Optimization: Reuse calculations from objective function in nonlinear constraints function

2022 8 15
2 个回答
回答已采纳
更新时间：2022 8 16
2 次查看（30 天）

0 个投票

Hello,
Is it possible to reuse calculations from one function in the other to save computational effort?
Example:
function SSE = objfunc(inputs)
% some calculations that output model results + some other things
SSE = sum(residuals.^2)
end
function [c, ceq] = nonlinconstraint(inputs)
% same calculations as the objective function
building c and ceq vectors
end
Now, I know I could make a third function that wraps the calculations I mention and call that function both in objfunc and nonlinconstraint but that would imply in doing (the same) expensive calculations twice. Is there a way to reuse the calculations from one function into another or calculate it only once and pass the results to them? Other some other workflow that saves time?
If I use parallel computing toolbox I doubt it would reuse these common calculations, although it would probably make the code faster.
I am talking in the context of optimization, like multistart, globalsearch, fmincon, etc. that take up those functions to try to find global/local optimum.
I could potentially write a single function that outputs SSE,c,ceq but then I do not know how I would pass it to the aforementioned algorithms.

请先登录，再回答此问题。

 采纳的回答

Torsten
Torsten 2022-8-15

2 个投票

13 个评论
显示 11更早的评论 隐藏 11更早的评论

Gustavo Lunardon
Gustavo Lunardon 2022-8-15
Thank you Torsten! This is much in line with what I was looking for, glad to see there is a documented example on that. I was not aware. I will try to make a mix of this example and Bruno's suggestion to make it work for my case.
Gustavo Lunardon
Gustavo Lunardon 2022-8-15
Does this also work with linear constraints or the solvers call the linear constraints more frequently than objective/nonlinear constraints?
Torsten
Torsten 2022-8-15
编辑：Torsten 2022-8-15
Linear constraints are set in A,b,Aeq,beq,lb and ub.
Since the arrays/matrices are constant, they don't have to be updated.
Gustavo Lunardon
Gustavo Lunardon 2022-8-15
编辑：Gustavo Lunardon 2022-8-15
OK. I see I can construct things that way. Thanks
Gustavo Lunardon
Gustavo Lunardon 2022-8-16
Actually, I have equality constraints in the form Aeq*x = beq(x). I was using the nonlinear constraints to pass that to the solver. I see that fmincon and the other algorithms do not accept function handles for beq so guess there is no other way around it.
Torsten
Torsten 2022-8-16
编辑：Torsten 2022-8-16
Yes, Aeq*x = beq(x) is a nonlinear constraint to be defined in "nonlinconstraint".
But why do you think you could save time here ?
You can't reuse calculations already performed in "objfunc" in this case, do you ?
Gustavo Lunardon
Gustavo Lunardon 2022-8-16
编辑：Gustavo Lunardon 2022-8-16
I do, the constraints are in that form because I am trying multiple shooting. They are continuity constraints and I need to integrate from the starting point of the node. These calculations yield the model value at the point (used for the residual in the objective function) and the values for the states at each node, which should be equal to the final value of the integration of the previous node (hence the nonlinear constraint). It does save time if I do not need to integrate everything twice.
Well, I could pass the initial and final state constraints as linear constraints, even if I could not do the same with the continuity ones.
Torsten
Torsten 2022-8-16
And you think multiple shooting is more stable than just simple integration using one of the ODE integrators ? Or why did you choose such a complicated approach ?
Gustavo Lunardon
Gustavo Lunardon 2022-8-16
编辑：Gustavo Lunardon 2022-8-16
I can use one of the standard ODE integrators between the nodes, no need to code Runge-Kutta myself, although I have that too. I do not think multiple shooting is more stable, I am struggling to make it converge at the moment. I am doing this because I am trying to solve optimal control problems and the control variables are discretized in time. I was trying to apply multiple shooting for regression to familiarize myself with it.
So control problems of the form, just as an example:
dy(1) = y(1);
dy(2) = u;
u could be a sequence of piecewise constant accelerations and y(1) and y(2) position and velocity, respectively. Then minimize some function related to the fuel used and so on.
I could also try to code orthogonal collocation but that looks more complicated than multiple shooting.
Torsten
Torsten 2022-8-16
But a usual ODE integrator also accepts discretized inputs. You just have to define how they should be interpolated between the discretization points. But there are several options: linear, quadratic, spline ...
But you must know the way to go with your problem.
Gustavo Lunardon
Gustavo Lunardon 2022-8-16
编辑：Gustavo Lunardon 2022-8-16
Do you mean define a vector u = [u1,u2,u3,...,uN], where N = number of discretrizations for the control variable, pass it as an additional parameter to the ode function and select (via interp1, pchip, etc) which element of the vector to be used in the integration for that given time step (internal time step as selected automatically by the ode solver)? Or something else?
Torsten
Torsten 2022-8-16
You get the control vector
u = [u1,u2,u3,...,uN]
passed from "fmincon", I guess, because it is usually made up of variables to be adapted/optimized. With this control vector, one usually forms a function handle
fun_u = @(t)interp1(tspan,u,t,'spline') (or something else instead of spline)
passes this function handle to the ode-integrator (more precisely: to the function where you define the ode system) and evaluates it at the places where the control variable needs to be inserted as
u = fun_u(t).
Note that the (length of u) might be the (length of tspan - 1) ; this has somhow to be handled in the definition of fun_u.
Gustavo Lunardon
Gustavo Lunardon 2022-8-16
Thanks for the explanation! Passing a handle looks better than passing a vector as I was thinking. Looks more neat.

请先登录，再进行评论。

更多回答（1 个）

Bruno Luong
Bruno Luong 2022-8-15

1 个投票

You can use this design pattern
function preciousvalue = expensivereuse(inputs)
persistent lastresult
if ~isempty(lastresult) && isequal(input, lastresult.inputs)
preciousvalue = lastresult.preciousvalue;
else
preciousvalue = computepreciousvalue(inputs); % this is the function that computes the expensive part
lastresult = struct('inputs', inputs, 'preciousvalue', preciousvalue);
end
end
function SSE = objfunc(inputs)
preciousvalue = expensivereuse(inputs);
% some specific calculations that output model results + some other things
% from preciousvalue
SSE = sum(residuals.^2)
end
function [c, ceq] = nonlinconstraint(inputs)
preciousvalue = expensivereuse(inputs);
% some specific calculations
from preciousvalue
building c and ceq vectors
end

1 个评论
显示 -1更早的评论 隐藏 -1更早的评论

Gustavo Lunardon
Gustavo Lunardon 2022-8-15
That is an interesting approach. It uses some lines I was not familiar with, like the persistent and from. I will keep that in mind. Thanks for the suggestion! It opens some paths to do other things I was looking for as well.

请先登录，再进行评论。

类别

在 帮助中心 和 File Exchange 中查找有关 Solver Outputs and Iterative Display 的更多信息

产品

版本

R2020b

标签

Community Treasure Hunt

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

Start Hunting!

Translated by