Skip to main content
Log in

Projected gradient methods for linearly constrained problems

  • Published:
Mathematical Programming Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to study the convergence properties of the gradient projection method and to apply these results to algorithms for linearly constrained problems. The main convergence result is obtained by defining a projected gradient, and proving that the gradient projection method forces the sequence of projected gradients to zero. A consequence of this result is that if the gradient projection method converges to a nondegenerate point of a linearly constrained problem, then the active and binding constraints are identified in a finite number of iterations. As an application of our theory, we develop quadratic programming algorithms that iteratively explore a subspace defined by the active constraints. These algorithms are able to drop and add many constraints from the active set, and can either compute an accurate minimizer by a direct method, or an approximate minimizer by an iterative method of the conjugate gradient type. Thus, these algorithms are attractive for large scale problems. We show that it is possible to develop a finite terminating quadratic programming algorithm without non-degeneracy assumptions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • P. Bertsekas, “On the Goldstein-Levitin-Polyak gradient projection method,”IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 21 (1976) 174–184.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • D.P. Bertsekas, “Projected Newton methods for optimization problems with simple constraints,”SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization 20 (1982) 221–246.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • J.V. Burke and J.J. Moré, “On the identification of active constraints,” Argonne National Laboratory, Mathematics and Computer Science Division Report ANL/MCS-TM-82, (Argonne, IL, 1986).

  • R.S. Dembo and U. Tulowitzki, “On the minimization of quadratic functions subject to box constraints,” Working Paper Series B#71, School of Organization and Management, Yale University, (New Haven, CT, 1983).

    Google Scholar 

  • R.S. Dembo and U. Tulowitzki, “Local convergence analysis for successive inexact quadratic programming methods,” Working Paper Series B#78, School of Organization and Management, Yale University, (New Haven, CT, 1984).

    Google Scholar 

  • R.S. Dembo and U. Tulowitzki, “Sequential truncated quadratic programming methods,”, in: P.T. Boggs, R.H. Byrd and R.B. Schnabel, eds.,Numerical Optimization 1984 (Society of Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia, 1985) pp. 83–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • J.C. Dunn, “Global and asymptotic convergence rate estimates for a class of projected gradient processes,”SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization 19 (1981), 368–400.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • J.C. Dunn, “On the convergence of projected gradient processes to singular critical points,”Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications (1986) to appear.

  • R. Fletcher,Practical Methods of Optimization Volume 2: Constrained Optimization (John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1981).

    Google Scholar 

  • E.M. Gafni and D.P. Bertsekas, “Convergence of a gradient projection method,” Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Laboratory for Information and Decision Systems Report LIDS-P-1201 (Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1982).

  • E.M. Gafni and D.P. Bertsekas, “Two-metric projection methods for constrained optimization,”SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization 22 (1984) 936–964.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • P.E. Gill, W. Murray and M.H. Wright,Practical Optimization (Academic Press, New York, 1981).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • A.A. Goldstein, “Convex programming in Hilbert space,”Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society 70 (1964) 709–710.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • E.S. Levitin and B.T. Polyak, “Constrained minimization problems”,USSR Computational Mathematics and Mathematical Physics 6 (1966), 1–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • G.P. McCormick and R.A. Tapia, “The gradient projection method under mild differentiability conditions,”SIAM Journal on Control 10 (1972) 93–98.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • D.P. O'Leary, “A generalized conjugate gradient algorithm for solving a class of quadratic programming problems,”Linear Algebra and its Applications 34 (1980) 371–399.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • R.R. Phelps “The gradient projection method using Curry's steplength,”SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization 24 (1986) 692–699.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • B.T. Polyak, “The conjugate gradient method in extremal problems,”USSR Computational Mathematics and Mathematical Physics 9 (1969) 94–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • E.H. Zarantonello, “Projections on convex sets in Hilbert space and spectral theory,” in: E.H. Zarantonello, ed.,Contributions to Nonlinear Functional Analysis (Academic Press, New York, 1971).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Work supported in part by the Applied Mathematical Sciences subprogram of the Office of Energy Research of the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract W-31-109-Eng-38.

Work supported in part by the Applied Mathematical Sciences subprogram of the Office of Energy Research of the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract W-31-109-Eng-38.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Calamai, P.H., Moré, J.J. Projected gradient methods for linearly constrained problems. Mathematical Programming 39, 93–116 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02592073

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02592073

Key words

Navigation