Polynomial Optimization Moments And Applications PDF Download

Polynomial Optimization is concerned with optimization problems of the form (P) : f* = { f(x) with x in set K}, where K is a basic semi-algebraic set in Rn defined by K={x in Rn such as gj(x) less or equal 0}; and f is a real polynomial of n variables x = (x1, x2, ..., xn). In this thesis we are interested in problems (P) where symmetries and/or structured sparsity are not easy to detect or to exploit, and where only a few (or even no) semidefinite relaxations of the moment-SOS approach can be implemented. And the issue we investigate is: How can the moment-SOS methodology be still used to help solve such problem (P)? We provide two applications of the moment-SOS approach to help solve (P) in two different contexts. * In a first contribution we consider MINLP problems on a box B = [xL, xU] of Rn and propose a moment-SOS approach to construct polynomial convex underestimators for the objective function f (if non convex) and for -gj if in the constraint gj(x) less or equal 0, the polynomial gj is not concave. We work in the context where one wishes to find a convex underestimator of a non-convex polynomial f of a few variables on a box B of Rn. The novelty with previous works on this topic is that we want to compute a polynomial convex underestimator p of f that minimizes the important tightness criterion which is the L1 norm of (f-h) on B, over all convex polynomials h of degree d _fixed. Indeed in previous works for computing a convex underestimator L of f, this tightness criterion is not taken into account directly. It turns out that the moment-SOS approach is well suited to compute a polynomial convex underestimator p that minimizes the tightness criterion and numerical experiments on a sample of non-trivial examples show that p outperforms L not only with respect to the tightness score but also in terms of the resulting lower bounds obtained by minimizing respectively p and L on B. Similar improvements also occur when we use the moment-SOS underestimator instead of the aBB-one in refinements of the aBB method. * In a second contribution we propose an algorithm that also uses an optimal solution of a semidefinite relaxation in the moment-SOS hierarchy (in fact a slight modification) to provide a feasible solution for the initial optimization problem but with no rounding procedure. In the present context, we treat the first variable x1 of x = (x1, x2, ...., xn) as a parameter in some bounded interval Y of R. Notice that f*=min { J(y) : y in Y} where J is the function J(y) := inf {f(x) : x in K ; x1=y}. That is one has reduced the original n-dimensional optimization problem (P) to an equivalent one-dimensional optimization problem on an interval. But of course determining the optimal value function J is even more complicated than (P) as one has to determine a function (instead of a point in Rn), an infinite-dimensional problem. But the idea is to approximate J(y) on Y by a univariate polynomial p(y) with the degree d and fortunately, computing such a univariate polynomial is possible via solving a semidefinite relaxation associated with the parameter optimization problem. The degree d of p(y) is related to the size of this semidefinite relaxation. The higher the degree d is, the better is the approximation of J(y) by p(y) and in fact, one may show that p(y) converges to J(y) in a strong sense on Y as d increases. But of course the resulting semidefinite relaxation becomes harder (or impossible) to solve as d increases and so in practice d is fixed to a small value. Once the univariate polynomial p(y) has been determined, one computes x1* in Y that minimizes p(y) on Y, a convex optimization problem that can be solved efficiently. The process is iterated to compute x2 in a similar manner, and so on, until a point x in Rn has been computed. Finally, as x* is not feasible in general, we then use x* as a starting point for a local optimization procedure to find a final feasible point x in K. When K is convex, the following variant is implemented. After having computed x1* as indicated, x2* is computed with x1 fixed at the value x1*, and x3 is computed with x1 and x2 fixed at the values x1* and x2* respectively, etc., so that the resulting point x* is feasible, i.e., x* in K. The same variant applies for 0/1 programs for which feasibility is easy to detect like e.g., for MAXCUT, k-CLUSTER or 0/1-KNAPSACK problems.