Optimization with a vector of penalty functions

15 次查看（过去 30 天）
Oliver
Oliver 2011-7-27
I'd be very grateful for any pointers on how to solve my optimization problem.
I have 10 equality constraints to fulfill (bEq) 45 weights (x) I can adjust to fulfill these constraints (each of which affects 2 equality constraints)
I want to find the vector of weights (x) which minimises the summed penalty function subject to the boundary constraint that the minimum weight x(i) = 0 for all i.
If my problem has a vector of numeric penalties associated with each x(i) then it is a relatively easy linprog problem:
  • min(f(x)) - where f is my costVectorS.T.
  • AEq * x = bEq
  • x(i) >= 0 (for all i)
so I would run
[weightsLP,fValLP,exitFlagLP] = ...
linprog(costVector,[],[],AEq,bEq,lowerBounds,[],[],options);
(where options sets my tolerences).
However, my true penalty is not a numeric vector but a vector of functions of x. Where my penalty function is quadratic it looks like:
global coeff mu;
coeffLocal = [coeff;coeff];
muLocal = [mu;mu];
N = size(coeffLocal,1);
y = zeros(N,1);
for i = 1:N
if abs(x(i)) > 1e-6
y(i) = coeffLocal(i,1) * ((abs(x(i))-muLocal(i,1))/muLocal(i,2))^2 + ...
coeffLocal(i,2) * (abs(x(i))-muLocal(i,1))/muLocal(i,2) + ...
coeffLocal(i,3);
end
end
f = sum(y);
Where the final summation gives me the cost associated with the vector x, coeff is an Nx3 array of quadratic function parameters and mu an Nx2 array of rescaling parameters.
I have tried running fmincon to solve this problem using the results of the linprog step as initial starting point. No matter what I do to the function and step size tolerences I seem to get initial result back - stuck in a local minimum - which I can show is not the correct solution when I look at the quadratic penalty functions.
Am I missing something? Should I be running a different optimization function - ie not fmincon? I appreciate that this is a very general question but I cannot find anything obvious in the help pages which suggests I am going about this the wrong way.
Many thanks, Oliver
  1 个评论
Oliver
Oliver 2011-7-28
I probably should have added that fgoalattain also gives me whatever initial x I give it

请先登录，再进行评论。

请先登录，再回答此问题。

采纳的回答

Steve Grikschat
Steve Grikschat 2011-7-28
Hi Oliver,
I think that fmincon is struggling with this for two reasons. fmincon is meant to work on smooth-continuous problems. You're function appears to be neither from what I can tell. Fmincon will struggle near the discontinuities/singularities.
Is the cutoff on the magnitude of x (1e-6) needed? Perhaps you can change your lower bounds from 0 to 1e-6? What about the abs() on the value of x?
If not, my advice would be to get this objective in a formulation for QUADPROG:
x'*H*x + f'*x
That will probably be much faster and smooth.
+Steve
  1 个评论
Oliver
Oliver 2011-7-28
Steve,
Many thanks for your answer.
Good point on the cutoff, I should not have included
that in the objective function I posted - it is redundant
given I can adjust the x tolerence with optimset.
On the abs value of x being in there - yes I believe
that's necessary as with my current formulation of the
problem it allows me to specify that the penalty for using
+1 or -1 units of an individual element of x are the same.
Thanks again,
Oliver

请先登录，再进行评论。

更多回答（1 个）

Oliver
Oliver 2011-8-2
I do not believe the quadprog route will work.
The minimization I need to perform is over:
\sum_{i=1}^N (a_i x_i^2 + b_i x_i + c_i)
ST to the constraints mentioned in my earlier question
  • x_i >= 0 for all i
  • AEq x = bEq
Given I have constants in each quadratic and there are no cross terms I don't see a way to write this in the form:
x'Hx + fx
so I don't think quadprog will help. Any suggestions very gratefully received.
Many thanks, Oliver

类别

在 Help Center 和 File Exchange 中查找有关 Solver Outputs and Iterative Display 的更多信息

标签

产品

Community Treasure Hunt

Find the treasures in MATLAB Central and discover how the community can help you!

Start Hunting!

Translated by