2017
DOI: 10.1109/tac.2017.2696742
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Exact Complexity Certification of Active-Set Methods for Quadratic Programming

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
70
0
2

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
2

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 81 publications
(72 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
0
70
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…3 shows the block scheme of the proposed MPC, where q −1 represents the one-step delay operator. Problem (12) can be cast into the parametric unconstrained QP problem min .…”
Section: Model Predictive Controlmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…3 shows the block scheme of the proposed MPC, where q −1 represents the one-step delay operator. Problem (12) can be cast into the parametric unconstrained QP problem min .…”
Section: Model Predictive Controlmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This paper extends the result in [18], which handles the strictly convex case, to also handle positive semi-definite mpQPs, leading to additional theoretical as well as numerical results. In addition to being able to certify the complexity of primal active-set methods applied to positive semi-definite mpQPs, it is shown that this extension allows for dual activeset QP methods and active-set methods for linear programs to be certified with the presented method, enabling the results in [18], [19] and [12] to be viewed in a unified framework.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A challenging aspect of the analysis of the primal activeset QP algorithm considered in this work is that it turns out that all iterates are not necessarily affine in the parameter, in contrast to the methods studied in [19], [20] and [12]. Nonaffine iterates are shown to lead to a partition of the parameter space consisting of both linear and quadratic inequalities, in contrast to only linear inequalities which is the case in [19], [20] and [12].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Implementation of a typical MPC approach requires to online solve an optimization problem based on system model at each sampling time. A constrained finite-horizon optimal control problem must be solved at each time step, making the online implementation of MPC in embedded boards a challenge [2]. One way to avoid the online solution is to represent the solution explicitly via reformulation of the MPC problem into an equivalent multi-parametric quadratic programming (mp-QP) problem.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%