Advertisement

Simplex Algorithms

  • Manfred Padberg
Part of the Algorithms and Combinatorics book series (AC, volume 12)

Abstract

We are now ready to state an iterative procedure for the resolution of the linear programming problem (LP) in standard form with descriptive “input data” m, n, A, b and c.

Keywords

Linear Programming Problem Simplex Algorithm Choice Rule Artificial Variable Basic Feasible Solution 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Dantzig, G.B. [ 1951 ] “Maximization of a linear function of variables subject to linear inequalities”, in Koopmans (ed) Activity Analysis of Production and Allocation, Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  2. Hoffman, A.J [ 1955 ] “How to solve a linear programming problem ”, in Antosiewicz (ed) Linear Programming Volume II, National Bureau of Standards, Washington, 397–424.Google Scholar
  3. Gass, S.I. [ 1955 ] “A first feasible solution to the linear programming problem”, in Antosiewicz (ed) Linear Programming Volume II, National Bureau of Standards, Washington, 495–508.Google Scholar
  4. Orchard-Hays, W. [ 1954 ] “A composite simplex algorithm - IP”, Technical Report P-525, The Rand Corporation, Santa Monica.Google Scholar
  5. Wolfe, Ph. [ 1955 ] “Reduction of systems of linear relations”, in Antosiewicz (ed) Linear Programming Volume II, National Bureau of Standards, Washington, 449451.Google Scholar
  6. Chapter 5.3 Google Scholar
  7. Bland, R. [ 1977 ] “New finite pivot rules for the simplex method”, Mathematics of Operations Research 2 103–107.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Charnes, A. [ 1952 ] “Optimality and degeneracy in linear programming”, Econometrica 20 160–170.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Crowder,H. and J.M. Hattingh [ 1975 ] “Partially normalized pivot selection in linear programming”, Mathematical Programming Study Number 4 12–25.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dantzig, G.B. [ 1951 ] “Maximization of a linear function of variables subject to linear inequalities”, in Koopmans (ed) Activity Analysis of Production and Allocation, Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  11. Dantzig, G.B., Orden, A. and Ph. Wolfe [ 1955 ] “The generalized simplex method for minimizing a linear form under linear inequality restraints”, Pacific Journal of Mathematics 5 183–195.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Goldfarb, D. and J.K. Reid [ 1977 ] “A practicable steepest-edge simplex algorithm”, Mathematical Programming 12 361–371.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Harris, P.M.J [ 1973 ] “Pivot selection methods of the devex LP code”, Mathematical Programming 5 1–28.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Wolfe, Ph. [ 1963 ] “A technique for resolving degeneracy in linear programming”, Journal of the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics 11 205–211.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Wolfe, Ph. [1978] Personal communication.Google Scholar
  16. Bartels, R.H. [ 1971 ] “A stabilization of the simplex method”, Numerische Mathematik 16 414–434.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Bartels, R.H. and G.H. Golub [ 1969 ] “The simplex method of linear programming using LU decomposition”, Communications of the Association for Computing Machinery 12 266–268.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Benichou, M., Gauthier, J.M., Hentges, G. and G. Ribière [ 1977 ] “The efficient solution of large-scale linear programming problems — Some algorithmic techniques and computational results” Mathematical Programming 13 280–322.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Benoit [ 1924 ] “Sur une méthode de résolution des équations normales etc. (procédé du commandant Cholesky)”, Bull. géodésique 2.Google Scholar
  20. Bixby, R.E. [ 1990 ] “Implementing the simplex methods, Part I: Introduction, Part II: The initial basis”, Working paper TR90–32 Mathematical Sciences, Rice U., Houston.Google Scholar
  21. Dantzig, G.B. and W. Orchard-Hays [ 1954 ] “The product form for the inverse in the simplex method”, Mathematical Tables and Other Aids to Computation 8 64–67.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Forrest, J.J.H. and J.A. Tomlin [ 1972 ] “Updating triangular factors of the basis to maintain sparsity in the product form simplex method”, Mathematical Programming 2 263–278.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gay, D.M. [ 1978 ] “On combining the schemes of Reid and Saunders for sparse LP bases”, in Duff and Stewart (eds) Sparse Matrix Proceedings, SIAM, Philadelphia, 313–334.Google Scholar
  24. Goldfarb, D. “On the Bartels-Golub decomposition for linear programming bases”, Mathematical Programming 13 272–279.Google Scholar
  25. Hoffman, A.J. [ 1952 ] “On approximate solutions of systems of linear inequalities”, Journal of Research of National Bureau of Standards 49 263–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hoffman, A., Mannos, N., Sokolowsky, D. and N. Wiegman [ 1953 ] “Computational experience in solving linear programs”, Journal of the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics 1 17–33.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hellerman E. and D. Rarick [ 1971 ] “Reinversion with the preassigned pivot procedure”, Mathematical Programming 1 195–216.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kuhn, H.W. and R.E. Quandt [ 1963 ] “An experimental study of the simplex method”, Proceedings of Symposia in Applied Mathematics, American Mathematical Society, Providence Vol 15 107–124.Google Scholar
  29. Kulisch, U.W. and W.L. Miranker [ 1986 ] “The arithmetic of the digital computer: A new approach”, SIAM Review 28 1–40.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Markowitz, H.M. [ 1957 ] “The elimination form of the inverse and its application to linear programming” Management Science 3 255–269.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Moore, R.E. [ 1966 ] Interval Analysis, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. Reid, J.K. [ 1982 ] “A sparsity exploiting variant of the Bartels-Golub decomposition for linear programming basis”, Mathematical Programming 24 55–69.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Robinson, S.M. [ 1963 ] “Bounds for error in the solution set of a perturbed linear program”, Linear Algebra and its Applications 6 69–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Saunders, M.A. [ 1976 ] “A fast, stable implementation of the simplex method using Bartels-Golub updating”, in Bunch and Rose (eds) Sparse Matrix Computations, Academic Press, New York 213–226.Google Scholar
  35. Tewarson, R.R. [ 1973 ] Sparse Matrices, Academic Press, New York.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. Tomlin, J.A. [ 1972 ] “Modifying triangular factors of the basis in the simplex method”, in Rose and Willoughby (eds) Sparse Matrices and Their Applications, Plenum, New York 77–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wilkinson, J.H. [ 1971 ] “Modern error analysis”, SIAM Review 13 548–568.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wolfe, Ph. [ 1965 ] “Errors in the solution of linear programming problems” in Rau (ed) Error in Digital Computation Volume II, Wiley, New York 271–284.Google Scholar
  39. Wolfe, Ph. and L. Cutler [ 1963 ] “Experiments in linear programming”, in Graves and Wolfe (eds) Recent advances in mathematical programming, McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York 177–200.Google Scholar
  40. Zurmühl, R. [1958] Matrizen,Springer Verlag, Berlin, 2nd edition.Google Scholar
  41. Beale, E.M.L. [ 1955 ] “Cycling in the dual simplex algorithm”, Naval Research Logistics Quarterly 2 269–275.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Hoffman, A.J. [1953] “Cycling in the simplex method”, National Bureau of Standards, Report No. 2974, Washington.Google Scholar
  43. Kotiah, T.C.T. and D.I. Steinberg [ 1978 ] “On the possibility of cycling with the simplex method”, Operations Research 26 374–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Marshall, K.T. and J.W. Suurballe [ 1969 ] “A note on cycling in the simplex method”, Naval Research Logistics Quarterly 16 121–137.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  45. Wolfe, Ph. [ 1963 ] “A technique for resolving degeneracy in linear programming”, Journal of the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics 11 205–211.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Bland, R. [ 1977 ] “New finite pivot rules for the simplex method”, Mathematics of Operations Research 2 103–107.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Charnes, A. [ 1952 ] “Optimality and degeneracy in linear programming”, Econometrica 20 160–170.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Dantzig, G.B. [ 1960 ] “Inductive proof of the simplex method”, IBM Journal of Research and Development 4 505–506.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Dantzig, G.B., Orden, A. and Ph. Wolfe [ 1955 ] “The generalized simplex method for minimizing a linear form under linear inequality restraints”, Pacific Journal of Mathematics 5 183–195.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wolfe, Ph. [ 1963 ] “A technique for resolving degeneracy in linear programming”, Journal of the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics 11 205–211.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Zhang, S. [ 1991 ] “On anti-cycling pivoting rules for the simplex method”, Operations Research Letters 10 189–192.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Chvâtal, V. [ 1983 ] Linear Programming, Freeman Press, New York.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  53. Dantzig, G.B. [ 1955 ] “Upper bounds, secondary constraints, and block triangularity in linear programming”, Econometrica 23 174–183.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Dantzig, G.B. [ 1969 ] “Mathematical Programming: Decomposition”, in Aronofsky (ed) Progress in Operations Research, Wiley, New York 176–193.Google Scholar
  55. Dantzig, G.B. and R.M. Van Slyke [ 1967 ] “Generalized upper bounding techniques”, Journal of Computer and System Sciences 1 213–226.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Dantzig, G.B. and Ph. Wolfe [ 1960 ] “Decomposition principle for linear programs”, Operations Research 8 101–111.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Ho, J.K. and E. Loute [ 1981 ] “An advanced implementation of the Dantzig-Wolfe decomposition algorithm for linear programming”, Mathematical Programming 20 303–326.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Klee, V. and G.J. Minty [ 1972 ] “How good is the simplex algorithm?” in Sisha (ed) Inequalities–III, Academic Press, New York 159–175.Google Scholar
  59. Perold, A.F. and G.B. Dantzig [ 1978 ] “A basis factorization method for block triangular linear programs”, in Duff and Stewart (eds) Proceedings of the Symposium on Sparse Matrix Computations, Knoxville 283–312.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Manfred Padberg
    • 1
  1. 1.Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Statistics and Operations Research DepartmentNew York UniversityNew York CityUSA

Personalised recommendations