Abstract

This work focuses on approximate proper solutions of vector optimization problems. A concept of Henig approximate proper efficiency is introduced and analyzed from several points of view. First, its main properties are stated and the limit behavior in multiobjective problems of the whole Henig approximate proper efficient set is deduced. These results show that the introduced concept is suitable to approximate the efficient solution set of the problem. After that, the Henig approximate proper efficient solutions are characterized by linear scalarizations under convexity assumptions, and by ε-subgradients in optimization problems dealing with difference of vector mappings. For this last objective, a notion of ε-subdifferential is introduced and studied, obtaining, in particular, a Moreau-Rockafellar type theorem.

Author information

Contact details are reproduced from the original publication and may be historical.

César Gutiérrez

Dep. de Matemática Aplicada, Universidad de Valladolid, Paseo de Belén 15, Campus Miguel Delibes, 47011 Valladolid, Spain

cesargv@mat.uva.es

Lidia Huerga

Dep. de Matemática Aplicada, Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia, Calle Juan del Rosal 12, Ciudad Universitaria, 28040 Madrid, Spain

lhuerga@bec.uned.es

Bienvenido Jiménez

Dep. de Matemática Aplicada, Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia, Calle Juan del Rosal 12, Ciudad Universitaria, 28040 Madrid, Spain

bjimenez@ind.uned.es

Vicente Novo

Dep. de Matemática Aplicada, Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia, Calle Juan del Rosal 12, Ciudad Universitaria, 28040 Madrid, Spain

vnovo@ind.uned.es

Keywords

  • Vector optimization
  • proper epsilon-efficiency
  • optimization of difference of vector mappings
  • epsilon-subdifferential
  • nearly cone-subconvexlikeness
  • linear scalarization

Mathematics Subject Classification

90C48, 90C25, 90C29, 90C46, 49K27

References

  1. K. J. Arrow, E. W. Barankin, D. Blackwell: Admissible points of convex sets, in: Contributions to the Theory of Games, Vol. 2, H. W. Kuhn et al. (ed.), Ann. Math. Stud. 28, Princeton University Press, Princeton (1953) 87–91.https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400881970-006Google Scholar
  2. H. P. Benson: An improved definition of proper efficiency for vector maximization with respect to cones, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 71 (1979) 232–241.https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-247X(79)90226-9Google Scholar
  3. J. M. Borwein: Proper efficient points for maximizations with respect to cones, SIAM J. Control Optim. 15 (1977) 57–63.https://doi.org/10.1137/0315004Google Scholar
  4. J. M. Borwein, D. Zhuang: Super efficiency in vector optimization, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 338 (1993) 105–122.https://doi.org/10.1090/S0002-9947-1993-1098432-5Google Scholar
  5. A. Brøndsted, R. T. Rockafellar: On the subdifferentiability of convex functions, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 16 (1965) 605–611.https://doi.org/10.1090/S0002-9939-1965-0178103-8Google Scholar
  6. A. Daniilidis: Arrow-Barankin-Blackwell theorems and related results in cone duality: A survey, in: Optimization (Namur, 1998), V. H. Nguyen et al. (ed.), Lecture Notes in Econom. and Math. Systems 481, Springer, Berlin (2000) 119–131.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-57014-8_9Google Scholar
  7. A. Engau: Definition and characterization of Geoffrion proper efficiency for real vector optimization with infinitely many criteria, J. Optim. Theory Appl. 165 (2015) 439–457.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10957-014-0608-5Google Scholar
  8. Y. Gao, X. Yang, K. L. Teo: Optimality conditions for approximate solutions of vector optimization problems, J. Ind. Manag. Optim. 7 (2011) 483–496.https://doi.org/10.3934/jimo.2011.7.483Google Scholar
  9. B. A. Ghaznavi-ghosoni, E. Khorram: On approximating weakly/properly efficient solutions in multi-objective programming, Math. Comput. Modelling 54 (2011) 3172–3181.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcm.2011.08.013Google Scholar
  10. G. Giorgi, A. Guerraggio, J. Thierfelder: Mathematics of Optimization: Smooth and Nonsmooth Case, Elsevier, Amsterdam (2004).Google Scholar
  11. A. Göpfert, H. Riahi, C. Tammer, C. Zălinescu: Variational Methods in Partially Ordered Spaces, Springer, New York (2003).Google Scholar
  12. A. Göpfert, C. Tammer, C. Zălinescu: A new ABB theorem in normed vector spaces, Optimization 53 (2004) 369–376.https://doi.org/10.1080/02331930412331282427Google Scholar
  13. A. Guerraggio, E. Molho, A. Zaffaroni: On the notion of proper efficiency in vector optimization, J. Optim. Theory Appl. 82 (1994) 1–21.https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02191776Google Scholar
  14. C. Gutiérrez, L. Huerga, B. Jiménez, V. Novo: Proper approximate solutions and ε-subdifferentials in vector optimization: Basic properties and limit behaviour, Nonlinear Anal. 79 (2013) 52–67.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.na.2012.11.016Google Scholar
  15. C. Gutiérrez, L. Huerga, B. Jiménez, V. Novo: Proper approximate solutions and ε-subdifferentials in vector optimization: Moreau-Rockafellar type theorems, J. Convex Analysis 21 (2014) 857–886.https://doi.org/10.68381/jca21047Google Scholar
  16. C. Gutiérrez, L. Huerga, V. Novo: Scalarization and saddle points of approximate proper solutions in nearly subconvexlike vector optimization problems, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 389 (2012) 1046–1058.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmaa.2011.12.050Google Scholar
  17. C. Gutiérrez, B. Jiménez, V. Novo: On approximate efficiency in multiobjective programming, Math. Methods Oper. Res. 64 (2006) 165–185.https://doi.org/10.1007/s00186-006-0078-0Google Scholar
  18. C. Gutiérrez, B. Jiménez, V. Novo: A unified approach and optimality conditions for approximate solutions of vector optimization problems, SIAM J. Optim. 17 (2006) 688–710.https://doi.org/10.1137/05062648XGoogle Scholar
  19. C. Gutiérrez, B. Jiménez, V. Novo: Improvement sets and vector optimization, Eur. J. Oper. Res. 223 (2012) 304–311.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2012.05.050Google Scholar
  20. M. I. Henig: Proper efficiency with respect to cones, J. Optim. Theory Appl. 36 (1982) 387–407.https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00934353Google Scholar
  21. J.-B. Hiriart-Urruty: Generalized differentiability, duality and optimization for problems dealing with differences of convex functions, in: Convexity and Duality in Optimization (Groningen, 1984), J. Ponstein (ed.), Lecture Notes in Econom. and Math. Systems 256, Springer, Berlin (1985) 37–70.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-45610-7_3Google Scholar
  22. J.-B. Hiriart-Urruty, C. Lemaréchal: Convex Analysis and Minimization Algorithms II, Springer, Berlin (1993).https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-02796-7Google Scholar
  23. J. Jahn: Vector Optimization. Theory, Applications, and Extensions, 2nd. Ed., Springer, Berlin (2011).https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-17005-8Google Scholar
  24. A. A. Khan, C. Tammer, C. Zălinescu: Set-Valued Optimization. An Introduction with Applications, Springer, Berlin (2015).https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-54265-7Google Scholar
  25. S. S. Kutateladze: Convex ε-programming, Sov. Math. Dokl. 20 (1979) 391–393.Google Scholar
  26. Z. Li, S. Wang: ε-approximate solutions in multiobjective optimization, Optimization 44 (1998) 161–174.https://doi.org/10.1080/02331939808844406Google Scholar
  27. J.-C. Liu: ε-properly efficient solutions to nondifferentiable multiobjective programming problems, Appl. Math. Lett. 12 (1999) 109–113.https://doi.org/10.1016/S0893-9659(99)00087-7Google Scholar
  28. M. El Maghri: Pareto-Fenchel ε-subdifferential sum rule and ε-efficiency, Optim. Lett. 6 (2012) 763–781.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11590-011-0301-7Google Scholar
  29. M. El Mahgri: Pareto-Fenchel ε-subdifferential composition rule and ε-efficiency, Numer. Funct. Anal. Optim. 35 (2014) 1–19.https://doi.org/10.1080/01630563.2013.812110Google Scholar
  30. M. El Mahgri: (ε-)Efficiency in difference vector optimization, J. Glob. Optim. 61 (2015) 803–812.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10898-014-0204-0Google Scholar
  31. K. Miettinen: Nonlinear Multiobjective Optimization, Kluwer, Dordrecht (1999).https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-5563-6Google Scholar
  32. J. H. Qiu: On solidness of polar cones, J. Optim. Theory Appl. 109 (2001) 199–214.https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017574123926Google Scholar
  33. J. H. Qiu: Dual characterization and scalarization for Benson proper efficiency, SIAM J. Optim. 19 (2008) 144–162.https://doi.org/10.1137/060676465Google Scholar
  34. C. Raffin: Sur les programmes convexes définis dans des espaces vectoriels topologiques, Ann. Inst. Fourier 20 (1970) 457–491.https://doi.org/10.5802/aif.347Google Scholar
  35. N. Rastegar, E. Khorram: A combined scalarizing method for multiobjective programming problems, Eur. J. Oper. Res. 236 (2014) 229–237.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2013.11.020Google Scholar
  36. W. Rong: Proper ε-efficiency in vector optimization problems with cone-subconvexlikeness, Acta Sci. Natur. Univ. NeiMongol 28 (1997) 609–613.Google Scholar
  37. Y. Sawaragi, H. Nakayama, T. Tanino: Theory of Multiobjective Optimization, Academic Press, Orlando (1985).Google Scholar
  38. T. Tanino, Y. Sawaragi: Conjugate maps and duality in multiobjective optimization, J. Optim. Theory Appl. 31 (1980) 473–499.https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00934473Google Scholar
  39. L. A. Tuan: ε-optimality conditions for vector optimization problems with set-valued maps, Numer. Funct. Anal. Optim. 31 (2010) 78–95.https://doi.org/10.1080/01630560903499845Google Scholar
  40. X. M. Yang, D. Li, S. Y. Wang: Near-subconvexlikeness in vector optimization with set-valued functions, J. Optim. Theory Appl. 110 (2001) 413–427.https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017535631418Google Scholar
  41. A. Zaffaroni: Superlinear separation for radiant and coradiant sets, Optimization 56 (2007) 267–285.https://doi.org/10.1080/02331930600819902Google Scholar
  42. C. Zălinescu: Convex Analysis in General Vector Spaces, World Scientific, Singapore (2002).https://doi.org/10.1142/5021Google Scholar

Suggested citation

C. Gutiérrez, L. Huerga, B. Jiménez, V. Novo. “Henig Approximate Proper Efficiency and Optimization Problems with Difference of Vector Mappings.” Journal of Convex Analysis 23 (2016), No. 3, 661–690. https://doi.org/10.68381/jca23026

Download BibTeXPublished by Heldermann Verlag.

Published by Heldermann Verlag, 2016. Rights now held by Banach Press LLC.