Augmented Lagrangian method with nonmonotone penalty parameters for constrained optimization

At each outer iteration of standard Augmented Lagrangian methods one tries to solve a box-constrained optimization problem with some prescribed tolerance. In the continuous world, using exact arithmetic, this subproblem is always solvable. Therefore, the possibility of finishing the subproblem resolution without satisfying the theoretical stopping conditions is not contemplated in usual convergence theories. However, in practice, one might not be able to solve the subproblem up to the required precision. This may be due to different reasons. One of them is that the presence of an excessively large penalty parameter could impair the performance of the box-constraint optimization solver. In this paper a practical strategy for decreasing the penalty parameter in situations like the one mentioned above is proposed. More generally, the different decisions that may be taken when, in practice, one is not able to solve the Augmented Lagrangian subproblem will be discussed. As a result, an improved Augmented Lagrangian method is presented, which takes into account numerical difficulties in a satisfactory way, preserving suitable convergence theory. Numerical experiments are presented involving all the CUTEr collection test problems.

A relaxed constant positive linear dependence constraint qualification and applications

In this work we introduce a relaxed version of the constant positive linear dependence constraint qualification (CPLD) that we call RCPLD. This development is inspired by a recent generalization of the constant rank constraint qualification by Minchenko and Stakhovski that was called RCRCQ. We show that RCPLD is enough to ensure the convergence of an augmented Lagrangian algorithm and that it asserts the validity of an error bound. We also provide proofs and counter-examples that show the relations of RCRCQ and RCPLD with other known constraint qualifications. In particular, RCPLD is strictly weaker than CPLD and RCRCQ, while still stronger than Abadie's constraint qualification. We also verify that the second order necessary optimality condition holds under RCRCQ.

A comparison of deterministic, reliability-based and risk-based structural optimization under uncertainty

In this paper, the effects of uncertainty and expected costs of failure on optimum structural design are investigated, by comparing three distinct formulations of structural optimization problems. Deterministic Design Optimization (DDO) allows one the find the shape or configuration of a structure that is optimum in terms of mechanics, but the formulation grossly neglects parameter uncertainty and its effects on structural safety. Reliability-based Design Optimization (RBDO) has emerged as an alternative to properly model the safety-under-uncertainty part of the problem. With RBDO, one can ensure that a minimum (and measurable) level of safety is achieved by the optimum structure. However, results are dependent on the failure probabilities used as constraints in the analysis. Risk optimization (RO) increases the scope of the problem by addressing the compromising goals of economy and safety. This is accomplished by quantifying the monetary consequences of failure, as well as the costs associated with construction, operation and maintenance. RO yields the optimum topology and the optimum point of balance between economy and safety. Results are compared for some example problems. The broader RO solution is found first, and optimum results are used as constraints in DDO and RBDO. Results show that even when optimum safety coefficients are used as constraints in DDO, the formulation leads to configurations which respect these design constraints, reduce manufacturing costs but increase total expected costs (including expected costs of failure). When (optimum) system failure probability is used as a constraint in RBDO, this solution also reduces manufacturing costs but by increasing total expected costs. This happens when the costs associated with different failure modes are distinct. Hence, a general equivalence between the formulations cannot be established. Optimum structural design considering expected costs of failure cannot be controlled solely by safety factors nor by failure probability constraints, but will depend on actual structural configuration. (c) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

TWO NEW WEAK CONSTRAINT QUALIFICATIONS AND APPLICATIONS

We present two new constraint qualifications (CQs) that are weaker than the recently introduced relaxed constant positive linear dependence (RCPLD) CQ. RCPLD is based on the assumption that many subsets of the gradients of the active constraints preserve positive linear dependence locally. A major open question was to identify the exact set of gradients whose properties had to be preserved locally and that would still work as a CQ. This is done in the first new CQ, which we call the constant rank of the subspace component (CRSC) CQ. This new CQ also preserves many of the good properties of RCPLD, such as local stability and the validity of an error bound. We also introduce an even weaker CQ, called the constant positive generator (CPG), which can replace RCPLD in the analysis of the global convergence of algorithms. We close this work by extending convergence results of algorithms belonging to all the main classes of nonlinear optimization methods: sequential quadratic programming, augmented Lagrangians, interior point algorithms, and inexact restoration.