Unifying condition numbers for linear programming

Mathematics of Operations Research

Volumn 28, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 609-624

  Cheung, Dennis ^a   Cucker, Felipe ^a   Pena, Javier ^b  

^a Department of Mathematics ^*  (Hong Kong)

^b CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Complementarity problems; Condition numbers; Distance ill posedness

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHMS; COMPUTATIONAL COMPLEXITY; MATRIX ALGEBRA; NUMERICAL ANALYSIS; OPERATIONS RESEARCH;

COMPLEMENTARITY PROBLEMS; CONDITION NUMBERS; DISTANCE ILL-POSEDNESS; HOMOGENOUS FEASIBILITY PROBLEM; PRIMAL FEASIBILITY PROBLEM;

LINEAR PROGRAMMING;

EID: 3142757851     PISSN: 0364765X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1287/moor.28.4.609.20520     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Cheung, D., F. Cucker. 2001. A new condition number for linear programming. Math. Programming 91 163-174.
2. Cheung, D., F. Cucker. 2002. Solving linear programs with finite precision: I. Condition numbers and random programs. Math. Programming. Forthcoming.
3. Cheung, D., F. Cucker. 2003. Solving linear programs with finite precision: II. Algorithms. Working paper.
4. Cheung, D., F. Cucker., Y. Ye. 2003. Linear programming and condition numbers under the real number computation model. P. Ciarlet, F. Cucker, eds. Handbook of Numerical Analysis, Vol. XI. North-Holland, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
5. Cucker, F., J. Pena. 2002. A primal-dual algorithm for solving polyhedral conic systems with a finite-precision machine. SIAM J. Optim. 12 522-554.
6. Demmel., J. 1992. The componentwise distance to the nearest singular matrix. SIAM J. Matrix Anal. Appl. 13 10-19.
7. Dontchev, A., A. Lewis, T. Rockafellar. 2003. The radius of metric regularity. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 355 493-517.
8. Doyle, J. 1982. Analysis of feedback systems with structured uncertainty. IEE Proc. 129 242-250.
9. Eckart, C., G. Young. 1936. The approximation of one matrix by another of lower rank. Psychometrika 1 211-218.
10. Epelman, M., R. M. Freund. 2000. Condition number complexity of an elementary algorithm for computing a reliable solution of a conic linear system. Math. Programming 88 451-485.
11. Epelman, M., R. M. Freund. 2002. A new condition measure, preconditioners, and relations between different measures of conditioning for conic linear systems. SIAM J. Optim. 12 627-655.
12. Freund, R. M., J. R. Vera. 1999a. Condition-based complexity of convex optimization in conic linear form via the ellipsoid algorithm. SIAM J. Optim. 10 155-176.
13. Freund, R. M., J. R. Vera. 1999b. Some characterizations and properties of the "distance to ill-posedness" and the condition measure of a conic linear system. Math. Programming 86 225-260.
14. Goldman, A., A. Tucker. 1956. Theory of linear programming. H. Kuhn, A. Tucker, eds. Linear Inequalities and Related Systems, Vol. 38. Ann Math. Stud. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 53-97.
15. Higham, N. 1996. Accuracy and Stability of Numerical Algorithms. SIAM, Philadelphia, PA.
16. Lewis, A. 1999. Ill-conditioned convex processes and linear inequalities. Math. Oper. Res. 24 829-834.
17. Lewis, A. S. 2001. Ill-conditioned inclusions. Set-Valued Anal. 9 375-381.
18. Nunez, M., R. M. Freund. 1998. Condition measures and properties of the central trajectory of a linear program. Math. Programming 83 1-28.
19. Packard, A., J. Doyle. 1993. The complex structured singular value. Automatica 29 71-109.
20. Packard, A., P. Pandey. 1993. Continuity properties of the real/complex structured singular value. IEEE Trans. Automatic Control 38 415-428.
21. Pena, J. 2000. Understanding the geometry of infeasible perturbations of a conic linear system. SIAM J. Optim. 10 534-550.
22. Pena, J. 2003. A characterization of the distance to infeasibility under block-structured perturbations. Linear Algebra Appl. 370 193-216.
23. Pena, J., J. Renegar. 2000. Computing approximate solutions for conic systems of constraints. Math. Programming 87 351-383.
24. Renegar, J. 1994. Some perturbation theory for linear programming. Math. Programming 65 73-91.
25. Renegar, J. 1995. Linear programming, complexity theory and elementary functional analysis. Math. Programming 70 279-351.
26. Renegar, J. 1996. Condition numbers, the barrier method, and the conjugate-gradient method. SIAM J. Optim. 6 879-912.
27. Rohn, J. 1989. Systems of linear interval equations. Linear Algebra Appl. 126 39-78.
28. Rump, S. 1999. Ill-conditioned matrices are componentwise near to singularity. SIAM Rev. 41 102-112.
29. Stewart, G. W. 1989. On scaled projections and pseudoinverses. Linear Algebra Its Appl. 112 189-193.
30. Todd, M. J. 1990. A Dantzig-Wolfe-like variant of Karmarkar's interior-point linear programming algorithm. Oper. Res. 38 1006-1018.
31. Vavasis, S. A., Y. Ye. 1995. Condition numbers for polyhedra with real number data. Oper. Res. Lett. 17 209-214.
32. Vavasis, S. A., Y. Ye. 1996. A primal-dual interior point method whose running time depends only on the constraint matrix. Math. Programming 74 79-120.
33. Vera, J. R. 1998. On the complexity of linear programming under finite precision arithmetic. Math. Programming 80 91-123.
34. Ye. Y. 1994. Toward probabilistic analysis of interior-point algorithms for linear programming. Math. Oper. Res. 19 38-52.
35. Zhou, K., J. Doyle, K. Glover. 1996. Robust and Optimal Control. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.