On Exploiting Problem Structure in a Basis Identification Procedure for Linear Programming

During the last decade, interior-point methods have become an efficient alternative to the simplex algorithm for solution of large-scale linear programming (LP) problems. However, in many practical applications of LP, interior-point methods have the drawback that they do not generate an optimal basic and nonbasic partition of the variables. This partition is required in the traditional sensitivity analysis and is highly useful when a sequence of related LP problems are solved. Therefore, in this article we discuss how an optimal basic solution can be generated from the interior-point solution. The emphasis of the article is on how problem structure can be exploited to reduce the computational cost associated with the basis identification. Computational results are presented that indicate that it is highly advantageous to exploit problem structure.

[1]  Robert E. Bixby,et al.  Commentary - Progress in Linear Programming , 1994, INFORMS J. Comput..

[2]  Nimrod Megiddo,et al.  On Finding Primal- and Dual-Optimal Bases , 1991, INFORMS J. Comput..

[3]  Uwe H. Suhl,et al.  Computing Sparse LU Factorizations for Large-Scale Linear Programming Bases , 1990, INFORMS J. Comput..

[4]  Jacek Gondzio,et al.  Implementation of Interior Point Methods for Large Scale Linear Programming , 1996 .

[5]  Alex Pothen,et al.  Computing the block triangular form of a sparse matrix , 1990, TOMS.

[6]  Knud D. Andersen,et al.  The Mosek Interior Point Optimizer for Linear Programming: An Implementation of the Homogeneous Algorithm , 2000 .

[7]  Robert E. Bixby,et al.  Recovering an optimal LP basis from an interior point solution , 1994, Oper. Res. Lett..

[8]  Y. Ye,et al.  Combining Interior-Point and Pivoting Algorithms for Linear Programming , 1996 .

[9]  E. Christiansen,et al.  Computation of the collapse state in limit analysis using the LP primal affine scaling algorithm , 1991 .

[10]  Yinyu Ye,et al.  On the finite convergence of interior-point algorithms for linear programming , 1992, Math. Program..

[11]  Knud D. Andersen,et al.  The APOS linear programming solver: an implementation of the homogeneous algorithm , 1997 .

[12]  Gautam Mitra,et al.  Experimental investigations in combining primal dual interior point method and simplex based LP solvers , 1995, Ann. Oper. Res..

[13]  A. Charnes,et al.  AN OPPOSITE SIGN ALGORITHM FOR ' 'PURIFICATION' ' TO AN EXTREME POINT SOLUTION, , 1963 .

[14]  Roy E. Marsten,et al.  Feature Article - Interior Point Methods for Linear Programming: Computational State of the Art , 1994, INFORMS J. Comput..

[15]  Irvin J. Lustig,et al.  Gigaflops in linear programming , 1996, Oper. Res. Lett..

[16]  Robert E. Bixby,et al.  Progress in Linear Programming , 1993 .

[17]  Harvey J. Greenberg,et al.  The use of the optimal partition in a linear programming solution for postoptimal analysis , 1994, Oper. Res. Lett..

[18]  Uwe H. Suhl,et al.  A fast LU update for linear programming , 1993, Ann. Oper. Res..

[19]  Alexander Martin,et al.  Parallelizing the Dual Simplex Method , 2000, INFORMS J. Comput..

[20]  K. Kortanek,et al.  New purification algorithms for linear programming , 1988 .

[21]  Erling D. Andersen,et al.  Presolving in linear programming , 1995, Math. Program..