# BARRIER FUNCTIONS AND THEIR MODIFICATIONS

Reference work entry

First Online:

**DOI:**https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-0611-X_57

- 21 Downloads

## INTRODUCTION

In the mid-1950s and the early 1960s, Frisch (1955) and Carroll (1961) proposed the use of *Barrier Functions* (BFs) for constrained optimization. Since then, the BFs have been extensively studied, with particularly major work in the area due to Fiacco and McCormick (1968) who developed the Sequential Unconstrained Minimization Technique (SUMT). Currently, methods based on barrier functions make up a considerable part of modern optimization theory.

## BARRIER FUNCTIONS

Consider the constrained optimization problem

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

## References

- [1]Bertsekas, D. (1982). Constrained Optimization and Lagrange Multipliers Methods, Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
- [2]Carroll, C. (1961). “The created response surface technique for optimizing nonlinear restrained systems,” Operations Research, 9, 169–184.Google Scholar
- [3]Eggermont, P. (1990). “Multiplicative Iterative Algorithm for Convex Programming,” Linear Algebral and its Applications, 130, 25–42.Google Scholar
- [4]Fiacco, A.V. and McCormick, G.P. (1968). Nonlinear Programming: Sequential Unconstrained Minimization Techniques, John Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
- [5]Frisch K. (1955). “The logarithmic potential method of convex programming,” Technical Memorandum, May 13, University Institute of Economics, Oslo.Google Scholar
- [6]Gonzaga, C. (1992). “Path Following Methods for Linear Programming,” SIAM Review, 34, 167–224.Google Scholar
- [7]Gill, P., Murray, W., Saunders, M., Tomlin, J., and Wright, M. (1986). “On Projected Barrier Methods for Linear Programming and an Equivalence to Karmarkar's Projective Method,” Mathematical Programming, 36, 183–209.Google Scholar
- [8]Golshtein, E.G. and Tretyakov, N.V. (1974). “Modified Lagrangean Functions,” Economics and Math. Methods, 10, 568–591 (Russian).Google Scholar
- [9]Hestenes, M. (1969). “Multiplier and gradient methods,” Jl. Optimization Theory & Applications, 4, 303–320.Google Scholar
- [10]Huard, P. (1967). “Resolution of Mathematical Programming with Nonlinear Constraints by the Method of Centers,” in Nonlinear Programming, J. Abadie, ed., North-Holland, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
- [11]Jensen, D. and Polyak, R. (1994). “The convergence of the modified barrier method for convex programming.” IBM Jl. R&D, 38, 307–321.Google Scholar
- [12]Karmarkar, N. (1984). “A New Polynomial-time Algorithm for Linear Programming,” Combinatorica, 4, 373–395.Google Scholar
- [13]Lustig, I., Marsten, R., and Shanno, D. (1992). “On implementing Mehrotra's Predictor-Corrector Interior Point Method for Linear Programming,” Siam Jl. Optimization, 2, 435–449.Google Scholar
- [14]Mangasarian, O. (1975). “Unconstrained Lagrangians in Nonlinear Programming,” SIAM Jl. Control, 13, 772–791.Google Scholar
- [15]Melman, A. and Polyak, R. (1996). “The Newton Modified Barrier Method for QP,” Annals of Operations Research, 62, 465–519.Google Scholar
- [16]Mehrotra, S. (1992). “On the Implementation of Primal-Dual Interior Point Method,” SIAM Jl. Optimization, 2, 575–601.Google Scholar
- [17]Nesterov, Yu. and Nemirovsky, A. (1994). Interior Point Polynomial Algorithms in Convex Programming. SIAM Studies in Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
- [18]Polyak, B.T. and Tretyakov, N.V. (1973). “The method of penalty bounds for constrained extremum problems,” Zh. Vych. Mat. iMat. Fiz, 13, 34–46, USSR Computational Methods Math. Phys., 13, 42–58.Google Scholar
- [19]Polyak, R. (1986). Controlled processes in extremal and equilibrium problems. VINITY, Moscow (Russian).Google Scholar
- [20]Polyak, R. (1992). “Modified Barrier Functions (Theory and Methods),” Mathematical Programming, 54 177–222.Google Scholar
- [21]Polyak, R. (1996). “Modified Barrier Functions in Linear Programming,” Research Report, Dept. of Operations Research, George Mason University, 1–56. Google Scholar
- [22]Polyak, R. (1997). “Modified Interior Distance Functions,” Contemporary Mathematics, 209, 183–209.Google Scholar
- [23]Polyak, R. and Teboulle, M. (1997). “Nonlinear Rescaling and Proximal-like Methods in Convex Optimization,” Mathematical Programming, 76, 265–284.Google Scholar
- [24]Powell, M. (1969). “A Method for Nonlinear Constraints in Minimization Problems,” in Optimization, R. Fletcher, ed., Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
- [25]Powell, M. (1995). “Some Convergence Properties of the Modified Log Barrier Method for Linear Programming,” SIAM Jl. Optimization, 5, 695–739.Google Scholar
- [26]Renegar, J. (1988). “A polynomial-time algorithm, based on Newton's method for linear programming,” Mathematical Programming, 40, 59–93.Google Scholar
- [27]Rockafellar, R.T. (1973). “The Multiplier Method of Hestenes and Powell Applied to Convex Programming,” Jl. Optimization Theory & Applications, 12, 555–562.Google Scholar
- [28]Roos, C., Terlaky, T., and Vial, J.-Ph. (1997). Theory and Algorithms for Linear Optimization: An Interior Point Approach, John Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
- [29]Smale, S. (1986). “A Newton method estimates from data at one point,” in The Merging of Disciplines in Pure, Applied and Computational Mathematics, R. Ewing, ed., Springer-Verlag, New York/Berlin.Google Scholar
- [30]Teboulle, M. (1993). “Entropic proximal mappings with application to nonlinear programming,” Mathematics of Operations Research, 17, 670–690.Google Scholar
- [31]Wright, S. (1997). Primal-Dual-Interior Point Methods, SIAM, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
- [32]Yinyu, Ye (1997). Interior Point Algorithms: Theory and Analysis, John Wiley, New York.Google Scholar

## Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001