Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
An interior point method was discovered by Soviet mathematician I. I. Dikin in 1967. [1] The method was reinvented in the U.S. in the mid-1980s. In 1984, Narendra Karmarkar developed a method for linear programming called Karmarkar's algorithm, [2] which runs in provably polynomial time (() operations on L-bit numbers, where n is the number of variables and constants), and is also very ...
Many other LP-type problems can also be expressed using quasiconvex functions in this way; for instance, the smallest enclosing circle problem is the problem of minimizing max i f i where each of the functions f i measures the Euclidean distance from one of the given points. [10] LP-type problems have also been used to determine the optimal ...
In decision problem versions of the art gallery problem, one is given as input both a polygon and a number k, and must determine whether the polygon can be guarded with k or fewer guards. This problem is ∃ R {\displaystyle \exists \mathbb {R} } -complete , as is the version where the guards are restricted to the edges of the polygon. [ 10 ]
For example, in solving the linear programming problem, the active set gives the hyperplanes that intersect at the solution point. In quadratic programming , as the solution is not necessarily on one of the edges of the bounding polygon, an estimation of the active set gives us a subset of inequalities to watch while searching the solution ...
An example of a decision problem is deciding with the help of an algorithm whether a given natural number is prime. Another example is the problem, "given two numbers x and y, does x evenly divide y?" A method for solving a decision problem, given in the form of an algorithm, is called a decision procedure for that problem.
Subproblems are re-solved given their new objective functions. An optimal value for each subproblem is offered to the master program. The master program incorporates one or all of the new columns generated by the solutions to the subproblems based on those columns' respective ability to improve the original problem's objective.
Of particular use is the property that for any fixed set of ~ values, the optimal result to the Lagrangian relaxation problem will be no smaller than the optimal result to the original problem. To see this, let x ^ {\displaystyle {\hat {x}}} be the optimal solution to the original problem, and let x ¯ {\displaystyle {\bar {x}}} be the optimal ...
Solve the problem using the usual simplex method. For example, x + y ≤ 100 becomes x + y + s 1 = 100, whilst x + y ≥ 100 becomes x + y − s 1 + a 1 = 100. The artificial variables must be shown to be 0. The function to be maximised is rewritten to include the sum of all the artificial variables.