Journal of Global Optimization

, Volume 24, Issue 3, pp 349–370 | Cite as

A Global Optimization Algorithm using Lagrangian Underestimates and the Interval Newton Method

  • Tim Van Voorhis


Convex relaxations can be used to obtain lower bounds on the optimal objective function value of nonconvex quadratically constrained quadratic programs. However, for some problems, significantly better bounds can be obtained by minimizing the restricted Lagrangian function for a given estimate of the Lagrange multipliers. The difficulty in utilizing Lagrangian duality within a global optimization context is that the restricted Lagrangian is often nonconvex. Minimizing a convex underestimate of the restricted Lagrangian overcomes this difficulty and facilitates the use of Lagrangian duality within a global optimization framework. A branch-and-bound algorithm is presented that relies on these Lagrangian underestimates to provide lower bounds and on the interval Newton method to facilitate convergence in the neighborhood of the global solution. Computational results show that the algorithm compares favorably to the Reformulation–Linearization Technique for problems with a favorable structure.

Lagrangian dual Interval Newton method Convex underestimate Quadratically constrained quadratic program 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Adjya, N., Tawarmalani, M. and Sahinidis, N.V. (1999), A Lagrangian Approach to the Pooling Problem, Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 38, 1956–1972.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Al-Khayyal, F.A., Horst, R. and Pardalos, P.M. (1992), Global Optimization of Concave Functions subject to Quadratic Constraints: An Application in Nonlinear Bilevel Programming, Annals of Operations Research 34, 125–147.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barrientos, O. and Correa, R. (2000), An Algorithm for Global Minimization of Linearly Constrained Quadratic Functions, Journal of Global Optimization 16, 77–93.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bazaraa, M.S., Sherali, H.D. and Shetty, C.M. (1993), Nonlinear Programming Theory and Algorithms, John Wiley & Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ben-Tal, A., Eiger, G. and Gershovitz, V. (1994), GlobalMinimization by Reducing the Duality Gap, Mathematical Programming 63, 193–212.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dur, M. and Horst, R. (1997), Lagrange Duality and Partitioning Techniques in Nonconvex Global Optimization, Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications 95, 347–369.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Falk, J.E. (1969), Lagrange Multipliers and Nonconvex Programs, SIAM Journal of Control 7, 534–545.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Floudas, C.A. and Visweswaran, V. (1993), Primal-Relaxed Dual Global Optimization Approach, Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications 78, 187–225.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Guignard, M. and Rosenwein M.B. (1989), An Application-Oriented Guide for Designing Lagrangean Dual Ascent Algorithms, European Journal of Operational Research 43, 197–205.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Horst, R. and Raber, U. (1998), Convergent Outer Approximation Algorithms for Solving Unary Problems, Journal of Global Optimization 13, 123–149.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kearfott, R.B. (1996), Rigorous Global Search: Continuous Problems, Nononvex Optimization and Its Applications 13, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Khammash, M.H. (1996), Synthesis of Globally Optimal Controllers for Robust Performance to Unstructured Uncertainty, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 41, 189–198.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kohl, N. and Madsen, O.B.G. (1997), An Optimization Algorithm for the Vehicle Routing Problem with Time Windows Based on Lagrangian Relaxation, Operations Research 45, 395–406.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kuno, T. and Utsuomiya, T. (2000), A Lagrangian Based Branch-and-Bound Algorithm for Production-Transportation Problems, Journal of Global Optimization 18, 59–73.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Li, D. and Sun, X.L. (2000), Local Convexification of the Lagrangian Function in Nonconvex Optimization, Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications 104, 109–120.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lodwick, W.A. (1992), Preprocessing Nonlinear Functional Constraints with Applications to the Pooling Problem, ORSA Journal on Computing 4, 119–131.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Preisig, J.C. (1996), Copositivity and the Minimization of Quadratic Functions with Nonnegativity and Quadratic Equality Constraints, SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization 34, 1135–1150.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ryoo, H. S. and Sahinidis, N. V. (1996), A Branch-and-Reduce Approach to Global Optimization, Journal of Global Optimization 8, 107–138.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Salapaka, M.V., Khammash, M. and Van Voorhis, T. (1998), Synthesis of Globally Optimal Controllers in 1 using the Reformulation–Linearization Technique, Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, Tampa, FL, December 1998.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sherali, H.D. and Tuncbilek, C.H. (1997), New Reformulation Linearization/Convexification Relaxations for Univariate and Multivariate Polynomial Programming Problems. Operations Research Letters 21, 1–9.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sherali, H.D. and Tuncbilek, C.H. (1995), A Reformulation-Convexification Approach for Solving Nonconvex Quadratic Programming Problems, Journal of Global Optimization 7, 1–31.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sherali, H.D. and Tuncbilek, C.H. (1992), A Global Optimization Algorithm for Polynomial Programming Problems Using a Reformulation–Linearization Technique, Journal of Global Optimization 2, 101–112.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Thng, I., Cantoni, A. and Leung, Y.H. (1996), Analytical Solutions to the Optimization of a Quadratic Cost Function subject to Linear and Quadratic Equality Constraints, Applied Mathematics and Optimization 34, 161–182.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Tuy, H. (1997), Convex Analysis and Global Optimization, Nonconvex Optimization and Its Applications 22, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Van de Velde, S.L. (1995), Dual Decomposition of a Single-Machine Scheduling Problem, Mathematical Programming 69, 413–428.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Visweswaran, V. and Floudas, C.A. (1990), A Global Optimization Algorithm (GOP) for Certain Classes of Nonconvex NLPs-II. Application of Theory and Test Problems, Computers and Chemical Engineering 14, 1419–1434.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wah, B.W. and Wang, T. (1999), Efficient and Adaptive Lagrange-Multiplier Methods for Nonlinear Continuous Global Optimization, Journal of Global Optimization 14, 1–25.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tim Van Voorhis
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Industrial and Manufacturing Systems EngineeringIowa State UniversityAmesUSA

Personalised recommendations