2008
DOI: 10.1080/10556780701394169
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Steering exact penalty methods for nonlinear programming

Abstract: This paper reviews, extends and analyzes a new class of penalty methods for nonlinear optimization. These methods adjust the penalty parameter dynamically; by controlling the degree of linear feasibility achieved at every iteration, they promote balanced progress toward optimality and feasibility. In contrast with classical approaches, the choice of the penalty parameter ceases to be a heuristic and is determined, instead, by a subproblem with clearly defined objectives. The new penalty update strategy is pres… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
65
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
4
4
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 76 publications
(67 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
(45 reference statements)
2
65
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Filter methods (see [12] and references therein, and-for the nondifferentiable case- [18,34]) employ feasibility restoration steps to reduce the value of a constraint violation function. In [4] dynamical steering of exact penalty methods toward feasibility and optimality is reviewed and analysed. While these references consider infeasibility within traditional nonlinear programming (inspired) algorithms, our work is devoted to the study of corresponding issues within subgradient based methods applied to Lagrange duals.…”
Section: Outline and Main Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Filter methods (see [12] and references therein, and-for the nondifferentiable case- [18,34]) employ feasibility restoration steps to reduce the value of a constraint violation function. In [4] dynamical steering of exact penalty methods toward feasibility and optimality is reviewed and analysed. While these references consider infeasibility within traditional nonlinear programming (inspired) algorithms, our work is devoted to the study of corresponding issues within subgradient based methods applied to Lagrange duals.…”
Section: Outline and Main Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These two components are far from trivial. The linear system is highly ill conditioned, nonsymmetric and indefinite, and the choice of µ has been the topic of several recent papers; see, e.g., [4,15]. In the next section we discuss the solution of the linear system.…”
Section: B)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Penalty and Barrier functions have been widely used and studied in the last years, for example by Byrd, Nocedal, and Waltz (2008), Goldfarb (2006), Fletcher (1997), Gould, Orban, and Toint (2003), Leyffer, Calva, and Nocedal (2006), Klatte and Kummer (2002), Mongeau and Sartenaer (1995) and Zaslavski (2005), due to its ability to deal with Degenerated Problems.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They were also used in Constrained NonLinear Programming to assure the admissibility of sub-problems and the iteration reliability by Byrd et al (2008) and Chen and Goldfarb (2006).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%