Quadratic Minimization with Bound Constraints
This example shows the effects of some option settings on a sparse, bound-constrained, positive definite quadratic problem.
Create the quadratic matrix H
as a tridiagonal symmetric matrix of size 400-by-400 with entries +4 on the main diagonal and –2 on the off-diagonals.
Bin = -2*ones(399,1); H = spdiags(Bin,-1,400,400); H = H + H'; H = H + 4*speye(400);
Set bounds of [0,0.9]
in each component except the 400th. Allow the 400th component to be unbounded.
lb = zeros(400,1); lb(400) = -inf; ub = 0.9*ones(400,1); ub(400) = inf;
Set the linear vector f
to zeros, except set f(400) =
–2
.
f = zeros(400,1); f(400) = -2;
Trust-Region-Reflective Solution
Solve the quadratic program using the 'trust-region-reflective'
algorithm.
options = optimoptions('quadprog','Algorithm',"trust-region-reflective"); tic [x1,fval1,exitflag1,output1] = ... quadprog(H,f,[],[],[],[],lb,ub,[],options);
Local minimum possible. quadprog stopped because the relative change in function value is less than the function tolerance.
time1 = toc
time1 = 0.1044
Examine the solution.
fval1,exitflag1,output1.iterations,output1.cgiterations
fval1 = -0.9930
exitflag1 = 3
ans = 18
ans = 1682
The algorithm converges in relatively few iterations, but takes over 1000 CG (conjugate gradient) iterations. To avoid the CG iterations, set options to use a direct solver instead.
options = optimoptions(options,'SubproblemAlgorithm','factorization'); tic [x2,fval2,exitflag2,output2] = ... quadprog(H,f,[],[],[],[],lb,ub,[],options);
Local minimum possible. quadprog stopped because the relative change in function value is less than the function tolerance.
time2 = toc
time2 = 0.0185
fval2,exitflag2,output2.iterations,output2.cgiterations
fval2 = -0.9930
exitflag2 = 3
ans = 10
ans = 0
This time, the algorithm takes fewer iterations and no CG iterations. The solution time decreases substantially, despite the relatively time-consuming direct factorization steps, because the solver avoids taking many CG steps.
Interior-Point Solution
The default 'interior-point-convex'
algorithm can solve this problem.
tic [x3,fval3,exitflag3,output3] = ... quadprog(H,f,[],[],[],[],lb,ub); % No options means use the default algorithm
Minimum found that satisfies the constraints. Optimization completed because the objective function is non-decreasing in feasible directions, to within the value of the optimality tolerance, and constraints are satisfied to within the value of the constraint tolerance. <stopping criteria details>
time3 = toc
time3 = 0.0402
fval3,exitflag3,output3.iterations
fval3 = -0.9930
exitflag3 = 1
ans = 8
Compare Results
All algorithms give the same objective function value to display precision, –0.9930
.
The 'interior-point-convex'
algorithm takes the fewest iterations. However, the 'trust-region-reflective'
algorithm with the direct subproblem solver reaches the solution fastest.
tt = table([time1;time2;time3],[output1.iterations;output2.iterations;output3.iterations],... 'VariableNames',["Time" "Iterations"],'RowNames',["TRR" "TRR Direct" "IP"])
tt=3×2 table
Time Iterations
________ __________
TRR 0.10443 18
TRR Direct 0.018544 10
IP 0.040204 8