nd ed. (Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, Baltimore, MD, 1989).Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    C.C. Gonzaga, Path-following methods for linear programming, SIAM Rev. 34(2) (1992) 167–224.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    N.K. Karmarkar, A new polynomial-time algorithm for linear programming, Combinatorica 4 (1984) 373–395.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    N.K. Karmarkar and K.G. Ramakrishnan, Computational results of an interior point algorithm for large scale linear programming, Math. Programming 52 (1991) 555–586.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    J.L. Kennington and R.V. Helgason, Algorithms for Network Programming (Wiley, New York, 1980).Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    D. Klingman, A. Napier and J. Stutz, NETGEN: A program for generating large scale capacitated assignment, transportation, and minimum cost flow network problems, Managm. Sci. 20(5) (1974) 814–821.Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    J. Liu, Modification of the minimum-degree algorithm by multiple elimination, ACM Trans. Math. Software 11 (1985) 141–153.Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    I.J. Lustig, R.E. Marsten and D.F. Shanno, Computational experience with a primal-dual interior point method for linear programming, Linear Algebra Appl. 152 (1991) 191–222.Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    I.J. Lustig, R.E. Marsten and D.F. Shanno, On implementing Mehrotra's predictor-corrector interiorpoint method for linear programming, SIAM J. Optim. 2(3) (1992) 435–449.Google Scholar
  27. [27]
    I.J. Lustig, R.E. Marsten and D.F. Shanno, Interior point methods for linear programming: Computational state of the art, ORSA J. Comput. 6(1) (1994) 1–14.Google Scholar
  28. [28]
    S. Mehrotra, Implementation of affine scaling methods: Approximate solutions of systems of linear equations using preconditioned conjugate gradient methods, ORSA J. Comput. 4(2) (1992) 103–118.Google Scholar
  29. [29]
    S. Mehrotra, On the implementation of a primal-dual interior point method, SIAM J. Optim. 2(4) (1992) 575–601.Google Scholar
  30. [30]
    S. Mehrotra and J.-S. Wang, Conjugate gradient based implementation of interior point methods for network flow problems, Technical Report 95–70.1, Department of Industrial Engineering and Management Sciences, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL (October 1995).Google Scholar
  31. [31]
    S.G. Nash and A. Sofer, Preconditioning of reduced matrices, Technical Report 93–01, Department of Operations Research and Engineering, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA (February 1993).Google Scholar
  32. [32]
    E. Ng and B.W. Peyton, Block sparse Cholesky algorithms on advanced uniprocessor computers, SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 14 (1993) 1034–1056.Google Scholar
  33. [33]
    C.C. Paige and M.A. Saunders, LSQR: An algorithm for sparse linear equations and sparse least squares, ACM Trans. Math. Software 8 (1982) 43–71.Google Scholar
  34. [34]
    L.F. Portugal, M.G.C. Resende, G. Veiga and J.J. JÚdice, A truncated primal-infeasible dual-feasible network interior point method (November 1994).Google Scholar
  35. [35]
    R.J. Vanderbei, LOQO: An interior point code for quadratic programming, Program in Statistics and Operations Research, Princeton University, rvdb@princeton.edu (1995).Google Scholar
  36. [36]
    R.S. Varga, Factorization and normalized iterative methods, in: Boundary Problems in Differential Equations, ed. R.E. Langer (Univ. of Wisconsin Press, Madison, 1960) pp. 121–142.Google Scholar
  37. [37]
    W. Wang, Iterative methods in interior point methods for linear programming, Ph.D. thesis, Applied Mathematics Program, University of Maryland (1996).Google Scholar
  38. [38]
    W. Wang and D.P. O'Leary, Adaptive use of iterative methods in interior point methods for linear programming, Technical Report CS-TR-3560, Computer Science Department, University of Maryland (November 1995); http://www.cs.umd.edu/Dienst/UI/2.0/Describe/ncstrl.umcp/CS-TR-3560.Google Scholar
  39. [39]
    R.C. Whaley and J.J. Dongarra, Automatically tuned linear algebra software, in: SC 1998 Proceedings (IEEE Press, New York, 1998) (electronic publication); http://www.netlib.org/utk/people/JackDongarra/papers.html.Google Scholar
  40. [40]
    M.H. Wright, Interior methods for constrained optimization, in: Acta Numerica 1992, ed. A. Iserles (Cambridge Univ. Press, New York, 1992) pp. 341–407.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Weichung Wang
    • 1
  • Dianne P. O'Leary
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Mathematics EducationNational Tainan Teachers CollegeTainanTaiwan
  2. 2.Department of Computer Science and Institute for Advanced Computer StudiesUniversity of MarylandCollege ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations