An Interval Partitioning Approach for Continuous Constrained Optimization

  • Chandra Sekhar Pedamallu
  • Linet Özdamar
  • Tibor Csendes
Part of the Optimization and Its Applications book series (SOIA, volume 4)


Constrained Optimization Problems (COP’s) are encountered in many scientific fields concerned with industrial applications such as kinematics, chemical process optimization, molecular design, etc. When non-linear relationships among variables are defined by problem constraints resulting in non-convex feasible sets, the problem of identifying feasible solutions may become very hard. Consequently, finding the location of the global optimum in the COP is more difficult as compared to bound-constrained global optimization problems.

This chapter proposes a new interval partitioning method for solving the COP. The proposed approach involves a new subdivision direction selection method as well as an adaptive search tree framework where nodes (boxes defining different variable domains) are explored using a restricted hybrid depth-first and best-first branching strategy. This hybrid approach is also used for activating local search in boxes with the aim of identifying different feasible stationary points. The proposed search tree management approach improves the convergence speed of the interval partitioning method that is also supported by the new parallel subdivision direction selection rule (used in selecting the variables to be partitioned in a given box). This rule targets directly the uncertainty degrees of constraints (with respect to feasibility) and the uncertainty degree of the objective function (with respect to optimality). Reducing these uncertainties as such results in the early and reliable detection of infeasible and sub-optimal boxes, thereby diminishing the number of boxes to be assessed. Consequently, chances of identifying local stationary points during the early stages of the search increase.

The effectiveness of the proposed interval partitioning algorithm is illustrated on several practical application problems and compared with professional commercial local and global solvers. Empirical results show that the presented new approach is as good as available COP solvers.

Key words

continuous constrained optimization interval partitioning approach practical applications 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [Aem] Scholar
  2. [AH83]
    Alefeld, G., Herzberger, J.: Introduction to Interval Computations. Academic Press Inc. New York, USA (1983)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. [AMF95]
    Androulakis, I.P., Maranas, C.D., Floudas, C.A.: AlphaBB: a global optimization method for general constrained nonconvex problems. Journal of Global Optimization, 7, 337–363 (1995)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. [AS00]
    Al-Khayyal, F.A., Sherali, H. D.: On finitely terminating branch-and-bound algorithms for some global optimization problems. SIAM Journal on Optimization, 10, 1049–1057 (2000)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. [BEG94]
    Ben-Tal, A., Eiger, G., Gershovitz, V.: Global optimization by reducing the duality gap. Mathematical Programming, 63, 193–212 (1994)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. [BFG87]
    Benhabib, B., Fenton, R.G., Goldberg, A.A.: Analytical trajectory optimization of seven degrees of freedom redundant robot. Transactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering, 11, 197–200 (1987)Google Scholar
  7. [BHR92]
    Burkard, R.E., Hamacher, H., Rote, G.: Sandwich approximation of univariate convex functions with an application to separable convex programming. Naval Research Logistics, 38, 911–924 (1992)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. [BLW80]
    Berna, T., Locke, M., Westerberg, A.W.: A new approach to optimization of chemical processes. American Institute of Chemical Engineers Journal, 26, 37–43 (1980)Google Scholar
  9. [BMV94]
    Benhamou, F., McAllester, D., Van Hentenryck, P.: CLP (Intervals) revisited. Proc. of ILPS’94, International Logic Programming Symposium, 124–138 (1994)Google Scholar
  10. [CGC00]
    Casado, L.G., García, I., Csendes, T.: A new multisection technique in interval methods for global optimization. Computing, 65, 263–269 (2000)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. [CGT94]
    Conn, A.R., Gould, N., Toint, Ph.L.: A note on exploiting structure when using slack variables. Mathematical Programming, 67, 89–99 (1994)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. [CR97]
    Csendes, T., Ratz, D.: Subdivision direction selection in interval methods for global optimization. SIAM J. on Numerical Analysis, 34, 922–938 (1997)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. [DNS97]
    Dallwig, S., Neumaier, A., Schichl, H.: GLOPT-a program for constrained global optimization. In: Bomze, I.M., Csendes, T., Horst, R., Pardalos, P.M. (eds) Developments in Global Optimization. Kluwer, Dordrecht, 19–36 (1997)Google Scholar
  14. [Dru96]
    Drud, A.S.: CONOPT: A System for Large Scale Nonlinear Optimization. Reference Manual for CONOPT Subroutine Library, ARKI Consulting and Development A/S, Bagsvaerd, Denmark (1996)Google Scholar
  15. [FGW02]
    Forsgren, A., Gill, P.E., Wright, M.H.: Interior methods for nonlinear optimization. SIAM Review., 44, 525–597 (2002)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. [FV93]
    Floudas, C.A., Visweswaran, V.: Primal-relaxed dual global optimization approach. J. Opt. Th. Appl., 78, 187–225 (1993)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. [GMS97]
    Gill, P.E., Murray, W., Saunders, M.A.: SNOPT: An SQP Algorithm for Large-scale Constrained Optimization. Numerical Analysis Report 97-2, Department of Mathematics, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA (1997)Google Scholar
  18. [Han92]
    Hansen, E.R.: Global Optimization Using Interval Analysis. Marcel Dekker, New York (1992)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. [HJL92]
    Hansen, P., Jaumard, B., Lu, S.: Global optimization of univariate Lipschitz functions: I. Survey and properties. Mathematical Programming, 55, 251–272 (1992)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  20. [HS80]
    Hansen, E., Sengupta, S.: Global constrained optimization using interval analysis. In: Nickel, K.L. (ed) Interval Mathematics. Academic Press, New York (1980)Google Scholar
  21. [HTD92]
    Horst, R., Thoai, N.V., De Vries, J.: A new simplicial cover technique in constrained global optimization. J. Global Opt., 2, 1–19 (1992)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [HW93]
    Hansen, E., Walster, G.W.: Bounds for Lagrange multipliers and optimal points. Comput. Math. Appl., 25, 59 (1993)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  23. [HWY03]
    Hsu, Y-L., Wang, S-G., Yu, C-C.: A sequential approximation method using neural networks for engineering design optimization problems. Engineering Optimization, 35, 489–511 (2003)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  24. [Kea91]
    Kearfott, R.B.: Decompostion of arithmetic expressions to improve the behaviour of interval iteration for nonlinear systems. Computing, 47, 169–191 (1991)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  25. [Kea94]
    Kearfott, R.B.: On Verifying Feasibility in Equality Constrained Optimization Problems. preprint (1994)Google Scholar
  26. [Kea96a]
    Kearfott, R.B.: A review of techniques in the verified solution of constrained global optimization problems. In: Kearfott, R.B., Kreinovich, V. (eds) Applications of Interval Computations. Kluwer, Dordrecht, Netherlands, pp. 23–60 (1996)Google Scholar
  27. [Kea96b]
    Kearfott, R.B.: Test results for an interval branch and bound algorithm for equality-constrained optimization. In: Floudas, C, Pardalos, P. (eds) State of the Art in Global Optimization: Computational Methods and Applications. Kluwer, Dordrecht, Netherlands, pp. 181–200 (1996)Google Scholar
  28. [Kea96c]
    Kearfott, R.B.: Rigorous Global Search: Continuous Problems. Kluwer, Dordrecht (1996)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. [Kea03]
    Kearfott, R.B.: An Overview of the GlobSol Package for Verified Global Optimization. talk given for the Department of Computing and Software, McMaster University, Ontario, Canada (2003)Google Scholar
  30. [Kea04]
    Kearfott, R.B.: Empirical comparisons of linear relaxations and alternate techniques in validated deterministic global optimization. Optimization Methods and Software, accepted (2004)Google Scholar
  31. [Kea05]
    Kearfott, R.B.: Improved and simplified validation of feasible points: inequality and equality constrained problems. Mathematical Programming, submitted (2005)Google Scholar
  32. [KK94]
    Kannan, B.K., Kramer, S.N.: An augmented Lagrange multiplier based method for mixed integer discrete continuous optimization and its applications to mechanical design. Journal of Mechanical Design, 116, 405–411 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. [Knu94]
    Knuppel, O.: PROFIL/BIAS — a fast interval library. Computing, 53, 277–287 (1994)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  34. [Kor85]
    Korf, R.E.: Depth-first iterative deepening: An optimal admissible tree search. Artificial Intelligence, 27, 97–109 (1985)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  35. [LZT97]
    Lawrence, C.T, Zhou, J.L., Tits, A.L.: User’s Guide for CFSQP Version 2.5: A Code for Solving (Large Scale) Constrained Nonlinear (minimax) Optimization Problems, Generating Iterates Satisfying All Inequality Constraints. Institute for Systems Research, University of Maryland, College Park, MD (1997)Google Scholar
  36. [Mar03]
    Markót, M.C.: Reliable Global Optimization Methods for Constrained Problems and Their Application for Solving Circle Packing Problems. PhD dissertation, University of Szeged, Hungary (2003)Google Scholar
  37. [MFCC05]
    Markót, M.C., Fernandez, J., Casado, L.G., Csendes, T.: New interval methods for constrained global optimization. Mathematical Programming, accepted (2005)Google Scholar
  38. [MNW]
    Morales, J.L., Nocedal, J., Waltz, R., Liu, G., Goux, J.P.: Assessing the Potential of Interior Methods for Nonlinear Optimization. Optimization Technology Center, Northwestern University, USA (2001)Google Scholar
  39. [Moo66]
    Moore, R.E.: Interval Anlaysis. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey (1966)Google Scholar
  40. [MS87]
    Murtagh, B.A., Saunders, M.A.: MINOS 5.0 User’s Guide. Report SOL 83-20, Department of Operations Research, Stanford University, USA (1987)Google Scholar
  41. [Pin97]
    Pintér, J.D.: LGO — a program system for continuous and Lipschitz global optimization. In: Bomze, I.M., Csendes, T., Horst, R., Pardalos, P.M. (eds) Developments in Global Optimization. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston/Dordrecht/London, pp. 183–197 (1997)Google Scholar
  42. [PR02]
    Pardalos, P.M., Romeijn, H.E.: Handbook of Global Optimization Volume 2. Nonconvex Optimization and Its Applications. Springer, Boston/Dordrecht/London (2002)Google Scholar
  43. [Pri]
    PrincetonLib.: Princeton Library of Nonlinear Programming Models. Scholar
  44. [RC95]
    Ratz, D., Csendes, T.: On the selection of subdivision directions in interval branch-and-bound methods for global optimization. J. Global Optimization, 7, 183–207 (1995)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  45. [Rob73]
    Robinson, S.M.: Computable error bounds for nonlinear programming. Mathematical Programming, 5, 235–242 (1973)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  46. [RR88]
    Ratschek, H., Rokne, J.: New Computer Methods for Global Optimization. Ellis Horwood, Chichester (1988)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  47. [RS95]
    Ryoo, H.S., Sahinidis, N.V.: Global optimization of nonconvex NLPs and MINLPs with applications in process design. Computers and Chemical Engineering, 19, 551–566 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. [RS96]
    Ryoo, H.S., Sahinidis, N.V.: A branch-and-reduce approach to global optimization. Journal of Global Optimization, 8, 107–139 (1996)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  49. [Sah96]
    Sahinidis, N.V.: BARON: A general purpose global optimization soft-ware package. Journal of Global Optimization, 8, 201–205 (1996)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  50. [Sah03]
    Sahinidis, N.V.: Global optimization and constraint satisfaction: the branch-and-reduce approach. In: Bliek, C, Jermann, C, Neumaier, A. (eds) COCOS 2002. LNCS, 2861, 1–16 (2003)Google Scholar
  51. [San88]
    Sandgren, E.: Nonlinear integer and discrete programming in mechanical design. Proceeding of the ASME Design Technology Conference, Kissimmee, FL, 95–105 (1988)Google Scholar
  52. [SNS]
    Scherbina, O., Neumaier, A., Sam-Haroud, D., Vu, X.-H., Nguyen, T.-V.: Benchmarking global optimization and constraint satisfaction codes. Global Optimization and Constraint Satisfaction: First International Workshop on Global Constraint Optimization and Constraint Satisfaction, COCOS 2002, Valbonne-Sophia Antipolis, France (2002)Google Scholar
  53. [SP99]
    Smith, E.M.B., Pantelides, C.C.: A symbolic reformulation/spatial branch and bound algorithm for the global optimization of nonconvex MINLP’s. Computers and Chemical Eng., 23, 457–478 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. [TS02]
    Tawarmalani, M., Sahinidis, N.V.: Convex extensions and envelopes of lower semi-continuous functions. Mathematical Programming, 93, 247–263 (2002)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  55. [TS04]
    Tawarmalani, M., Sahinidis, N.V.: Global optimization of mixed-integer nonlinear programs: A theoretical and computational study. Mathematical Programming, 99, 563–591 (2004)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  56. [TTT85]
    Tuy, H., Thieu, T.V., Thai., N.Q.: A conical algorithm for globally minimizing a concave function over a closed convex set. Mathematics of Operations Research, 10, 498 (1985)zbMATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. [TZ89]
    Torn, A., Žilinskas, A.: Global Optimization. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 350, Springer, Berlin (1989)Google Scholar
  58. [Wol94]
    Wolfe, M.A.: An interval algorithm for constrained global optimization. J. Comput. Appl. Math., 50, 605–612 (1994)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  59. [ZB03]
    Zilinskas, J., Bogle, I.D.L.: Evaluation ranges of functions using balanced random interval arithmetic. Informatica, 14, 403–416 (2003)zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  60. [ZT96]
    Zhou, J.L., Tits, A.L.: An SQP algorithm for finely discretized continuous minimax problems and other minimax problems with many objective functions. SIAM J. on Optimization, 6, 461–487 (1996)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chandra Sekhar Pedamallu
    • 1
  • Linet Özdamar
    • 2
  • Tibor Csendes
    • 3
  1. 1.School of Mechanical and Aerospace EngineeringNanyang Technological UniversitySingapore
  2. 2.Izmir Ekonomi UniversitesiIzmirTurkey
  3. 3.Institute of InformaticsUniversity of SzegedSzegedHungary

Personalised recommendations