Non-linear constraints with several input variables in fmincon
1 visualización (últimos 30 días)
Mostrar comentarios más antiguos
javm6
el 16 de Sept. de 2021
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 comentario
Alan Weiss
el 20 de Sept. de 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
Respuesta aceptada
Matt J
el 20 de Sept. de 2021
Editada: Matt J
el 20 de Sept. de 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 comentarios
Perry Mason
el 22 de Sept. de 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
Más respuestas (0)
Ver también
Categorías
Más información sobre Surrogate Optimization en Help Center y File Exchange.
Community Treasure Hunt
Find the treasures in MATLAB Central and discover how the community can help you!
Start Hunting!