**Author:**
Paul Schrimpf

**Date: **2019-09-11

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

This document was created using Weave.jl. The code is available in the course github repository. The same document generates both static webpages and associated jupyter notebooks. This is meant to accompany the lecture notes for 526.

\[ \def\indep{\perp\!\!\!\perp} \def\Er{\mathrm{E}} \def\R{\mathbb{R}} \def\En{{\mathbb{E}_n}} \def\Pr{\mathrm{P}} \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\left\Vert {#1} \right\Vert} \newcommand{\abs}[1]{\left\vert {#1} \right\vert} \DeclareMathOperator*{\argmax}{arg\,max} \DeclareMathOperator*{\argmin}{arg\,min} \def\inprob{\,{\buildrel p \over \rightarrow}\,} \def\indist{\,{\buildrel d \over \rightarrow}\,} \]

The goal of this notebook is to give you some familiarity with numeric optimization. Understanding the code in this notebook will require some knowledge of Julia.

Therefore you might find the following other resources about Julia useful:

Numeric optimization is important because many (most) models cannot be fully solved analytically. Numeric results can be used to complement analytic ones. Numeric optimization plays a huge role in econometrics.

In our notes on optimization, we focused on maximization problems because utility and profit maximization are arguably the most fundamental optimization problems in economics. In this notebook, we will focus on minimization problems following the convention in mathematics, engineering, and most numerical libraries. It is easy to convert between minimization and maximization, and we hope that this does not lead to any confusion.

The simplest type of optimization algorithm are heuristic searches. Consider the problem:

\[ \min_x f(x) \]

with \(f:\R^n \to \R\). Heuristic search algorithms consist of

- Evaluate \(f\) at a collection of points
- Generate a new candidate point, \(x^{new}\). Replace a point in the current collection with \(x^{new}\) if \(f(x^{new})\) is small enough.
- Stop when function value stops decreasing and/or collection of points become too close together.

There are many variants of such algorithms with different ways of generating new points, deciding whether to accept the new point, and deciding when to stop. Here is a simple implementation and animation of the above idea. In the code below, new points are drawn randomly from a normal distribution, and new points are accepted whenever \(f(x^{new})\) is smaller than the worst existing function value.

using Distributions # julia functions come in packages, we make them available with using # to install a package type `!add Distributions` # or `using Pkg; Pkg.add("Distributions")` using Plots # Lines starting with # are comments. # The following block is a docstring. It is what would be displayed if # you enter `?minrandomsearch """ minrandomsearch(f, x0, npoints; var0=1.0, ftol = 1e-6, vtol = 1e-4, maxiter = 1000, vshrink=0.9, xrange=[-2., 3.], yrange=[-2.,6.]) Find the minimum of function `f` by random search. Creates an animation illustrating search progress. Inputs: - `f` function to minimizie - `x0` starting value - `npoints` number of points in cloud - `var0` initial variance of points - `ftol` convergence tolerance for function value. Search terminates if both function change is less than ftol and variance is less than vtol. - `vtol` convergence tolerance for variance. Search terminates if both function change is less than ftol and variance is less than vtol. - `maxiter` maximum number of iterations - `vshrink` after every 100 iterations with no function improvement, the variance is reduced by this factor - `xrange` range of x-axis in animation - `yrange` range of y-axis in animation - `animate` whether to create animation Output: - `(fmin, xmin, iter, info, anim)` tuple consisting of minimal function value, minimizer, number of iterations, convergence info, and an animation """ function minrandomsearch(f, x0, npoints; var0=1.0, ftol = 1e-6, vtol = 1e-4, maxiter = 1000, vshrink=0.9, xrange=[-2., 3.], yrange=[-2.,6.], animate=true) var = var0 # current variance for search oldbest = Inf # smallest function value xbest = x0 # x with smallest function vale newbest = f(xbest) iter = 0 # number of iterations noimprove = 0 # number of iterations with no improvement animate = (animate && length(x0)==2) if animate # make a contour plot of the function we're minimizing. This is for # illustrating; you wouldn't have this normally x = range(xrange[1],xrange[2], length=100) y = range(yrange[1],yrange[2], length=100) c = contour(x,y,(x,y) -> log(f([x,y]))) anim = Animation() else anim = nothing end while ((oldbest - newbest > ftol || var > vtol) && iter<=maxiter) oldbest = newbest x = rand(MvNormal(xbest, var),npoints) if animate # plot the search points p = deepcopy(c) scatter!(p, x[1,:], x[2,:], markercolor=:black, markeralpha=0.5, legend=false, xlims=xrange, ylims=yrange) end fval = mapslices(f,x, dims=[1]) (newbest, i) = findmin(fval) if (newbest > oldbest) noimprove+=1 newbest=oldbest else xbest = x[:,i[2]] noimprove = 0 end if animate # plot the best point so far scatter!(p, [xbest[1]],[xbest[2]], markercolor=:red, legend=false) end if (noimprove > 10) # shrink var var *= vshrink end frame(anim) # add frame to animation iter += 1 end if (iter>maxiter) info = "Maximum iterations reached" else info = "Convergence." end return(newbest, xbest, iter, info, anim) end """ banana(a,b) Returns the Rosenbrock function with parameters a, b. """ function banana(a,b) x->(a-x[1])^2+b*(x[2]-x[1]^2)^2 end f = banana(1.0,1.0) x0 = [-2.0, 3.0] result = minrandomsearch(f, x0, 20, var0=0.1, vshrink=0.5, vtol=1e-3 )

(3.19369654264188e-8, [0.9999654438714766, 0.9997555525763097], 88, “Conver gence.”, Animation(“/tmp/jl_MWNnvL”, [“000001.png”, “000002.png”, “000003.p ng”, “000004.png”, “000005.png”, “000006.png”, “000007.png”, “000008.png”, “000009.png”, “000010.png” … “000079.png”, “000080.png”, “000081.png”, “0 00082.png”, “000083.png”, “000084.png”, “000085.png”, “000086.png”, “000087 .png”, “000088.png”]))

import Base64:stringmime gif(result[5], "randsearch.gif", fps=5)

ERROR: UndefVarError: stringmime not defined

There are many other heuristic search algorithms. A popular deterministic one is the Nelder-Mead simplex. Popular heuristic search algorithms that include some randomness include simulated annealing and particle swarm. Each of the three algorithms just mentioned are available in Optim.jl. These heuristic searches have the advantage that they only function values (as opposed to also requiring gradients or hessians, see below). Some heuristic algorithms, like simulated annealing, can be shown to converge to a global (instead of local) minimum under appropriate assumptions. Compared to algorithms that use more information, heuristic algorithms tend to require many more function evaluations.

Gradient descent is an iterative algorithm to find a local minimum. As the name suggests, it consists of descending toward a minimum in the direction opposite the gradient. Each step, you start at some \(x\) and compute \(x_{new}\)

- Given current \(x\), compute \(x_{new} = x - \gamma Df_{x}\)
- Adjust \(\gamma\) depending on whether \(f(x_{new})<f(x)\)
- Repeat until \(\norm{Df_{x}}\), \(\norm{x-x_{new}}\), and/or \(\abs{f(x)-f(x_{new})}\) small.

using ForwardDiff using LinearAlgebra """ graddescent(f, x0; γ0=1.0, ftol = 1e-6, xtol = 1e-4, gtol=1-6, maxiter = 1000, xrange=[-2., 3.], yrange=[-2.,6.], animate=true) Find the minimum of function `f` by gradient descent Inputs: - `f` function to minimizie, must be compatible with ForwardDiff - `x0` starting value - `γ0` initial step size multiplier - `ftol` tolerance for function value - `xtol` tolerance for x - `gtol` tolerance for gradient. Convergence requires meeting all three tolerances. - `maxiter` maximum iterations - `xrange` x-axis range for animation - `yrange` y-axis range for animation - `animate` whether to create animation Output: - `(fmin, xmin, iter, info, anim)` tuple consisting of minimal function value, minimizer, number of iterations, convergence info, and animation """ function graddescent(f, x0; γ0=1.0, ftol = 1e-6, xtol = 1e-4, gtol=1-6, maxiter = 1000, xrange=[-2., 3.], yrange=[-2.,6.], animate=true) fold = f(x0) xold = x0 xchange=Inf fchange=Inf γ = γ0 iter = 0 stuck=0 improve = 0 # we increase γ if 5 steps in a row improve f(x) animate = animate && (length(x0)==2) if animate # make a contour plot of the function we're minimizing. This is for # illustrating; you wouldn't have this normally c = contour(range(xrange[1],xrange[2], length=100), range(yrange[1],yrange[2], length=100), (x,y) -> log(f([x,y]))) anim = Animation() else anim = nothing end g = ForwardDiff.gradient(f,xold) while(iter < maxiter && ((xchange>xtol) || (fchange>ftol) || (stuck>0) || norm(g)>gtol) ) g = ForwardDiff.gradient(f,xold) x = xold - γ*g fnew = f(x) if animate scatter!(c, [xold[1]],[xold[2]], markercolor=:red, legend=false, xlims=xrange, ylims=yrange) quiver!(c, [xold[1]],[xold[2]], quiver=([-γ*g[1]],[-γ*g[2]]), legend=false, xlims=xrange, ylims=yrange) frame(anim) end if (fnew>=fold) γ*=0.5 improve = 0 stuck += 1 if (stuck>=10) break end else stuck = 0 improve += 1 if (improve>5) γ *= 2.0 improve=0 end xold = x fold = fnew end xchange = norm(x-xold) fchange = abs(fnew-fold) iter += 1 end if (iter >= maxiter) info = "Maximum iterations reached" elseif (stuck>0) info = "Failed to improve for " * string(stuck) * " iterations." else info = "Convergence." end return(fold, xold, iter, info, anim) end

graddescent

result = graddescent(f, x0) gif(result[5], "graddescent.gif", fps=5)

ERROR: UndefVarError: stringmime not defined

Although an appealing and intuitive idea, the above example illustrates that gradient descent can perform surprisingly poorly in some cases. Nonetheless, gradient descent is useful for some problems. Notably, (stochastic) gradient descent is used to fit neural networks, where the dimension of `x`

is so large that computing the inverse hessian in (quasi) Newton’s method is prohibitively time consuming.

Newton’s method and its variations are often the most efficient minimization algorithms. Newton’s method updates \(x\) by minimizing a second order approximation to \(f\). Specifically:

- Given \(x\) set \(x_{new} = x - (D^2f_x)^{-1} Df_x\)
- Repeat until \(\norm{Df_{x}}\), \(\norm{x-x_{new}}\), and/or \(\abs{f(x)-f(x_{new})}\) small.

""" newton(f, x0;ftol = 1e-6, xtol = 1e-4, gtol=1-6, maxiter = 1000, xrange=[-2., 3.], yrange=[-2.,6.], animate=true) Find the minimum of function `f` by Newton's method. Inputs: - `f` function to minimizie, must be compatible with ForwardDiff - `x0` starting value - `ftol` tolerance for function value - `xtol` tolerance for x - `gtol` tolerance for gradient. Convergence requires meeting all three tolerances. - `maxiter` maximum iterations - `xrange` x-axis range for animation - `yrange` y-axis range for animation - `animate` whether to create animation Output: - `(fmin, xmin, iter, info, anim)` tuple consisting of minimal function value, minimizer, number of iterations, convergence info, and animation """ function newton(f, x0; γ0=1.0, ftol = 1e-6, xtol = 1e-4, gtol=1-6, maxiter = 1000, xrange=[-2., 3.], yrange=[-2.,6.], animate=true) fold = f(x0) xold = x0 xchange=Inf fchange=Inf iter = 0 stuck=0 animate=animate && length(x0)==2 if animate # make a contour plot of the function we're minimizing. This is for # illustrating; you wouldn't have this normally c = contour(range(xrange[1],xrange[2], length=100), range(yrange[1],yrange[2], length=100), (x,y) -> log(f([x,y]))) anim = Animation() end g = ForwardDiff.gradient(f,xold) while(iter < maxiter && ((xchange>xtol) || (fchange>ftol) || (stuck>0) || norm(g)>gtol) ) g = ForwardDiff.gradient(f,xold) H = ForwardDiff.hessian(f,xold) Δx = - inv(H)*g x = xold + Δx fnew = f(x) if animate scatter!(c, [xold[1]],[xold[2]], markercolor=:red, legend=false, xlims=xrange, ylims=yrange) quiver!(c, [xold[1]],[xold[2]], quiver=([Δx[1]],[Δx[2]]), legend=false, xlims=xrange, ylims=yrange) frame(anim) end if (fnew>=fold) stuck += 1 if (stuck>=10) break end else stuck = 0 xold = x fold = fnew end xchange = norm(x-xold) fchange = abs(fnew-fold) iter += 1 end if (iter >= maxiter) info = "Maximum iterations reached" elseif (stuck>0) info = "Failed to improve for " * string(stuck) * " iterations." else info = "Convergence." end return(fold, xold, iter, info, anim) end

newton

result = newton(f, x0) gif(result[5], "newton.gif", fps=5)

ERROR: UndefVarError: stringmime not defined

Newton’s method tends to take relatively few iterations to converge for well-behaved functions. It does have the disadvantage that hessian and its inverse can be time consuming to compute, especially when the dimension of \(x\) is large. Newton’s method can be unstable for functions that are not well approximated by their second expansion. This problem can be mitigated by combining Newton’s method with a line search or trust region.

Line searches consist of approximately minimizing \(f\) along a given direction instead of updating \(x\) with a fixed step size. For Newton’s method, instead of setting \(x_{new} = x - (D^2f_x)^{-1} Df_x\), set \(x_{new} \approx \argmin_{\delta} f(x - \delta (D^2f_x)^{-1} Df_x)\) where \(\delta\) is a scalar. This one dimensional problem can be solved fairly quickly. Line search can also be combined with gradient descent.

Instead of setting \[ x_{new} = x - (D^2f_x)^{-1} Df_x = \argmin_{\tilde{x}} f(x) + Df_x (\tilde{x} - x) + \frac{1}{2} (\tilde{x}-x)^T Df_x (\tilde{x} - x) \] to the unconstrained minimizer of a local second order approximation, trust region methods introduce an region near \(x\) where the approximation is trusted, and set \[ x_{new} = \argmin_{\tilde{x} \in TR(x)} f(x) + Df_x (\tilde{x} - x) + \frac{1}{2} (\tilde{x}-x)^T D^2 f_x (\tilde{x} - x). \] Often \(TR(x) = \{\tilde{x} : \norm{x - \tilde{x}} < r\}\). The radius of the trust region is then increased or decreased depending on \(f(x_{new})\).

Quasi-Newton methods (in particular the BFGS algorithm) are probably the most commonly used nonlinear optimization algorithm. Quasi-Newton methods are similar to Newton’s method, except instead of evaluating the hessian directly, quasi-Newton methods build an approximation to the hessian from repeated evaluations of \(Df_x\) at different \(x\).

Optim.jl contains all the algorithms mentioned above. Their advice on choice of algorithm is worth following..

In each of the algorithms above, we were somewhat cavalier with details like how to adjust step sizes and trust regions and what it means to approximately minimize during a line search. In practice these details can be quite important for how long an algorithm takes and whether it succeeds or fails. Different implementations of algorithms have different details. Often the details can be adjusted through some options. It can be worthwhile to try multiple implementations and options to get the best performance.

Constrained optimization is a bit harder than unconstrained, but uses similar ideas. For simple bound constraints, like \(x\geq 0\) it is often easiest to simply transfrom to an unconstrained case by optimizing over \(y = \log(x)\) instead.

For problems with equality constraints, one can apply Newton’s method to the first order conditions.

The difficult case is when there are inequality constraints. Just like when solving analytically, the difficulty is figuring out which constraints bind and which do not. For inequality constraints, we will consider problems written in the form: \[ \min_{x \in \R^n} f(x) \text{ s.t. } c(x) \geq 0 \]

Interior point methods circumvent the problem of figuring out which constraints bind by approaching the optimum from the interior of the feasible set. To do this, the interior point method applies Newton’s method to a modified version of the first order condition. The unmodified first order conditions can be written \[ \begin{align*} 0 = & Df_x - \lambda^T Dc_x \\ 0 = & \lambda_i c_i(x) \\ \lambda \geq & 0 \\ c(x) \geq & 0 \end{align*} \] A difficulty with these conditions is that solving them can require guessing and checking which combinations of constraints bind and which do not. Interior point methods get around this problem by beginning with an interior \(x\) and \(\lambda\) such that \(\lambda>0\) and \(c(x)>0\). They are then updated by applying Newton’s method to the equations \[ \begin{align*} 0 = & Df_x - \lambda^T Dc_x \\ \mu = & \lambda_i c_i(x) \\ \end{align*} \] where there is now a \(\mu\) in place of \(0\) in the second equation. \(x\) and \(\lambda\) are updated according to Newton’s method for this system of equations. In particular, \(x_{new} = x + \Delta_x\) and \(\lambda_{new}= \lambda + \Delta_\lambda\), where \[ \begin{align*} \begin{pmatrix} - ( Df_x - \lambda^T Dc_x) \\ \mu 1_m - diag(c(x)) \lambda \end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix} D^2 f_x - D^2 (\lambda c)_x & -Dc_x^T \\ \lambda Dc_x & diag(c(x)) \end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix} \Delta_x \\ \Delta_\lambda \end{pmatrix} \end{align*} \] Over iterations \(\mu\) is gradually decreased toward \(0\). Here is one simple implementation.

""" interiorpoint(f, x0, c; tol=1e-4, maxiter = 1000, μ0 = 1.0, μfactor = 0.2, xrange=[-2., 3.], yrange=[-2.,6.], animate=true) Find the minimum of function `f` subject to `c(x) >= 0` using a primal-dual interior point method. Inputs: - `f` function to minimizie - `x0` starting value. Must have c(x0) > 0 - `c` constraint function. Must return an array. - `tol` convergence tolerance - `μ0` initial μ - `μfactor` how much to decrease μ by - `xrange` range of x-axis for animation - `yrange` range of y-axis for animation - `animate` whether to create an animation (if true requires length(x)==2) - `verbosity` higher values result in more printed output during search. 0 for no output, any number > 0 for some. Output: - `(fmin, xmin, iter, info, animate)` tuple consisting of minimal function value, minimizer, number of iterations, and convergence info """ function interiorpoint(f, x0, c; tol=1e-4, maxiter = 1000, μ0 = 1.0, μfactor = 0.2, xrange=[-2., 3.], yrange=[-2.,6.], animate=true, verbosity=0) fold = f(x0) xold = x0 all(c(x0).>0) || error("interiorpoint requires a starting value that strictly satisfies all constraints") μ = μ0 λ = μ./c(x0) xchange=Inf fchange=Inf iter = 0 μiter = 0 stuck=0 animate = animate && length(x0)==2 if animate # make a contour plot of the function we're minimizing. This is for # illustrating; you wouldn't have this normally ct = contour(range(xrange[1],xrange[2], length=100), range(yrange[1],yrange[2], length=100), (x,y) -> log(f([x,y]))) plot!(ct, xrange, 2.5 .- xrange) # add constraint anim = Animation() end L(x,λ) = f(x) - λ'*c(x) foc = [ForwardDiff.gradient(x->L(x,λ),xold); λ.*c(xold)] while(iter < maxiter && ((xchange>tol) || (fchange>tol) || (stuck>0) || norm(foc)>tol || μ>tol) ) # Calculate the direction for updating x and λ Dc = ForwardDiff.jacobian(c, xold) cx = c(xold) foc = ForwardDiff.gradient(x->L(x,λ),xold) H = ForwardDiff.hessian(x->L(x,λ),xold) Δ = [H -Dc'; λ'*Dc diagm(cx)] \ [-foc; μ .- cx.*λ] # Find a step size such that λ>=0 and c(x)>=0 # The details here could surely be improved α = 1.0 acceptedstep = false λold = copy(λ) x = copy(xold) while (α > 1e-10) x = xold + α*Δ[1:length(xold)] λ = λold + α*Δ[(length(xold)+1):length(Δ)] if (all(λ.>=0) && all(c(x).>=0)) acceptedstep=true break end α *= 0.5 end if !acceptedstep stuck = 1 break end fnew = f(x) if (animate) scatter!(ct, [xold[1]],[xold[2]], markercolor=:red, legend=false, xlims=xrange, ylims=yrange) quiver!(ct, [xold[1]],[xold[2]], quiver=([α*Δ[1]],[α*Δ[2]]), legend=false, xlims=xrange, ylims=yrange) frame(anim) end xchange = norm(x-xold) fchange = abs(fnew-fold) μiter += 1 # update μ (the details here could also be improved) foc = ForwardDiff.gradient(x->L(x,λ),x) if (μiter>10 || (norm(foc)< μ && λ'*c(x)<10*μ)) μ *= μfactor μiter = 0 end xold = x fold = fnew if verbosity>0 print("Iter $iter: f=$fnew, λ=$λ, c(x)=$(c(x)), μ=$μ, norm(foc)=$(norm(foc))\n") end iter += 1 end if (iter >= maxiter) info = "Maximum iterations reached" elseif (stuck>0) info = "Failed to find feasible step for " * string(stuck) * " iterations." else info = "Convergence." end return(fold, xold, iter, info, anim) end """ banana(a,b) Returns the Rosenbrock function with parameters a, b. """ function banana(a,b) x->(a-x[1])^2+b*(x[2]-x[1]^2)^2 end f = banana(1.0,1.0) x0 = [3.0, 0.0] function constraint(x) [x[1] + x[2] - 2.5] end

constraint (generic function with 1 method)

result = interiorpoint(f, x0, constraint; maxiter=100) gif(result[5], "ip.gif", fps=5)

ERROR: UndefVarError: stringmime not defined

Optim.jl includes an interior point method. IPOPT is another popular implementation. As above, the details of the algorithm can be important in practice. It can be worthwhile to experiment with different methods for updating \(\mu\), using a more sophisticated line search or trust region, and perhaps replacing the computation of the hessian with a quasi-Newton approximation.

It has been proven that interior point methods converge relatively quickly for convex optimization problems.

Sequential quadratic programming relies on the fact that there are efficient methods to compute the solution to quadratic programs — optimization problems with quadratic objective functions and linear constraints. We can then solve a more general optimization problem by solving a sequence of quadratic programs that approximate the original problem.

Sequential quadratic programming is like a constrained version of Newton’s method. Given a current \(x\) and \(\lambda\) the new \(x\) solves \[ \begin{align*} x_{new} \in \argmin_{\tilde{x}} & f(x) + Df_x (\tilde{x} - x) + \frac{1}{2} (\tilde{x}-x)^T (D^2 f_x + D^2 (\lambda^T c)_x) (\tilde{x} - x) \\ \text{ s. t. } & c(x) + Dc_{x} (\tilde{x} - x) \geq 0 \end{align*} \] and the new \(\lambda\) is set to the value of the multipliers for this problem.

This quadratic program (an optimization problem with a quadratic objective function and linear constraints) can be solved fairly efficiently if \((D^2 f_x + D^2 (\lambda^T c)_x)\) is positive semi-definite.^{1}

One could also incorporate a trust region or line search into the above algorithm. Here is one simple implementation.

using Convex, ECOS """ sequentialquadratic(f, x0, c; tol=1e-4, maxiter = 1000, trustradius=1.0, xrange=[-2., 3.], yrange=[-2.,6.], animate=true, verbosity=1) Find the minimum of function `f` by random search Inputs: - `f` function to minimizie - `x0` starting value. Must have c(x0) > 0 - `c` constraint function. Must return an array. - `tol` convergence tolerance - `trustradisu` initial trust region radius - `xrange` range of x-axis for animation - `yrange` range of y-axis for animation - `animate` whether to create an animation (if true requires length(x)==2) - `verbosity` higher values result in more printed output during search. 0 for no output, any number > 0 for some. Output: - `(fmin, xmin, iter, info, animate)` tuple consisting of minimal function value, minimizer, number of iterations, and convergence info """ function sequentialquadratic(f, x0, c; tol=1e-4, maxiter = 1000, trustradius=1.0, xrange=[-2., 3.], yrange=[-2.,6.], animate=true, verbosity=1) fold = f(x0) xold = x0 xchange=Inf fchange=Inf iter = 0 μiter = 0 stuck=0 animate = animate && length(x0)==2 if animate # make a contour plot of the function we're minimizing. This is for # illustrating; you wouldn't have this normally ct = contour(range(xrange[1],xrange[2], length=100), range(yrange[1],yrange[2], length=100), (x,y) -> log(f([x,y]))) plot!(ct, xrange, 2.5 .- xrange) # add constraint anim = Animation() end Dc = ForwardDiff.jacobian(c,xold) Df = ForwardDiff.gradient(f,xold) λ = (Dc*Dc') \ Dc*Df println(λ) L(x,λ) = f(x) - λ'*c(x) foc = [ForwardDiff.gradient(x->L(x,λ),xold); λ.*c(xold)] fold = f(xold) negsquared(x) = x < 0 ? x^2 : zero(x) merit(x) = f(x) + sum(negsquared.(c(x))) while(iter < maxiter && ((xchange>tol) || (fchange>tol) || (stuck>0) || norm(foc)>tol) ) Df = ForwardDiff.gradient(f,xold) Dc = ForwardDiff.jacobian(c, xold) cx = c(xold) H = ForwardDiff.hessian(x->L(x,λ),xold) # set up and solve our QP Δ = Variable(length(xold)) problem = minimize(Df'*Δ + quadform(Δ,H), [cx + Dc*Δ >= 0; norm(Δ)<=trustradius]) solve!(problem, ECOSSolver(verbose=verbosity-1)) λ .= problem.constraints[1].dual xnew = xold .+ Δ.value if (animate) scatter!(ct, [xold[1]],[xold[2]], markercolor=:red, legend=false, xlims=xrange, ylims=yrange) quiver!(ct, [xold[1]],[xold[2]], quiver=([Δ.value[1]],[Δ.value[2]]), legend=false, xlims=xrange, ylims=yrange) frame(anim) end # decide whether to accept new point and whether to adjust trust region if (merit(xnew) < merit(xold)) xold = xnew stuck = 0 foc = [ForwardDiff.gradient(x->L(x,λ),xold); λ.*c(xold)] if (problem.constraints[2].dual>1e-4) # trust region binding trustradius *= 3/2 end else stuck += 1 trustradius *= 2/3 if (stuck>=20) break end end xchange = norm(xnew-xold) fchange = abs(f(xnew)-f(xold)) if true print("Iter $iter: f=$(f(xold)), λ=$λ, c(x)=$(c(xold)), TR=$trustradius, norm(foc)=$(norm(foc))\n") end iter += 1 end if (iter >= maxiter) info = "Maximum iterations reached" elseif (stuck>0) info = "Failed to find feasible step for " * string(stuck) * " iterations." else info = "Convergence." end return(f(xold), xold, iter, info, anim) end

sequentialquadratic

x0 = [0.0, 0.0] result = sequentialquadratic(f, x0, constraint; maxiter=100)

[-1.0] Iter 0: f=1.0, λ=[5.744129812962317e7], c(x)=[-2.5], TR=0.6666666666666666, norm(foc)=2.8722813232690143 Iter 1: f=1.0, λ=[8.82630652026277e7], c(x)=[-2.5], TR=0.4444444444444444, norm(foc)=2.8722813232690143 Iter 2: f=5.038440570604318, λ=[1.1753817640813076e8], c(x)=[-0.07212807174 958691], TR=0.6666666666666666, norm(foc)=1.6644012806823975e8 Iter 3: f=1.6448771839550929, λ=[2.416203521589231e-9], c(x)=[0.48372602542 892373], TR=1.0, norm(foc)=8.727700659672426 Iter 4: f=0.5840086806647102, λ=[4.4551946746239154e-10], c(x)=[0.675758196 7033381], TR=1.0, norm(foc)=4.6137298556725534 Iter 5: f=0.23916925350447604, λ=[7.569576370538181e-11], c(x)=[0.499383048 6552775], TR=1.0, norm(foc)=2.5160755086622277 Iter 6: f=0.09743531200157135, λ=[9.38238253913904e-10], c(x)=[0.1987192291 2166484], TR=1.0, norm(foc)=1.40581442153938 Iter 7: f=0.040343557701675914, λ=[0.02685022552990332], c(x)=[4.2504577635 327223e-10], TR=1.0, norm(foc)=0.7553410661599463 Iter 8: f=0.027527315271240967, λ=[0.08320080939959254], c(x)=[1.3213163896 352853e-10], TR=1.0, norm(foc)=0.3652756468851557 Iter 9: f=0.024131472985838866, λ=[0.08679517745067436], c(x)=[8.8190521552 17832e-10], TR=1.0, norm(foc)=0.1831946208733258 Iter 10: f=0.023256002358673446, λ=[0.08778281083823443], c(x)=[2.176565594 4250284e-10], TR=1.0, norm(foc)=0.09173401109091146 Iter 11: f=0.023033667836213356, λ=[0.08804971131022993], c(x)=[2.176051783 209232e-9], TR=1.0, norm(foc)=0.04591272206539734 Iter 12: f=0.02297758351219684, λ=[0.08811530260655176], c(x)=[2.1821664475 396574e-9], TR=1.0, norm(foc)=0.022967012802199437 Iter 13: f=0.022963508642272278, λ=[0.08812480456673913], c(x)=[3.764233369 452086e-10], TR=1.0, norm(foc)=0.011500723092885471 Iter 14: f=0.0229599744412804, λ=[0.08812974655873822], c(x)=[1.36619604518 27326e-10], TR=1.0, norm(foc)=0.005756385618588163 Iter 15: f=0.022959088150398085, λ=[0.0881314107961055], c(x)=[4.5647441382 3571e-10], TR=1.0, norm(foc)=0.002880464885383854 Iter 16: f=0.02295886732972351, λ=[0.0881263017672415], c(x)=[1.07529629644 88688e-9], TR=1.0, norm(foc)=0.001456169724223254 Iter 17: f=0.022958810562596636, λ=[0.08812727182962203], c(x)=[3.745093124 507548e-10], TR=1.0, norm(foc)=0.0007266128616736104 Iter 18: f=0.022958797295923792, λ=[0.08812916326165048], c(x)=[9.805600775 791845e-10], TR=1.0, norm(foc)=0.0003909086741240457 Iter 19: f=0.022958793324829984, λ=[0.08812981693441531], c(x)=[1.730438015 101754e-10], TR=1.0, norm(foc)=0.00020768034064370404 Iter 20: f=0.022958792149509473, λ=[0.08812993623802398], c(x)=[1.063815702 195825e-10], TR=1.0, norm(foc)=0.00010132460936763705 Iter 21: f=0.02295879187493447, λ=[0.08813033423408839], c(x)=[1.4879342202 789303e-10], TR=1.0, norm(foc)=4.905856373221587e-5

gif(result[5], "sqp.gif", fps=5)

ERROR: UndefVarError: stringmime not defined

Compared to interior point methods, sequential quadratic programming has the advantage of not needing a feasible point to begin. Like Newton’s method, sequential quadratic programming has local quadratic convergence. A downside of sequential quadratic programming is that solving the quadratic program at each step can take considerably longer than solving the system of linear equations that interior point methods and Newton methods require.

SLQP active set methods use a linear approximation to the optimization problem to decide which constraints are “active” (binding). In each iteration, a linear approximation to the original problem is first solved. The constraints that bind in linear approximation are then assumed to bind in the full problem, and we take a Newton step accordingly.

Augmented Lagragian methods convert a constrained minimization problem to an unconstrained problem by adding a penalty that increases with the constraint violation to the objective function.

Most for Convex program solvers are designed to accept semidefinite programs instead of quadratic programs. Fortunately, a quadratic program can be re-written as a semidefinite program. A solver such as SCS, ECOS, or Mosek can then be used. Fortunately, Convex.jl will automatically take care of any necessary transformation.↩︎