How good are interior point methods? Klee–Minty cubes tighten iteration-complexity bounds

How good are interior point methods? Klee-Minty cubes tighten iteration-complexity bounds

By refining a variant of the Klee–Minty example that forces the central path to visit all the vertices of the Klee–Minty n-cube, we exhibit a nearly worst-case example for path-following interior point methods. Namely, while the theoretical iteration-complexity upper bound is O(2nn 5 2 ), we prove that solving this n-dimensional linear optimization problem requires at least 2n − 1 iterations.

Bounds on Eigenvalues of Matrices Arising from Interior-Point Methods

Interior-point methods feature prominently among numerical methods for inequality-constrained optimization problems, and involve the need to solve a sequence of linear systems that typically become increasingly ill-conditioned with the iterations. To solve these systems, whose original form has a nonsymmetric 3×3 block structure, it is common practice to perform block elimination and either sol...

Interior-point Methods

Interior-Point Methods

The modern era of interior-point methods dates to 1984, when Karmarkar proposed his algorithm for linear programming. In the years since then, algorithms and software for linear programming have become quite sophisticated, while extensions to more general classes of problems, such as convex quadratic programming, semide nite programming, and nonconvex and nonlinear problems, have reached varyin...

Interior Point Methods

In this section we will give an (extremely) brief Introduction to the concept of interior point methods • Logarithmic Barrier Method • Method of Centers We have previously seen methods that follow a path On the boundary of the feasible region (Simplex). As the name suggest, interior point methods instead Follow a path through the interior of the feasible region.