A Generator of Nonregular Semidefinite Programming Problems

  • Eloísa Macedo
  • Tatiana Tchemisova
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Mathematics & Statistics book series (PROMS, volume 223)


Regularity is an important property of optimization problems. Various notions of regularity are known from the literature, being defined for different classes of problems. Usually, optimization methods are based on the optimality conditions, that in turn, often suppose that the problem is regular. Absence of regularity leads to theoretical and numerical difficulties, and solvers may fail to provide a trustworthy result. Therefore, it is very important to verify if a given problem is regular in terms of certain regularity conditions and in the case of nonregularity, to apply specific methods. On the other hand, in order to test new stopping criteria and the computational behaviour of new methods, it is important to have an access to sets of reasonably-sized nonregular test problems. The paper presents a generator that constructs nonregular Semidefinite Programming (SDP) instances with prescribed irregularity degrees and a database of nonregular test problems created using this generator. Numerical experiments using popular SDP solvers on the problems of the database are carried out and permit to conclude that the most popular SDP solvers are not efficient when applied to nonregular problems.


Semidefinite programming Regularity Constraint qualification Good behaviour Generator of nonregular sdp problems 



The authors would like to thank the anonymous referees for their suggestions and valuable comments that have helped to improve the paper. This work was supported by Portuguese funds through the CIDMA - Center for Research and Development in Mathematics and Applications, and the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT - Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia), within project UID/MAT/04106/2013.


  1. 1.
    M.F. Anjos, J.B. Lasserre (eds.), Handbook of Semidefinite, Conic and Polynomial Optimization: Theory, Algorithms, Software and Applications, vol. 166, International Series in Operational Research and Management Science (Springer, US, 2012)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    B. Borchers, Sdplib 1.2, a library of semidefinite programming test problems. Optim. Methods Softw. 11(1–4), 683–690 (1999)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Y. Cheung, S. Schurr, H. Wolkowicz, Preprocessing and reduction for degenerate semidefinite programs. Comput. Anal. Math. Springer Proc. Math. Stat. 50, 251–303 (2013)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Inc. CVX Research. Cvx: Matlab software for disciplined convex programming, version 2.0 (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    E. de Klerk, Aspects of Semidefinite Programming - Interior Point Algorithms and Selected Applications, vol. 65, Applied Optimization (Kluwer, 2004)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    D.E. Dolan, J.J. Moré, Benchmarking optimization software with performance profiles. Math. Program. Ser. A 91, 201–213 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    R.M. Freund, F. Ordó nez, K.C. Toh, Behavioral measures and their correlation with ipm iteration counts on semi-definite programming problems. Math. Program. 109(2), 445–475 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    G. Gruber, F. Rendl, Computational experience with ill-posed problems in semidefinite programming. Comput. Optim. Appl. 21, 201–212 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    G. Gruber, S. Kruk, F. Rendl, H. Wolkowicz, Presolving for semidefinite program without constraint qualifications. Technical report, CORR 98-32, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario (1998)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    B. Hernández-Jiménez, M.A. Rojas-Medar, R. Osuna-Gómez, A. Beato-Moreno, Generalized convexity in non-regular programming problems with inequality-type constraints. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 352, 604–613 (2009)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    C. Jansson, D. Chaykin, C. Keil, Rigorous error bounds for the optimal value in sdp. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 46(1), 180–200 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    O.I. Kostyukova, T.V. Tchemisova, Optimality criterion without constraint qualification for linear semidefinite problems. J. Math. Sci. Springer, US 182(2), 126–143 (2012)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    M. Liu, G. Pataki, Exact duals and short certificates of infeasibility and weak infeasibility in conic linear programming. Math. Program. Ser. A, 1–46 (2017)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    E. Macedo, in Testing Regularity on Linear Semidefinite Optimization Problems (Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2015), pp. 213–236Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    E. Macedo, Numerical study of regularity in Semidefinite Programming and applications. Ph.D. thesis, University of Aveiro, Portugal, 2016Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    G. Pataki, Bad semidefinite programs: they all look the same. SIAM J. Optim. 27(1), 146–172 (2017)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    I. Polik, T. Terlaky, New stopping criteria for detecting infeasibility in conic optimization. Optim. Lett. Springer 3(2), 187–198 (2009)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    M.V. Solodov, Constraint qualifications, Encyclopedia of Operations Research and Management Science (Wiley, New York, 2010)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    J.F. Sturm, Using SeDuMi 1.02, a MATLAB toolbox for optimization over symmetric cones. Optim. Methods Softw. 11, 625–653 (1999)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    R.H. Tutuncu, K.C. Toh, M.J. Todd, Solving semidefinite-quadratic-linear programs using sdpt3. Math. Program. Ser. B 95, 189–217 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    H. Waki, M. Nakata, M. Muramatsu, Strange behaviors of interior-point methods for solving semidefinite programming problems in polynomial optimization. Comput. Optim. Appl. Springer 53(3), 823–844 (2012)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    H. Wei, H. Wolkowicz, Generating and measuring instances of hard semidefinite programs. Math. Program. 125(1), 31–45 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    H. Wolkowicz, R. Saigal, L. Vandenberghe (eds.), Handbook of Semidefinite Programming: Theory, Algorithms, and Applications (Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 2000)MATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    M. Yamashita, K. Fujisawa, M. Kojima, Implementation and evaluation of sdpa 6.0 (semidefinite programming algorithm 6.0). Optim. Methods Softw. 18, 491–505 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.TEMA, Department of Mechanical EngineeringUniversity of AveiroAveiroPortugal
  2. 2.CIDMA, Department of MathematicsUniversity of AveiroAveiroPortugal

Personalised recommendations