第一阶段原有单纯形和对偶单纯形算法的计算比较

线性最优化广泛应用于经济与管理的各个领域.在线性规划问题的求解中,如果一个初始基本可行解没有直接给出,则常采用经典的两阶段法求解.对含有"≥"不等式约束的线性规划问题,讨论了第一阶段原有单纯形法和对偶单纯形法两种算法形式,并根据第一阶段问题的特点提出了改进的对偶单纯形枢轴准则.最后,通过大规模数值试验对两种算法进行计算比较,结果表明,改进后的对偶单纯形算法在计算效率上明显优于原有单纯形算法.     

求解线性规划的极大熵方法

极大熵方法是求解多约束非线性规划和极大极小问题的一种有效的方法.用它来求解多约束优化问题,一种途径是将多约束用单约束近似,再用增广Lagrange乘子法求解近似问题;另一种途径是用极大熵方法构造精确罚函数的近似.无论是哪一种途径都需要估计乘子的上界.能否构造不引入乘子估计的算法是很有意义的.Karmarkar算法是求解线性规划的一种有效的多项式内点方法.这种方法在每一次迭代时都要作变换,在像空间用内切球近似单纯形的近似问题得到像空间的新的近似解,再作逆变换求得原空间的新的近似解.可见一次性地构造近似问题并求解之而得     

基于最钝角主元标规则的亏基算法北大核心

在最钝角原理基础上建立了新的主元标规则,它按最钝角原理赋予一组非基本变量较高优先权,先在其中选择进基变量,直到其相应的检验数均满足符号条件;如果此时剩下的检验数均已满足条件,则已达到最优.在亏基架构中引入新的主元规则,能有效地减少每次迭代可选的非基变量的个数.数值试验表明,新算法的效率优于亏基原始单纯形算法,表明了最钝角原理的可行性和有效性.     

基于最钝角主元标规则的亏基算法

在最钝角原理基础上建立了新的主元标规则,它按最钝角原理赋予一组非基本变量较高优先权,先在其中选择进基变量,直到其相应的检验数均满足符号条件;如果此时剩下的检验数均已满足条件,则已达到最优.在亏基架构中引入新的主元规则,能有效地减少每次迭代可选的非基变量的个数.数值试验表明,新算法的效率优于亏基原始单纯形算法,表明了最钝角原理的可行性和有效性.     

基于单纯形方法的双层线性规划全局优化算法

通过分析双层线性规划可行域的结构特征和全局最优解在约束域的极点上达到这一特性,对单纯形方法中进基变量的选取法则进行适当修改后,给出了一个求解双层线性规划局部最优解方法,然后引进上层目标函数对应的一种割平面约束来修正当前局部最优解,直到求得双层线性规划的全局最优解.提出的算法具有全局收敛性,并通过算例说明了算法的求解过程.     

单纯形算法的两种部分定价策略

根据Hu和Johnson的原始一对偶单纯形算法原理,提出了两种部分定价策略.给定一组原始一对偶可行解,首先,选择与原始问题简约价值系数为负且对偶松弛变量取零值相应的非基变量作为部分定价变量,再用Dantzig准则的单纯形算法求解该原始子问题.其次,针对原始退化问题,选择相应于原始问题简约价值系数小于某个适当小正数的非基变量进行部分定价,然后应用Bland准则的单纯形算法求解原始子问题,以克服退化可能引起的循环现象.最后,对来自NETLIB和MIPLIB的一些典型算例执行初步数值试验,结果表明,与经典单纯形算法相比,提出的算法具有更好的计算表现.     

方向选择约束单纯形算法

一、引言人们一直致力于求解线性规划的单纯形算法的改进工作.1976年,Powell 发表过降低基维数的改进单纯形算法,这个算法是将基矩阵的一个块用基矩阵的其它块的乘积来表示,虽然实现了降低基维数,节省了存贮空间,却增加了计算次数,减慢了计算速度.Sethi and Thompson 针对线性规划问题也提出过竞争和非竞争约束(candidate andnoncandidate constraints)的概念.他们发现,随机生成的实验问题,其总约束中大约只有15%—25%是竞争约束,并提出了一个仅对竞争约束进行旋转运算的单纯形算法.他们的算法,对某些特殊的线性规划提高了求解速度,但并不减少基的维数,并不节省内存空间,增加了程序复杂性.1984年,Sethi and Thompson 又提出 PAPA 算法,再次利用线性规划问题通常只有少量竞争约束这个事实来提高求解速度.但 PAPA 算法往往要在原问题的可行域外运行.况且,上面提到的各种算法,均不能从理论上表明,它们较标准改进单纯形算法到底节省了多少存贮单元和节省了多少计算次数.     

一种原始——对偶单纯形算法的枢轴准则选择

Curet曾提出了一种有趣的原始一对偶技术,在优化对偶问题的同时单调减少原始不可行约束的数量,当原始可行性产生时也就产生了原问题的最优解.然而该算法需要一个初始对偶可行解来启动,目标行的选择也是灵活、不确定的.根据Curet的原始一对偶算法原理,提出了两种目标行选择准则,并通过数值试验进行比较和选择.对不存在初始对偶可行解的情形,通过适当改变目标函数的系数来构造一个对偶可行解,以求得一个原始可行解,再应用原始单纯形算法求得原问题的最优解.数值试验对这种算法的计算性能进行验证,通过与经典两阶段单纯形算法比较,结果表明,提出的算法在大部分问题上具有更高的计算效率.     

模糊线性规划问题的一种新的单纯形算法

提出求解模糊线性规划问题的一种新的思路 ,就是应用单纯形法先求解与 (FLP)相应的普通线性规划问题 ,通过模糊约束集与模糊目标集的隶属度的比较 ,获得两个集合交集的最优隶属度 ,将此最优隶属度代入最优单纯形表中 ,即可求得 (FLP)的解。本算法只需在一张适当的迭代表台上执行单纯形迭代过程 ,简捷方便适用     

一类带反凸约束的非线性比式和问题的全局优化算法

本文针对一类带有反凸约束的非线性比式和分式规划问题,提出一种求其全局最优解的单纯形分支和对偶定界算法.该算法利用Lagrange对偶理论将其中关键的定界问题转化为一系列易于求解的线性规划问题.收敛性分析和数值算例均表明提出的算法是可行的.     

Some fundamental issues of basic line search algorithm for linear programming problems

In this article we present the fundamental idea, concepts and theorems of a basic line search algorithm for solving linear programming problems which can be regarded as an extension of the simplex method. However, unlike the iteration of the simplex method from a basic point to an improved adjacent basic point via pivot operation, the basic line search algorithm, also by pivot operation, moves from a basic line which contains two basic feasible points to an improved basic line which also contains two basic feasible points whose objective values are no worse than that of the two basic feasible points on the previous basic line. The basic line search algorithm may skip some adjacent vertices so that it converges to an optimal solution faster than the simplex method. For example, for a 2-dimensional problem, the basic line search algorithm can find an optimal solution with only one iteration.     

线性规划的最钝角CRISS-CROSS算法

1 引言 考虑如下标准线性规划问题 minimize c~Tx (1) subject to Ax=b, x≥0 其中A∈R~(m×n) (m相似文献   

Linear programming with multiple choice constraints for single chain undiscounted Markov decision problems

This paper develops an efficient LP algorithm for solving single chain undiscounted Markov decision problems. The algorithm imposes, in the framework of the simplex method, the multiple choice constraints that exactly one basic variable be chosen from each Markov state. It is proved that the algorithm converges to an optimal solution in a finite number of steps.     

A dual approach to primal degeneracy

The Revised Primal Simplex algorithm, in its simplest form, has no defence against degeneracy. Various forms of the perturbation method are usually effective, but most offer no guarantee of avoiding all degeneracy, and can lead to numerical difficulties. This paper presents a method that avoids cycling and circling by taking a dual approach.The degenerate subproblem consists of all the original variables, but only the degenerate transformed constraints. The current primal objective, which may be mixed, is used. This subproblem may be solved using the dual simplex algorithm, starting from the current dual infeasible solution, and with a zero dual objective. If the dual algorithm terminates optimally then the whole problem is optimal (subject to primal feasibility). Otherwise the final solution provides a non-basic direction which improves the value of the mixed primal objective and moves away from the degenerate vertex. A purification algorithm then renders the solution basic and further improves the mixed objective.     

A comprehensive simplex-like algorithm for network optimization and perturbation analysis

The family of network optimization problems includes the following prototype models: assignment, critical path, max flow, shortest path, and transportation. Although it is long known that these problems can be modeled as linear programs (LP), this is generally not done. Due to the relative inefficiency and complexity of the simplex methods (primal, dual, and other variations) for network models, these problems are usually treated by one of over 100 specialized algorithms. This leads to several difficulties. The solution algorithms are not unified and each algorithm uses a different strategy to exploit the special structure of a specific problem. Furthermore, small variations in the problem, such as the introduction of side constraints, destroys the special structure and requires modifying andjor restarting the algorithm. Also, these algorithms obtain solution efficiency at the expense of managerial insight, as the final solutions from these algorithms do not have sufficient information to perform postoptimality analysis.

Another approach is to adapt the simplex to network optimization problems through network simplex. This provides unification of the various problems but maintains all the inefficiencies of simplex, as well as, most of the network inflexibility to handle changes such as side constraints. Even ordinary sensitivity analysis (OSA), long available in the tabular simplex, has been only recently transferred to network simplex.

This paper provides a single unified algorithm for all five network models. The proposed solution algorithm is a variant of the self-dual simplex with a warm start. This algorithm makes available the full power of LP perturbation analysis (PA) extended to handle optimal degeneracy. In contrast to OSA, the proposed PA provides ranges for which the current optimal strategy remains optimal, for simultaneous dependent or independent changes from the nominal values in costs, arc capacities, or suppliesJdemands. The proposed solution algorithm also facilitates incorporation of network structural changes and side constraints. It has the advantage of being computationally practical, easy for managers to understand and use, and provides useful PA information in all cases. Computer implementation issues are discussed and illustrative numerical examples are provided in the Appendix     

A partitioning and bounded variable algorithm for linear programming

An interesting new partitioning and bounded variable algorithm (PBVA) is proposed for solving linear programming problems. The PBVA is a variant of the simplex algorithm which uses a modified form of the simplex method followed by the dual simplex method for bounded variables. In contrast to the two-phase method and the big M method, the PBVA does not introduce artificial variables. In the PBVA, a reduced linear program is formed by eliminating as many variables as there are equality constraints. A subproblem containing one ‘less than or equal to’ constraint is solved by executing the simplex method modified such that an upper bound is placed on an unbounded entering variable. The remaining constraints of the reduced problem are added to the optimal tableau of the subproblem to form an augmented tableau, which is solved by applying the dual simplex method for bounded variables. Lastly, the variables that were eliminated are restored by substitution. Differences between the PBVA and two other variants of the simplex method are identified. The PBVA is applied to solve an example problem with five decision variables, two equality constraints, and two inequality constraints. In addition, three other types of linear programming problems are solved to justify the advantages of the PBVA.     

A Dual Simplex Implementation of a Constraint Selection Algorithm for Linear Programming

The constraint selection approach to linear programming begins by solving a relaxed version of the problem using only a few of the original constraints. If the solution obtained to this relaxation satisfies the remaining constraints it is optimal for the original LP. Otherwise, additional constraints must be incorporated in a larger relaxation. The procedure successively generates larger subproblems until an optimal solution is obtained which satisfies all of the original constraints. Computational results for a dual simplex implementation of this technique indicate that solving several small subproblems in this manner is more computationally efficient than solving the original LP using the revised simplex method.