Non-linear constraints with several input variables in fmincon
1 visualizzazione (ultimi 30 giorni)
Mostra commenti meno recenti
Hello everyone,
I am trying to solve the following optimization problem with fmincon:
To do this, I have made the following code:
fun = @(x) x'*L*x;
nonlcon = @(x) consfun(A,B,x);
x = fmincon(fun,x0,[],[],[],[],[],[],nonlcon);
Where ''consfun'' is the following function:
function [c,ceq] = consfun(A,B,x)
c = (norm(A*x,inf)/b)-D);
ceq = [];
end
However, the final solution, x, does not satisfy the non-linear constraint so I wonder if the code is correct in relation to the optimisation problem posed.
Can anyone help me?
Thank you very much for your time!
1 Commento
Alan Weiss
il 20 Set 2021
Did fmincon claim to give a feasible solution? If so, then in what way was the constraint violated? I mean, was consfun(A,B,x) > 0? If not, then you may need to search for a feasible solution. See Converged to an Infeasible Point.
Alan Weiss
MATLAB mathematical toolbox documentation
Risposta accettata
Matt J
il 20 Set 2021
Modificato: Matt J
il 20 Set 2021
Your nonlinear constraints are not differentiable. That doesn't always spell disaster, but it breaks the assumptions of fmincon. Also, since your problem can be reformulated as a quadratic program, it would be better to use quadprog.
[m,n]=size(A);
e=ones(m,1);
Aineq=[A;-A];
bineq=[(B+b*D).*e ; -(B-b*D).*e];
x=quadprog(L,zeros(n,1),Aineq,bineq);
4 Commenti
Perry Mason
il 22 Set 2021
I meant that the constraint in the original problem of javm6 is defined in terms of the infinity norm.
I reckon your reformulation works if the constraint is defined using euclidean norm, but will this reformulation still work even if the infinity norm is used?
Cheers
Più risposte (0)
Vedere anche
Categorie
Scopri di più su Surrogate Optimization in Help Center e File Exchange
Community Treasure Hunt
Find the treasures in MATLAB Central and discover how the community can help you!
Start Hunting!