Advertisement

The ESA NLP Solver WORHP

Part of the Springer Optimization and Its Applications book series (SOIA, volume 73)

Abstract

We Optimize Really Huge Problems (WORHP) is a solver for large-scale, sparse, nonlinear optimization problems with millions of variables and constraints. Convexity is not required, but some smoothness and regularity assumptions are necessary for the underlying theory and the algorithms based on it. WORHP has been designed from its core foundations as a sparse sequential quadratic programming (SQP) / interior-point (IP) method; it includes efficient routines for computing sparse derivatives by applying graph-coloring methods to finite differences, structure-preserving sparse named after Broyden, Fletcher, Goldfarb and Shanno (BFGS) update techniques for Hessian approximations, and sparse linear algebra. Furthermore it is based on reverse communication, which offers an unprecedented level of interaction between user and nonlinear programming (NLP) solver. It was chosen by ESA as the European NLP solver on the basis of its high robustness and its application-driven design and development philosophy. Two large-scale optimization problems from space applications that demonstrate the robustness of the solver complement the cursory description of general NLP methods and some WORHP implementation details.

Keywords

Nonlinear optimization Large-scale Mathematical optimization NLP 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors are indebted to Florian Wolff for his support in preparing the numerical results and for various suggestions on the manuscript and to Dr. Matthias Knauer for guiding the numerical evaluation with first TransWORHP results.

Development of WORHP has been supported by BMWi (German Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology) grants 50RL0722 and 50JR0688, the TEC-EC Control Division of the European Space Agency (ESA) in the projects eNLP (GSTP-4 G603-45EC) and eNLPext (GSTP-5 G517-045EC), and Steinbeis Research Center (SFZ) Optimization and Optimal Control.

References

  1. 1.
    Betts, J.T.: Practical Methods for Optimal Control Using Nonlinear Programming. SIAM Press, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (2001)MATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Büskens, C., Gerdts, M.: Numerical solution of optimal control problems with DAE systems of higher index. In: Optimalsteuerungsprobleme in der Luft- und Raumfahrt, Workshop in Greifswald des Sonderforschungsbereichs 255: Transatmospärische Flugsysteme, pp. 27–38. München (2000)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Büskens, C., Gerdts, M.: Emergency landing of a hypersonic flight system: A corrector iteration method for admissible real–time optimal control approximations. In: Optimalsteuerungsprobleme in der Luft- und Raumfahrt, Workshop in Greifswald des Sonderforschungsbereichs 255: Transatmospärische Flugsysteme, pp. 51–60. München (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Büskens, C., Maurer, H.: SQP-methods for solving optimal control problems with control and state constraints: Adjoint variables, sensitivity analysis and real-time control. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 120(1–2), 85–108 (2000)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fourer, R., Gay, D.M., Kernighan, B.W.: AMPL: A Mathematical Programming Language. Brooks/Cole Publishing Company / Cengage Learning, Florence (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gertz, M., Wright, J.W.: Object-oriented software for quadratic programming. ACM Trans. Math. Software 29, 796–813 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gill, P.E., Murray, W., Wright, M.H.: Practical Optimization. Academic, London (1981)MATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gill, P.E., Murray, W., Saunders, M., Wright, M.H.: Model building and practical spects of nonlinear programming. In: Schittkowski, K. (ed.) Computational Mathematical Programming, pp. 209–47. Springer, Berlin (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gill, P.E., Murray, W., Saunders, M.A.: SNOPT: An SQP algorithm for large-scale constrained optimization. SIAM J. Optim. 12, 979–1006 (1997)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Han, S.P.: Superlinearly convergent variable metric algorithms for general nonlinear programming problems. Math. Program. 11(3), 263–282 (1976/77)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kalmbach, P.: Effiziente Ableitungsbestimmung bei hochdimensionaler nichtlinearer Optimierung. Ph.D. thesis, Universität Bremen (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kluever, C.A.: Optimal feedback guidance for low-thrust orbit insertion. Optim. Contr. Appl. Meth. 16, 155–173 (1995)MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Levenberg, K.: A method for the solution of certain non-linear problems in least-squares. Q. Appl. Math. 2(2), 164–168 (1944)MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mangasarian, O.L., Fromowitz, S.: The Fritz John necessary optimality conditions in the presence of equality and inequality constraints. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 17, 37–47 (1967)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mayrhofer, M., Sachs, G.: Notflugbahnen eines zweistufigen Hyperschall-Flugsystems ausgehend vom Trennmanöver. In: Seminar des Sonderforschungsbereichs 255: Transatmospärische Flugsysteme, pp. 109–118. München (1996)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schittkowski, K.: On the convergence of a Sequential Quadratic Programming method with an augmented Lagrangian line search function. Mathematische Operationsforschung und Statistik, Series Optimization 14, 197–216 (1983)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wilson, R.B.: A Simplicial algorithm for concave programming. Ph.D. thesis, Harvard University (1963)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for Industrial MathematicsUniversity of BremenBremenGermany

Personalised recommendations