Skip to main content
Log in

Equivalent primal and dual differentiable reformulations of the Euclidean multifacility location problem

  • Published:
IIE Transactions

Abstract

In this paper, we consider two equivalent differentiable reformulations of the nondifferentiable Euclidean multifacility location problem (EMFLP). The first of these is derived via a Lagrangian dual approach based on the optimum of a linear function over a unit ball (circle). The resulting formulation turns out to be identical to the known dual problem proposed by Francis and Cabot [1]. Hence, besides providing an easy direct derivation of the dual problem, this approach lends insights into its connections with classical Lagrangian duality and related results. In particular, it characterizes a straightforward recovery of primal location decisions. The second equivalent differentiable formulation is constructed directly in the primal space. Although the individual constraints of the resulting problem are generally nonconvex, we show that their intersection represents a convex feasible region. We then establish the relationship between the Karush–Kuhn–Tucker (KKT) conditions for this problem and the necessary and sufficient optimality conditions for EMFLP. This lends insights into the possible performance of standard differentiable nonlinear programming algorithms when applied to solve this reformulated problem. Some computational results on test problems from the literature, and other randomly generated problems, are also provided.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Francis, R.L. and Cabot, A.V. (1972) Properties of a multifacility location problem involving Euclidean distances. Naval Research Logistics Quarterly, 19, 335–353.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Francis, R.L., McGinnis, Jr, L.F. and White, J.A. (1991) Facility Layout and Location: An Analytical Approach, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Eyster, J.W., White, J.A. and Wierwille, W.W. (1973) On solving multifacility location problems using a hyperboloid approxima-tion procedure. AIIE Transactions, 5(1), 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Wesolowsky, G.O. and Love, R.F. (1972) A nonlinear approximation method for solving a generalized rectangular distance Weber problem. Management Science, 18(11), 656–663.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Rosen, J.B. and Xue, G.L. (1993) On the convergence of a hyperboloid approximation procedure for the perturbed Euclid-ean multifacility location problem. Operations Research, 41(6), 1164–1171.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Charalambous, C. (1985) Acceleration of the HAP approach for the multifacility location problem. Naval Research Logistics, 32, 373–389.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Calamai, P.H. and Conn, A.R. (1987) A projected Newton method for Lp norm location problems. Mathematical Program-ming, 38, 75–109.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Sinha, S.M. (1996) A duality theorem for nonlinear programming. Management Science, 12, 385–390.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Love, R.F. (1974) The dual of a hyperbolic approximation to the generalized constrained multi-facility location problem with \(\left( \ell \right)\) p distances. Management Science, 21, 22–33.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Xue, G.L., Rosen, J.B. and Pardalos, P.M. (1996) A polynomial time dual algorithm for the Euclidean multifacility location problem. Operations Research Letters, 18, 201–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Bazaraa, M.S., Sherali H.D. and Shetty C.M. (1993) Nonlinear Programming: Theory and Algorithms, 2nd edn. John Wiley, New York, NT, Ch. 6.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Geoffrion, A.M. (1971) Duality in nonlinear programming: a simplified applications-oriented development. SIAM Review, 13, 1–37.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Rockafellar, R.T. (1990) Convex Analysis, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Plastria, F. (1992) When facilities coincide: exact optimality conditions in multifacility location. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, 169, 476–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Murtagh, B.A. and Saunders, M.A. (1994) MINOS 5.4 user`s guide. Systems Optimization Laboratory, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Lasdon, L.S. and Waren A.D. (1994) GRG2 user's guide. The University of Texas, Austin, TX.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Al-Loughani, I.M. (1997) Algorithmic approaches for solving the Euclidean location and location-allocation problems. Unpub-lished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA 24061.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Zhang, J., Kim N.H. and Lasdon L.S. (1985) An improved suc-cessive linear programming algorithm. Management Science, 31(10), 1312–1331.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Fletcher, R. (1981) Practical Methods of Optimization 2: Con-strained Optimization, John Wiley, Chichester, England.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Calamai, P.H. and Charalambous C. (1980) Solving multifacility location problems involving Euclidean distances. Naval Research Logistics, 27, 609–620.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sherali, H.D., Al-loughani, I. Equivalent primal and dual differentiable reformulations of the Euclidean multifacility location problem. IIE Transactions 30, 1065–1074 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007511830871

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007511830871

Keywords

Navigation