Topics in Modern Computational Methods for Optimal Control Problems

  • Ekkehard W. Sachs
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems book series (LNE, volume 378)


Optimal control problems represent an important and interesting family of optimization problems. They differ from other optimization problems in so far as the description of the system to be controlled always involves some dynamics. This part is usually described by a system of differential equations or integral equations or difference equations. Depending on the model the type of differential equations is either ordinary or partial or a combination of both. The special feature about optimal control problems is that they are formulated in a function space, hence in an infinite dimensional space, and that they involve some kind of dynamics.


Optimal Control Problem Active Index Superlinear Convergence Trust Region Method Gradient Projection Method 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    D. B. Bertsekas. On the Goldstein-Levitin-Polyak gradient projection method. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, (2): 174–184, 1976.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    D. B. Bertsekas. Projected Newton methods for optimization problems with simple constraints. SIAM J. Control and Optimization, 20: 221–246, 1982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    J. V. Burke and J. Moré. On the identification of active constraints. Technical Report ANL/MCSTM-82, Argonne National Laboratory, Math. and Comp. Science Div. Report, 1986.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    P. H. Calamai and J. Moré. Projected gradient methods for linearly constrained problems. Math. Programming, 39: 93–116, 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    J. C. Dunn. Global and asymptotic convergence rate estimates for a class of projected gradient processes. SIAM J. Control and Optimization, 19: 368–400, 1981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    J. C. Dunn. On the convergence of projected gradient processes to singular critical points. J. Optim. Th. Appl., 55 (2): 203–215, 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    J. C. Dunn and E. W. Sachs. The effect of perturbations on the convergence rates of optimization algorithms. Applied Math. and Optimization, 10: 143–147, 1983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    A. A. Goldstein. On Newton’s methòd. Numer. Math., 7: 391–393, 1965.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    C. T. Kelley and E. W. Sachs. Mesh independence of the gradient projection method for optimal control problems. SIAM J. Control and Optimization,to appear.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    E. S. Levitin and B. T. Polyak. Constrained optimization methods. USSR Comput. Math. Phys., 6: 1–50, 1966.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    E. W. Sachs. Convergence of algorithms for perturbed optimization problems. Annals of Operations Research, 27: 311–342, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [1]
    C. G. Broyden. A class of methods for solving simultaneous equations. Math. Comp., 19: 577–593, 1965.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [2]
    C. G. Broyden, J. E. Dennis, and J. J. Moré. On the local and superlinear convergence of quasi-Newton methods. J. I. M. A., 12: 223–246, 1973.Google Scholar
  14. [3]
    J. E. Dennis. Toward a unified convergence theory for Newton-like methods. In L. B. Rall, editor, Nonlinear Functional Analysis and Applications, pages 425–472. Academic Press, 1971.Google Scholar
  15. [4]
    A. Griewank. Rates of convergence for secant methods on nonlinear problems in Hilbert space. In J. P. Hennart, editor, Numerical Analysis, Proceedings Guanajuato, Mexico 1984, pages 138–157. Springer, 1985.Google Scholar
  16. [5]
    A. Griewank. The local convergence of Broyden-like methods on Lipschitzian problems in Hilbert space. SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 24: 684–705, 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [6]
    C. T. Kelley and E. W. Sachs. A new proof of superlinear convergence for Broyden’s method in Hilbert space. SIAM J. Optimization, 1, 1991.Google Scholar
  18. [7]
    C. T. Kelley and E. W. Sachs. Quasi-Newton methods and unconstrained optimal control problems. SIAM J. Control and Optimization, 25: 1503–1517, 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [8]
    J. Stoer. Two examples on the convergence of certain rank-2 minimization methods for quadratic functionals in Hilbert space. Lin. Alg. and Appl., 28: 37–52, 1984.Google Scholar
  20. [1]
    A. Griewank. The solution of boundary value problems by broyden based secant methods. In J. Noye and R. May, editors, Computational Techniques and Applications: CTAC 85, Proceedings of CTAC, Melbourne, August 1985, pages 309–321. North Holland, 1986.Google Scholar
  21. [2]
    W. E. Hart and S. O. W. Soul. Quasi-newton methods for discretized nonlinear boundary problems. Journal of the Institute of Applied Mathematics, 11: 351–359, 1973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [3]
    C. T. Kelley and E. W. Sachs. A quasi-Newton method for elliptic boundary value problems. SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 24: 516–531, 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. [4]
    C. T. Kelley and E. W. Sachs. A pointwise quasi-Newton method for unconstrained optimal control problems. Numer. Math., 55: 159–176, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [5]
    C. T. Kelley, E. W. Sachs, and B. Watson. A pointwise quasi-Newton method for unconstrained optimal control problems, II. Journal of Optimization Th. and Applic., 71, 1991.Google Scholar
  25. [6]
    E. B. Lee and L. Markus. Foundations of Optimal Control Theory. Wiley, New York-London-Sydney, 1967.Google Scholar
  26. [7]
    H. Maurer. First and second order sufficient optimality conditions in mathematical programming and optimal control. Math. Programming Study, 14: 163–177, 1981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ekkehard W. Sachs
    • 1
  1. 1.FB IV — MathematikUniversität TrierTrierGermany

Personalised recommendations