Computational Mathematics and Mathematical Physics

, Volume 58, Issue 2, pp 159–169

Projective-Dual Method for Solving Systems of Linear Equations with Nonnegative Variables

Article

Abstract

In order to solve an underdetermined system of linear equations with nonnegative variables, the projection of a given point onto its solutions set is sought. The dual of this problem—the problem of unconstrained maximization of a piecewise-quadratic function—is solved by Newton’s method. The problem of unconstrained optimization dual of the regularized problem of finding the projection onto the solution set of the system is considered. A connection of duality theory and Newton’s method with some known algorithms of projecting onto a standard simplex is shown. On the example of taking into account the specifics of the constraints of the transport linear programming problem, the possibility to increase the efficiency of calculating the generalized Hessian matrix is demonstrated. Some examples of numerical calculations using MATLAB are presented.

Keywords

systems of linear equations with nonnegative variables regularization projection of a point duality generalized Newton’s method unconstrained optimization transport linear programming problem

References

1. 1.
A. I. Golikov and Yu. G. Evtushenko, “Solution method for large-scale linear programming problems,” Dokl. Math. 70 (1), 615–619 (2004).
2. 2.
V. A. Garanzha, A. I. Golikov, Yu. G. Evtushenko, and M. Kh. Nguen, “Parallel implementation of Newton’s method for solving large-scale linear programs,” Comput. Math. Math. Phys. 49 (8), 1303–1317 (2009).
3. 3.
O. L. Mangasarian, “A Newton method for linear programming,” J. Optim. Theory Appl. 121, 1–18 (2004).
4. 4.
L. D. Popov, “Quadratic approximation of penalty functions for solving large-scale linear programs,” Comput. Math. Math. Phys. 47 (2), 200–214 (2007).
5. 5.
L. D. Popov, “Experience in organizing hybrid parallel calculations in the Evtushenko–Golikov method for problems with block-angular structure,” Autom. Remote Control 75 (4), 622–631 (2014).
6. 6.
I. I. Eremin, “On quadratic and fully quadratic problems of convex programming,” Russ. Math. 42 (12), 20–26 (1998).
7. 7.
M. Frank and P. Wolfe, “An algorithm for quadratic programming,” Naval Res. Logist. Quart. 3, 95–110 (1956).
8. 8.
A. N. Tikhonov, “On ill-posed problems in linear algebra and a stable method for their solution,” Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 163 (4), 591–594 (1965).
9. 9.
V. N. Malozemov and G. Sh. Tamasyan, “Two fast algorithms for projecting a point onto the canonical simplex,” Comput. Math. Math. Phys. 56 (5), 730–743 (2016).
10. 10.
G. Sh. Tamasyan, E. V. Prosolupov, and T. A. Angelov, “Comparative study of two fast algorithms for projecting a point to the standard simplex,” J. Appl. Ind. Math. 10 (2), 288–301 (2016).

Authors and Affiliations

• B. V. Ganin
• 1
• A. I. Golikov
• 1
• Yu. G. Evtushenko
• 1
1. 1.Dorodnitsyn Computing CenterFRC CSC RASMoscowRussia