Skip to main content

Toward Exposing the Applicability of Gass & Saaty’s Parametric Programming Procedure

  • Chapter
Perspectives in Operations Research

Part of the book series: Operations Research/Computer Science Interfaces Series ((ORCS,volume 36))

Summary

In this paper we discuss some applications of Gass & Saaty’s parametric programming procedure (GSP3). This underutilized procedure is relevant to solution strategies for many problem types but is often not considered as a viable alternate approach. By demonstrating the utility of this procedure, we hope to attract other researchers to explore the use of GSP 3 as a solution approach for important problems in operations research, computer science, information systems, and other areas.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. V. Aggarwal. A Lagrangean-Relaxation Method for the Constrained Assignment Problem. Computers & Operations Research, 12:97–106, 1985.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. C. Alpert and S. Yao. Spectral Partitioning: The More Eigenvectors, the Better. 32 nd ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference, 195–200, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  3. J. Bezdek. Pattern Recognition with Fuzzy Objective Function Algorithms. Plenum Press, New York, NY, 1981.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. H. Bock. Probability Models in Partitional Cluster Analysis. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, 23:5–28, 1996.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. K.-H. Borgwardt. The Average Number of Steps Required by the Simplex Method is Polynomial. Zeitchrift fur Operations Research, 26:157–177, 1982.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. N. Bryson. Parametric Programming and Lagrangian Relaxation: The Case of the Network Problem with a Single Side-Constraint. Computers & Operations Research, 18:129–140, 1991.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. N. Bryson. Applications of the Parametric Programming Procedure. European Journal of Operational Research, 54:66–73, 1991.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. N. Bryson. Identifying the Efficient Extreme-Points of the Three-Objective Linear Programming Problem. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 44:81–85, 1993.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. M-S. Chen and P. Yu. Optimal Design of Multiple Hash Tables for Concurrency Control. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 9:384–390, 1997.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. G. Dantzig. Making Progress during a Stall in the Simplex Algorithm. Technical Report SOL 88-5, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  11. R. Dave. Generalized Fuzzy C-Shells Clustering and Detection of Circular and Elliptic Boundaries. Pattern Recognition, 25:713–722, 1992.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. P. Denning. Working Sets Past and Present. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 6:64–84, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  13. I. Dhillon. Co-Clustering Documents and Words Using Bipartite Spectral Graph Partitioning. Proceedings of the 7th ACM SIGKDD, 269–274, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  14. C. Ding and X. He. Linearized Cluster Assignment via Spectral Ordering. ACM Proceedings of the 21 st International Conference on Machine Learning, 30, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  15. C. Faloutsos and K-I. Lin. FastMap: A Fast Algorithm for the Indexing, Data Mining, and Visualization of Traditional and Multimedia Datasets. ACM SIGMOD Proceedings, 163–174, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  16. S. Gass and T. Saaty. The Computational Algorithm for the Parametric Objective Function. Naval Research Logistics Quarterly, 2:39–45, 1955.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. L. Hagen and A. Kahng. New Spectral Methods for Ratio Cut Partitioning and Clustering. IEEE Trans. on Computed Aided Design, 11:1074–1085, 1992.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. A. Joseph and N. Bryson. Partitioning of Sequentially Ordered Systems Using Linear Programming. Computers & Operations Research, 24:679–686, 1997a.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. A. Joseph and N. Bryson. “Parametric Programming and Cluster Analysis”, European Journal of Operational Research 111:582–588, 1999.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. A. Joseph and N. Bryson. W-Efficient Partitions and the Solution of the Sequential Clustering Problem. Annals of Operations Research: Nontraditional Approaches to Statistical Classification, 74:305–319, 1997b.

    Google Scholar 

  21. N. Karmarkar. A New Polynomial-Time Algorithm for Linear Programming. Combinatorica, 4:373–395,1984.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  22. B. Kernighan. Optimal Sequential Partitions of Graphs. Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery, 18:34–40, 1971.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  23. L. Kurgan and K. Cios. CAIM Discretization Algorithm. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 16:145–153, 2004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. H. Liu and R. Setiono. Feature Selection by Discretization. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 9:642–645, 1997.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. T. Magnanti and J. Orlin. Parametric Linear Programming and Anti-Cycling Rules. Mathematical Programming, 41:317–325, 1988.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  26. J. McQueen. Some Methods for Classification and Analysis of Multivariate Observations, In: Lecam, L.M. and Neyman, J. (Eds.): Proceedings of the 5th Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability, 281–297, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  27. J. Moy, K. Lam, and E. Choo. Deriving Partial Values in MCDM by Goal Programming. Annals of Operations Research, 74:277–288, 1997.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. F. Murtagh. A Survey of Recent Advances in Hierarchical Clustering Algorithms which Use Cluster Centers. Computer Journal, 26:354–359, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  29. G. L. Nemhauser and L. A. Wolsey. Integer and Combinatorial Optimization. Wiley, New York, 1988.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. K.-M. Osei-Bryson and A. Joseph. Applications of Sequential Set Partitioning: Three Technical Information Systems Problems. Omega, 34:492–500, 2006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. K.-M. Osei-Bryson and T. Inniss. A Hybrid Clustering Algorithm. Computers & Operations Research, in press, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  32. L. Stanfel. Recursive Lagrangian Method for Clustering Problems. European Journal of Operational Research, 27:332–342, 1986.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. J. Ward. Hierarchical Grouping to Optimize an Objective Function. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 58:236–244, 1963.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2006 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Osei-Bryson, KM. (2006). Toward Exposing the Applicability of Gass & Saaty’s Parametric Programming Procedure. In: Alt, F.B., Fu, M.C., Golden, B.L. (eds) Perspectives in Operations Research. Operations Research/Computer Science Interfaces Series, vol 36. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-39934-8_14

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics