ECE580 Solution to Problem Set 3: Applications of the FONC, SONC, and SOSC

Similar documents
ECE580 Solution to Problem Set 6

Lecture 3: Basics of set-constrained and unconstrained optimization

ECE580 Partial Solution to Problem Set 3

ECE580 Fall 2015 Solution to Midterm Exam 1 October 23, Please leave fractions as fractions, but simplify them, etc.

Math 273a: Optimization Basic concepts

ECE580 Solution to Problem Set 4

MATH 4211/6211 Optimization Basics of Optimization Problems

ECE580 Exam 1 October 4, Please do not write on the back of the exam pages. Extra paper is available from the instructor.

Computational Optimization. Convexity and Unconstrained Optimization 1/29/08 and 2/1(revised)

MATH 4211/6211 Optimization Constrained Optimization

MAT 419 Lecture Notes Transcribed by Eowyn Cenek 6/1/2012

MATH 5720: Unconstrained Optimization Hung Phan, UMass Lowell September 13, 2018

Performance Surfaces and Optimum Points

Week 4: Calculus and Optimization (Jehle and Reny, Chapter A2)

Math 164 (Lec 1): Optimization Instructor: Alpár R. Mészáros

ECE 680 Modern Automatic Control. Gradient and Newton s Methods A Review

Numerical Optimization

Computational Optimization. Constrained Optimization Part 2

Module 04 Optimization Problems KKT Conditions & Solvers

Functions of Several Variables

OPER 627: Nonlinear Optimization Lecture 2: Math Background and Optimality Conditions

Examination paper for TMA4180 Optimization I

Functions of Several Variables

Math (P)refresher Lecture 8: Unconstrained Optimization

Chapter 8 Gradient Methods

OPTIMALITY AND STABILITY OF SYMMETRIC EVOLUTIONARY GAMES WITH APPLICATIONS IN GENETIC SELECTION. (Communicated by Yang Kuang)

Review of Optimization Methods

Fundamentals of Unconstrained Optimization

Course Notes for EE227C (Spring 2018): Convex Optimization and Approximation

Computing Solution Concepts of Normal-Form Games. Song Chong EE, KAIST

CE 191: Civil and Environmental Engineering Systems Analysis. LEC 05 : Optimality Conditions

CHAPTER 2: QUADRATIC PROGRAMMING

SWFR ENG 4TE3 (6TE3) COMP SCI 4TE3 (6TE3) Continuous Optimization Algorithm. Convex Optimization. Computing and Software McMaster University

Chapter 2: Unconstrained Extrema

Concavity and Lines. By Ng Tze Beng

Introduction to unconstrained optimization - direct search methods

Two hours. To be provided by Examinations Office: Mathematical Formula Tables. THE UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER. xx xxxx 2017 xx:xx xx.

CHAPTER 2: CONVEX SETS AND CONCAVE FUNCTIONS. W. Erwin Diewert January 31, 2008.

Name: Instructor: Lecture time: TA: Section time:

Lagrange Multipliers

Mathematical Economics: Lecture 16

Finite Dimensional Optimization Part III: Convex Optimization 1

Lecture 1. 1 Conic programming. MA 796S: Convex Optimization and Interior Point Methods October 8, Consider the conic program. min.

This exam will be over material covered in class from Monday 14 February through Tuesday 8 March, corresponding to sections in the text.

Production Possibility Frontier

EC /11. Math for Microeconomics September Course, Part II Problem Set 1 with Solutions. a11 a 12. x 2

Machine Learning and Computational Statistics, Spring 2017 Homework 2: Lasso Regression

TMA 4180 Optimeringsteori KARUSH-KUHN-TUCKER THEOREM

Quadratic Optimization over a Polyhedral Set

Chapter 2 BASIC PRINCIPLES. 2.1 Introduction. 2.2 Gradient Information

Extreme Abridgment of Boyd and Vandenberghe s Convex Optimization

MA2501 Numerical Methods Spring 2015

where u is the decision-maker s payoff function over her actions and S is the set of her feasible actions.

Classical iterative methods for linear systems

Optimization Part 1 P. Agius L2.1, Spring 2008

SF2822 Applied nonlinear optimization, final exam Wednesday June

Math 502 Fall 2005 Solutions to Homework 3

September Math Course: First Order Derivative

Game Theory. Greg Plaxton Theory in Programming Practice, Spring 2004 Department of Computer Science University of Texas at Austin

Here each term has degree 2 (the sum of exponents is 2 for all summands). A quadratic form of three variables looks as

Symmetric Matrices and Eigendecomposition

Unconstrained Optimization

Static Problem Set 2 Solutions

The general programming problem is the nonlinear programming problem where a given function is maximized subject to a set of inequality constraints.

Lec3p1, ORF363/COS323

1. (7pts) Find the points of intersection, if any, of the following planes. 3x + 9y + 6z = 3 2x 6y 4z = 2 x + 3y + 2z = 1

Optimality, Duality, Complementarity for Constrained Optimization

Nonlinear Programming (NLP)

Lecture 2: Convex Sets and Functions

Deep Learning. Authors: I. Goodfellow, Y. Bengio, A. Courville. Chapter 4: Numerical Computation. Lecture slides edited by C. Yim. C.

10-725/ Optimization Midterm Exam

Cauchy s Theorem (rigorous) In this lecture, we will study a rigorous proof of Cauchy s Theorem. We start by considering the case of a triangle.

Math 164-1: Optimization Instructor: Alpár R. Mészáros

2.098/6.255/ Optimization Methods Practice True/False Questions

SECTION C: CONTINUOUS OPTIMISATION LECTURE 11: THE METHOD OF LAGRANGE MULTIPLIERS

B553 Lecture 3: Multivariate Calculus and Linear Algebra Review

An Iterative Descent Method

Lecture: Cone programming. Approximating the Lorentz cone.

Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences. Supergradients. KC Border Fall 2001 v ::15.45

Math 291-2: Final Exam Solutions Northwestern University, Winter 2016

Lecture 2 - Unconstrained Optimization Definition[Global Minimum and Maximum]Let f : S R be defined on a set S R n. Then

Interior Point Algorithms for Constrained Convex Optimization

CE 191: Civil & Environmental Engineering Systems Analysis. LEC 17 : Final Review

1 Convexity, concavity and quasi-concavity. (SB )

MATH529 Fundamentals of Optimization Unconstrained Optimization II

Lyapunov Stability Theory

Chapter 3 Transformations

Course Notes for EE227C (Spring 2018): Convex Optimization and Approximation

Name: Section Registered In:

Homework Assignment 3

Notes I Classical Demand Theory: Review of Important Concepts

EC 521 MATHEMATICAL METHODS FOR ECONOMICS. Lecture 1: Preliminaries

Unconstrained optimization

In view of (31), the second of these is equal to the identity I on E m, while this, in view of (30), implies that the first can be written

Math Maximum and Minimum Values, I

Optimization. Sherif Khalifa. Sherif Khalifa () Optimization 1 / 50

Mathematical Economics (ECON 471) Lecture 3 Calculus of Several Variables & Implicit Functions

MATH2070 Optimisation

Optimality Conditions for Constrained Optimization

Lakehead University ECON 4117/5111 Mathematical Economics Fall 2002

Transcription:

ECE580 Spring 2016 Solution to Problem Set 3 February 8, 2016 1 ECE580 Solution to Problem Set 3: Applications of the FONC, SONC, and SOSC These problems are from the textbook by Chong and Zak, 4th edition, which is the textbook for the ECE580 Spring 2016 semester As such, many of the problem statements are taken verbatim from the text; however, others have been reworded for reasons of efficiency or instruction Solutions are mine Any errors are mine and should be reported to me, skoskie@iupuiedu, rather than to the textbook authors 61 Consider the problem minimize f(x) subject to x Ω, where f C 2 For each of the following definitions of Ω, x, and f, determine whether x is, is not, or might be a local minimizer (a) f : R 2 R, Ω = {x : x 1 1}, x = [ 1 2 T, f(x ) = [ 1 1 T Solution: x is on the boundary so we must verify that d T f(x ) 0 for all feasible directions d To be feasible, d 1 must be nonnegative, and d 2 is arbitrary, so long as d 0 d T f(x ) = d 1 + d 2 Since d 2 is arbitrary, this quantity may be negative, thus x is not a local minimizer (b) f : R 2 R, Ω = {x : x 1 1, x 2 2}, x = [ 1 2 T, f(x ) = [ 1 0 T Solution: In this case, x is on the boundary at a corner Thus, to be feasible, d must have both d 1 and d 2 nonnegative d T f(x ) = d 1 0, so the FONC is satisfied and x could be a local minimizer We are not given the Hessian, so we cannot check the SONC nor the SOSC (c) f : R 2 R, Ω = {x : x 1 0, x 2 0}, x = [ 1 2 T, f(x ) = [ 0 0 T, F (x ) = I Solution: x is an interior point Since the gradient is zero at x, the FONC is satisfied Since the Hessian is positive definite, the SOSC is satisfied so x is a local minimizer (d) f : R 2 R, Ω = {x : x 1 1, x 2 2}, x = [ 1 2 T, f(x ) = [ 1 0 T [, 1 0 F (x ) = 0 1

ECE580 Spring 2016 Solution to Problem Set 3 February 8, 2016 2 Solution: x is on the boundary at a corner Both d 1 and d 2 must be nonnegative as before, and not both zero To satisfy the FONC, we need d T f(x ) = d 1 0, for all feasible d at x, which is true However, Applying the SONC with d = (0, 1), which is a feasible direction at x, we find that d T F (x )d = [ 0 1 [ [ 1 0 0 = 1 < 0 0 1 1 so the SONC is not satisfied and x is not a local minimizer 62 Find the minimizers and maximizers of f(x 1, x 2 ) = 1 3 x3 1 4x 1 + 1 3 x3 2 16x 2 Solution: Note that there is no restriction on the set of feasible points so Ω = R 2 First, we identify possible minimizers and maximizers by applying the first order necessary condition (FONC) Solving [ (x f(x 1, x 2) = 1 ) 2 4 (x 2) 2 = 0 16 leads to two possible values for x 1 and two for x 2, namely x 1 { 2, 2} and x 2 { 4, 4} Thus we have four points to be checked: ( 2, 4), (2, 4), ( 2, 4), (2, 4) Next we apply the second order necessary condition (SONC) for interior points (all points of R 2 are interior points) At each of the four points, we examine the Hessian, [ 2x1 0 F (x 1, x 2 ) = 0 2x 2 If both x 1 and x 2 are positive, the Hessian is positive definite, so (2, 4) is a strict local minimizer If both x 1 and x 2 are negative, the Hessian is negative definite, so ( 2, 4) is a strict local maximizer In the other two cases, the Hessian is indefinite so those points are neither minimizers nor maximizers 69 Consider the function f(x 1, x 2 ) = x 2 1x 2 + x 3 2x 1 (a) In what direction does f decrease most rapidly at the point x (0) = [2, 1 T? Solution: The rate of increase of f at a point x in the unit direction d is < f(x), d > (see p 84) The direction of maximum rate of increase of f at x is f(x) (see pp 71, 132)

ECE580 Spring 2016 Solution to Problem Set 3 February 8, 2016 3 The gradient is Evaluated at x (0), this becomes [ 2x1 x f(x 1, x 2 ) = 2 + x 3 2 x 2 1 + 3x 1 x 2 2 f(2, 1) = [ 5 10 Thus the unit vector in the direction of maximum rate of decrease of f at x (0) is [ f(2, 1) 1/ 5 ˆd = f(2, 1) = 2/ 5 (b) What is the rate of increase of f at the point x (0) in the direction of maximum decrease of f? Solution: the rate of increase of f at the point x (0) in the direction of maximum decrease of f is < f(x (0) ), ˆd > = [ 5 10 [ 1/ 5 2/ 5 = 5 + 4 5 = 5 5 (c) Find the rate of increase of f at the point x (0) in the direction d = [ 3 4 T Solution: First, we must obtain the unit vector [ 3/5 ˆd = d/ d = 4/5 Then we take the scalar product 613 Consider the problem < f(x (0) ), ˆd > = [ 5 10 [ 3/5 4/5 = 3 + 8 = 11 minimize f(x) (1) subject to x Ω (2) where f : R 2 R is given by f(x) = 3x 1, where x = [ x 1 Ω = {x : x 1 + x 2 2 2} x 2 T, and (a) Does the point x = [ 2 0 T satisfy the FONC? Solution: The gradient evaluated at x is [ T 3 f(2, 0) = 0

ECE580 Spring 2016 Solution to Problem Set 3 February 8, 2016 4 which is never zero, so no point in the interior of Ω satisfies the FONC OTOH, The point x = [ 2 0 T is on the boundary, so we must examine the feasible directions on the boundary (or more precisely at x ) The boundary is shown in Figure?? The Matlab code used to generate the figure is as follows: >> x2 = [0:01:4; >> x1 = 2 - x2^2; >> plot(x1,x2) >> hold Current plot held >> plot(x1,-x2) >> title( Feasible set \Omega for Problem 613 ) >> text(-11,15, \Omega = \{x: x_1 + x_2^2 \leq 2\} ) >> xlabel( x_1 ) >> ylabel( x_2 ) (b) Does the point x = [ 2 0 T satisfy the SONC? Solution: The condition d T f(x ) = 0 requires that d 1 = 0 However, the only feasible directions at x have d 1 < 0 so the SONC is trivially satisfied (c) Is the point x = [ 2 0 T a local minimizer? Solution: To determine this, we might imagine that we should apply the SOSC However, the SOSC that we have covered applies only in the interior case and x is on the boundary, so the SOSC is of no help Instead, let s look at the gradient [ T 3 f(2, 0) = 0 means that the function f is strictly increasing with decreasing x 1 The point x is the unique point for which x 1 = 2 (because if x 2 0, then x 1 < 2 x 2 < 2, so we have shown that x is the unique minimizer of f on Ω 614 Consider the problem minimize f(x) subject to x Ω where Ω = {x R 2 : x 2 1 + x 2 2 1} and f(x) = x 2 (a) Find all point(s) satisfying the FONC Solution The gradient of f is f(x) = [ 0 1

ECE580 Spring 2016 Solution to Problem Set 3 February 8, 2016 5 The set Ω consists of all points on and outside the unit circle We can reject all points outside the unit circle because these are interior points of Ω and the gradient is nonzero at all of these points For the points on the boundary, we must consider feasible directions The FONC that applies at boundary points requires that for any feasible direction Here we find that d T f(x ) 0 d T f(x ) = d 2, so the only points that can satisfy the condition are those for which there is a feasible direction with nonnegative d 2 This immediately eliminates all points on the for which x 2 < 0 However, it eliminates more than that For any point on the upper portion of the unit circle, with one exception, there are feasible directions for which d 2 < 0 The one exception is the point (0, 1) For this point, d 2 0, so the unique point that satisfies the FONC is x = (0, 1) For this x, the set of feasible directions is {d : d 2 0} (b) Which of these point(s) satisfying the SONC? Solution The SONC requires that the Hessian be positive semidefinite on the set of points x with feasible directions d at x such that d T f(x ) = 0 The point x has two feasible directions with d 2 = 0, namely d = (±1, 0) To check the SONC for these directions, we need the Hessian, which in this case is F (x) = 0 So the SONC is satisfied for any d at all, feasible or not (c) Which of these point(s) are local minimizers? Solution We cannot use the SOSC because the point (0, 1) is not an interior point of Ω Reasoning towards the answer, we note that f(0, 1) = 1 If we travel in a direction with increasing d 2, f increases; if we travel in a direction with constant d 2, f remains constant; if we travel in a direction with decreasing d 2, however, we obtain a smaller value of f Of course we must show that such a value exists in Ω for this argument to be valid Let ɛ be small and positive and x 2 = 1 ɛ Then let x 1 = 1 (1 ɛ) 2 = 1 (1 2ɛ + ɛ 2 = 2ɛ ɛ 2 We see that for arbitrarily small ɛ, the point ( ɛ(2 ɛ), 1 ɛ) is on the unit circle and the value of f is smaller than 1 so the point (0, 1) is not a local minimizer