Abstract

A new kernel function is introduced in Mathematical Optimization. This function is called the dislocation hyperbolic kernel function. It is based on the dislocation hyperbolic function. Finally we present some applications of this new function.

Author information

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

Lennin Mallma Ramirez

Systems Engineering and Computer Science Program, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

lenninmr@gmail.com

Nelson Maculan

Systems Engineering and Computer Science Program, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

maculan@cos.ufrj.br

Adilson Elias Xavier

Systems Engineering and Computer Science Program, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

adilson.xavier@gmail.com

Vinicius Layter Xavier

Institute of Mathematics and Statistics, Rio de Janeiro State University, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Keywords

  • Dislocation hyperbolic function
  • Fenchel conjugate
  • kernel function
  • self-concordant

Mathematics Subject Classification

46N10

References

  1. M. Achache: A new primal-dual path-following method for convex quadratic programming, Comp. Appl. Math. 25 (2006) 97–110.https://doi.org/10.1590/S0101-82052006000100005Google Scholar
  2. A. Auslender, M. Teboulle, S. Ben-Tiba: Interior proximal and multiplier methods based on second order homogeneous kernels, Math. Oper. Res. 24 (1999) 645–668.https://doi.org/10.1287/moor.24.3.645Google Scholar
  3. A. M. Bagirov, N. Karmitsa, S. Taheri: Partitional Clustering via Nonsmooth Optimization, Springer, Cham (2020).https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37826-4Google Scholar
  4. A. M. Bagirov, B. Ordin, G. Ozturk, A. E. Xavier: An incremental clustering algorithm based on hyperbolic smoothing, Pattern Recognition 61 (2015) 219–241.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10589-014-9711-7Google Scholar
  5. Y. Q. Bai, M. El Ghami, C. Roos: A new efficient large-update primal-dual interior-point method based on a finite barrier, SIAM J. Optim. 13 (2003) 766–782.https://doi.org/10.1137/S1052623401398132Google Scholar
  6. Y. Q. Bai, M. El Ghami, C. Roos: A comparative study of kernel functions for primal-dual interior point algorithms in linear optimization, SIAM J. Optim. 15 (2004) 101–128.https://doi.org/10.1137/S1052623403423114Google Scholar
  7. Y. Q. Bai, W. Xie, J. Zhang: New parameterized kernel functions for linear optimization, J. Global Optim. 54 (2012) 353–366.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10898-012-9934-zGoogle Scholar
  8. A. Ben-Tal, A. Ben-Israel, M. Teboulle: Certainty equivalents and information measures: duality and extremal principles, J. Math. Analysis Appl. 157 (1991) 211–236.https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-247X(91)90145-PGoogle Scholar
  9. A. Ben-Tal, M. Teboulle: Penalty function and duality in stochastic programming via ϕ−divergence functionals, Math. Oper. Res. 12 (1987) 224-240https://doi.org/10.1287/moor.12.2.224Google Scholar
  10. R. Beran: Minimum Hellinger distances estimates for parametric models, Ann. Statist. 5 (1977) 445–463.https://doi.org/10.1214/aos/1176343842Google Scholar
  11. C. Chen, O. L. Mangasarian: Smoothing methods for convex inequalities and linear complementarity problems, Math. Programming 71 (1995) 51–69.https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01592244Google Scholar
  12. S. Fathi-Hafshejani, A. F. Jahromi, M. R. Peyghami, S. Chen: Complexity of interior point for a classs of linear complementarity problems using a kernel function with trigonometric growth term, J. Optim. Theory Appl. 178 (2018) 935–949.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10957-018-1344-zGoogle Scholar
  13. C. C. Gonzaga, R. A. Castillo: A nonlinear programming algorithm based on noncoercive penalty function, Math. Programming 96 (2003) 87–101.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10107-002-0332-zGoogle Scholar
  14. A. N. Iusem, M. Teboulle: Convergence rate analysis of nonquadratic proximal methods for convex and linear programming, Math. Oper. Res. 20 (1995) 657–677.https://doi.org/10.1287/moor.20.3.657Google Scholar
  15. B. W. Kort, D. P. Bertsekas: A new penalty function method for constrained minimization, Proc. 1972 IEEE Conf. Decision and Control (1972) 162–166.https://doi.org/10.1109/CDC.1972.268971Google Scholar
  16. S. Kullback, R. A. Leibler: On information and sufficiency, Ann. Math. Statist. 22 (1951) 79–86.https://doi.org/10.1214/aoms/1177729694Google Scholar
  17. L. Mallma-Ramirez: The Hyperbolic Augmented Lagrangian Algorithm, Ph. D. Thesis, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro/COPPE, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (2022); https:// www.cos.ufrj.br/ uploadfile/ publicacao/ 3038.pdf.Google Scholar
  18. L. Mallma-Ramirez, N. Maculan, E. A. Xavier, V. L. Xavier: Convergence analysis of the hyperbolic augmented Lagrangian algorithm, Technical Report, PESC-COPPE-UFRJ, ES-2991/21 (2021); https:// www.cos.ufrj.br/ uploadfile/ publicacao/ 2991.pdf.Google Scholar
  19. Y. E. Nesterov, A. S. Nemirovskii: Interior Point Polynomial Algorithms in Convex Programming, SIAM Studies in Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia (1994).https://doi.org/10.1137/1.9781611970791Google Scholar
  20. J. Peng, C. Roos, T. Terlaky: Self-regular functions and new search directions for linear and semidefinite optimization, Math. Programming 93 (2002) 129–171.https://doi.org/10.1007/s101070200296Google Scholar
  21. M. R. Peyghami, S. F. Hafshejani: Complexity analysis of an interior-point algorithm for linear optimization based on a new proximity function, Numer. Algorithms 67 (2014) 33–48.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11075-013-9772-1Google Scholar
  22. R. A. Polyak: Log-sigmoid multipliers method in constrained optimization, Ann. Oper. Res. 101 (2001) 427–460.https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010938423538Google Scholar
  23. R. A. Polyak: Nonlinear rescaling vs. smoothing technique in convex optimization, Math. Programming 92 (2002) 197–235.https://doi.org/10.1007/s101070100293Google Scholar
  24. R. Polyak, M. Teboulle: Nonlinear rescaling and proximal-like methods in convex optimization, Math. Programming 76 (1997) 265–284.https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02614440Google Scholar
  25. J. W. Pratt: Risk aversion in the small and in the large, Econometrica 32 (1964) 122–136.https://doi.org/10.2307/1913738Google Scholar
  26. R. T. Rockafellar: Convex Analysis, Princeton University Press, Princeton (1970).https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400873173Google Scholar
  27. A. E. Xavier: Penalização Hiperbólica – Um Novo Método para Resolução de Problemas de Otimização, Master’s Thesis, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro/COPPE, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (1982).Google Scholar
  28. A. E. Xavier: Penalização Hiperbólica, Ph. D. Thesis, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro/COPPE, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (1992).Google Scholar
  29. A. E. Xavier: Hyperbolic penalty: a new method for nonlinear programming with inequalities, Int. Trans. Oper. Res. 8 (2001) 659–671.https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-3995.t01-1-00330Google Scholar
  30. A. E. Xavier: The hyperbolic smoothing clustering method, Pattern Recognition 43 (2010) 731–737.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2009.06.018Google Scholar
  31. W. I. Zangwill: Non-linear programming via penalty function, Manage. Science 13 (1967) 344–358.https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.13.5.344Google Scholar

Suggested citation

L. M. Ramirez, N. Maculan, A. E. Xavier, V. L. Xavier. “Dislocation Hyperbolic Kernel Function.” Journal of Convex Analysis 31 (2024), No. 3, 1021–1034. https://doi.org/10.68381/jca31049

Download BibTeXPublished by Heldermann Verlag.

Published by Heldermann Verlag, 2024. Rights now held by Banach Press LLC.