Linear simplex method

Lieb, S. G. Simplex Method of Nonlinear Least-Squares—A Logical Complementary Method to Linear Least-Squares Analysis ofData, /. Chem. Educ. 1997, 74, 1008-1011. 

Linear algebraic problem, 53 Linear displacement operator, 392 Linear manifolds in Hilbert space, 429 Linear momentum operator, 392 Linear operators in Hilbert space, 431 Linear programming, 252,261 diet problem, 294 dual problem, 304 evaluation of methods, 302 in matrix notation, simplex method, 292... 

It can be shown that this can be generalized to the case of more than two variables. The standard solution of a linear programming problem is then to define the comer points of the convex set and to select the one that yields the best value for the objective function. This is called the Simplex method. 

The Sequential Simplex or simply Simplex method relies on geometry to create a heuristic rule for finding the minimum of a function. It is noted that the Simplex method of linear programming is a different method. 

The LP problems were solved by the simplex method. This algorithm solves a linear program by progressing from one extreme point of the feasible polyhedron to an adjacent one. 

The fact that the extremum of a linear program always occurs at a vertex of the feasible region is the single most important property of linear programs. It is true for any number of variables (i.e., more than two dimensions) and forms the basis for the simplex method for solving linear programs (not to be confused with the simplex method discussed in Section 6.1.4). 

In the following discussion we assume that, in the system of Equations (7.6)-(7.8), all lower bounds lj = 0, and all upper bounds Uj = +< >, that is, that the bounds become 0. This simplifies the exposition. The simplex method is readily extended to general bounds [see Dantzig (1998)]. Assume that the first m columns of the linear system (7.7) form a basis matrix B. Multiplying each column of (7.7) by B-1 yields a transformed (but equivalent) system in which the coefficients of the variables ( x,. . . , xm) are an identity matrix. Such a system is called canonical and has the form shown in Table 7.1. 

This transportation problem is an example of an important class of LPs called network flow problems Find a set of values for the flow of a single commodity on the arcs of a graph (or network) that satisfies both flow conservation constraints at each node (i.e., flow in equals flow out) and upper and lower limits on each flow, and maximize or minimize a linear objective (say, total cost). There are specified supplies of the commodity at some nodes and demands at others. Such problems have the important special property that, if all supplies, demands, and flow bounds are integers, then an optimal solution exists in which all flows are integers. In addition, special versions of the simplex method have been developed to solve network flow problems with hundreds of thousands of nodes and arcs very quickly, at least ten times faster than a general LP of comparable size. See Glover et al. (1992) for further information. 

The following figure shows the constraints. If slack variables jc3, x4 and x5 are added respectively to the inequality constraints, you can see from the diagram that the origin is not a feasible point, that is, you cannot start the simplex method by letting x x2 = 0 because then x3 = 20, x4 = -5, and x5 = -33, a violation of the assumption in linear programming that x > 0. What should you do to apply the simplex method to the problem other than start a phase I procedure of introducing artificial variables ... 

Chapter 1 presents some examples of the constraints that occur in optimization problems. Constraints are classified as being inequality constraints or equality constraints, and as linear or nonlinear. Chapter 7 described the simplex method for solving problems with linear objective functions subject to linear constraints. This chapter treats more difficult problems involving minimization (or maximization) of a nonlinear objective function subject to linear or nonlinear constraints ... 

The separation of synthetic red pigments has been optimized for HPTLC separation. The structures of the pigments are listed in Table 3.1. Separations were carried out on silica HPTLC plates in presaturated chambers. Three initial mobile-phase systems were applied for the optimization A = n-butanol-formic acid (100+1) B = ethyl acetate C = THF-water (9+1). The optimal ratios of mobile phases were 5.0 A, 5.0 B and 9.0 for the prisma model and 5.0 A, 7.2 B and 10.3 C for the simplex model. The parameters of equations describing the linear and nonlinear dependence of the retention on the composition of the mobile phase are compiled in Table 3.2. It was concluded from the results that both the prisma model and the simplex method are suitable for the optimization of the separation of these red pigments. Multivariate regression analysis indicated that the components of the mobile phase interact with each other [79],... 

In general, linear functions and correspondingly linear optimization methods can be distinguished from nonlinear optimization problems. The former, being in itself the wide field of linear programming with the predominant Simplex algorithm for routine solution [75] shall be excluded here. 

First, and most general, is the case of an objective function that may or may not be smooth and may or may not allow for the computation of a gradient at every point. The nonlinear Simplex method [77] (not to be confused with the Simplex algorithm for linear programming) performs a pattern search on the basis of only function values, not derivatives. Because it makes little use ofthe objective function characteristics, it typically requires a great many iterations to find a solution that is even close to an optimum. 

Monte Carlo method, 210, 21 propagation, 210, 28] Gauss-Newton method, 210, 11 Marquardt method, 210, 16 Nelder-Mead simplex method, 210, 18 performance methods, 210, 9 sample analysis, 210, 29 steepest descent method, 210, 15) simultaneous [free energy of site-specific DNA-protein interactions, 210, 471 for model testing, 210, 463 for parameter estimation, 210, 463 separate analysis of individual experiments, 210, 475 for testing linear extrapolation model for protein unfolding, 210, 465. 

EX12 1.2 Linear programming by two phase simplex method M10,M11... 

REM EL 1.2. LINEAR PROGRAMMING V TWO PHASE SIMPLEX METHOD REM MERGE M10,MU REM DATA... 

LINEAR PROGRAMING BY TNO PHASE SIMPLEX METHOD EVALUATION OF CONSTRAINTS... 

Real problems are likely to be considerably more complex than the examples that have appeared in the literature. It is for this reason that the computer assumes a particular importance in this work. The method of solution for linear-programming problems is very similar, in terms of its elemental steps, to the operations required in matrix inversions. A description ot the calculations required for the Simplex method of solution is given in Charnes, Cooper, and Henderson s introductory book on linear programming (C2). Unless the problem has special character-... 

Then the problem is transformed into one of optimizing a function with respect to the independent variables subjected to some constraints governed by their physical limits. Equations 8, 10 and 11 constitute a typical linear programming problem which can be readily solved by the simplex method (18). An example is the design problem where the residence time is minimized if its specification cannot be met. 

When the criterion optimized is a linear function of the operating variables, the feasibility problem is said to be one in linear programming. Being the simplest possible feasibility problem, it was the first one studied, and the publication in 1951 of G. Dantzig s simplex method for solving linear-programming problems (D2) marked the beginning of contemporary research in optimization theory. Section IV,C is devoted to this important technique. 

In the previous example, the technique used to reduce the artificial variables to zero was in fact Dantzig s simplex method. The linear function optimized was the simple sum of the artificial variables. Any linear function may be optimized in the same manner. The process must start with a basic solution feasible with the constraints, the function to be optimized expressed only in terms of the variables not in the starting basis. From these expressions it is decided what nonbasic variable should be brought into the basis and what basic variable should be forced out. The process is iterated until no further improvement is possible. 

Ordinarily we would introduce artificial variables and begin using the simplex method to reduce the sum of these variables to zero. However, in order to save space, as well as to demonstrate the effect of the quadratic term in the cost function, we shall start with the basis which was optimal in the linear case just solved. This basis, namely x2, x3, and u2, will of course be feasible for the three original constraints. If we filled out the basis by using vly v2, and v2, the basis would be feasible and there would be no artificial variables. Although at first glance it would appear that the basis x2) x3l u2, vlt v2 and v3 is optimal, this is not true because of the complementary slackness condition, which prohibits having both x2 and v2, or both x3 and v3, in the same basis. 

Another approach that is different from the previous methods is the simplex method of minimization. " It involves the formation of a simplex, a geometric shape with (w + 1) sides, where m is the number of parameters on the WSS surface. The WSS is calculated at each corner of the simplex and compared. The movement of the simplex across the WSS surface (toward the minimum) is controlled by a small number of rules. For example, the point with the highest WSS is reflected across the centroid (center of the simplex) to produce a new point. If this point has the lowest WSS, it is extended again. A point with a larger WSS causes the simplex to contract. By a series of such steps, the simplex moves across the WSS surface to approach the minimum value. Although the simplex method can be relatively slow, it has the advantage of computational simplicity that makes it useful for a variety of non-linear regression problems. 

Successive quadratic programming solves a sequence of quadratic programming problems. A quadratic programming problem has a quadratic economic model and linear constraints. To solve this problem, the Lagrangian function is formed from the quadratic economic model and linear constraints. Then, the Kuhn-Tucker conditions are applied to the Lagrangian function to obtain a set of linear equations. This set of linear equations can then be solved by the simplex method for the optimum of the quadratic programming problem. 

In the preceding chapter was discussed how a near-optimum experimental domain can be established through the method of steepest ascent. A disadvantage of this method is that it requires that the slopes of a linear approximation of the response surface model is established first. When it is reasonable to assume that the most influencing experimental variables are known, it is possible to locate a near-optimum domain through alternative procedures, viz. the simplex methods. In these methods, a minimum initial set of experiments is used to span a variation in the experimental domain. From these experiments, it is then possible to determine in which direction an improved response is to be expected. A new experiment is run in this direction. 

---