Converting a linear optimization problem with absolute values

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around converting a linear optimization problem that includes absolute value terms into a standard linear programming (LP) format. The original poster presents a problem involving minimizing an objective function with absolute values and constraints, seeking clarification on how to properly handle the absolute value terms in the context of linear programming.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss different methods for handling absolute values in linear programming, including replacing absolute values with new variables and adding constraints. There is confusion regarding the correct formulation and the implications of the constraints on the variables involved.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively exploring the problem, with some providing insights into standard methods for addressing absolute values in optimization. There is acknowledgment of mistakes in the problem statement, and clarification is sought regarding the relationship between the objective function and the constraints. The discussion remains open, with no explicit consensus reached.

Contextual Notes

There are indications of mixed variable references in the problem statement, which has led to confusion. Participants are also addressing the constraints and their relevance to the objective function, highlighting the need for clarity in the problem setup.

Yo388
Messages
8
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Here is an alternative approach to handling absolute value terms as the decision variables: abs(x) is the smallest value z that satisfies x \leq z and -x \leq z. Using this,convert the following into a lp

Min 2x1 + 3abs(x2)

S.T x1 + x2 \geq 6

Homework Equations


Here is a pretext from my textbook that shows how to do it a different way

20130917_232043_2.jpg


The Attempt at a Solution



After a while of staring at it ,I gave it a try

20130917_231852_5.jpg


What do you guys think?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Yo388 said:

Homework Statement


Here is an alternative approach to handling absolute value terms as the decision variables: abs(x) is the smallest value z that satisfies x \leq z and -x \leq z. Using this,convert the following into a lp

Min 2x1 + 3abs(x2)

S.T x1 + x3 \geq 6

Homework Equations


Here is a pretext from my textbook that shows how to do it a different way

View attachment 61918

The Attempt at a Solution



After a while of staring at it ,I gave it a try

View attachment 61920

What do you guys think?

I think there is something wrong with the problem statement: it has ##x_1## and ##x_2## in the objective but ##x_1## and ##x_3## in the constraint.
Mod note: This is now fixed.[/color]
As written, the problem does not have a finite solution, since we can have ##x_1 \rightarrow -\infty##, ##x_3 = 6 - x_1 \rightarrow +\infty## and ##x_2 = 0##. If you really intend to have ##x_1 \geq 0## you need to say so.

In any case, you need only one constraint, not three. Basically, it is one of the standard methods for such problems to just replace ##x_2## by ##x_2^+ - x_2^-## (with ##x_2^+, x_2^- \geq 0##) and to write ##x_2^+ + x_2^-## in place of ##|x_2|## in the objective.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hey

Ya sorry I just noticed as well that I made a mistake. there's no x3,I meant x2.

Anyways , you the way you have said I already know how to do. But the reason I am confused is that the question asks that the aforementioned observation be used in answering the question.

P.S I can't seem to edit the question to fix the mistake
 
Yo388 said:
Hey

Ya sorry I just noticed as well that I made a mistake. there's no x3,I meant x2.

Anyways , you the way you have said I already know how to do. But the reason I am confused is that the question asks that the aforementioned observation be used in answering the question.

P.S I can't seem to edit the question to fix the mistake
I fixed it for you. Members have only a few hours to go back and edit their posts, but mentors don't have that restriction.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Yo388 said:
Hey

Ya sorry I just noticed as well that I made a mistake. there's no x3,I meant x2.

Anyways , you the way you have said I already know how to do. But the reason I am confused is that the question asks that the aforementioned observation be used in answering the question.

P.S I can't seem to edit the question to fix the mistake

There are two *different* ways of handling such problems, and you have mixed them up. For problems in which |x| appears only in the objective, and with a coefficient c > 0, we can:
(1) Replace ##x## in the constraints by ##x^+ - x^-## and ##|x|## by ##x^+ + x^-## in the objective; or
(2) keep x unchanged in the constraints, replace |x| in the objective by a new variable z, and add two constraints z ≥ x and z ≥ -x.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Ray Vickson said:
There are two *different* ways of handling such problems, and you have mixed them up. For problems in which |x| appears only in the objective, and with a coefficient c > 0, we can:
(1) Replace ##x## in the constraints by ##x^+ - x^-## and ##|x|## by ##x^+ + x^-## in the objective; or
(2) keep x unchanged in the constraints, replace |x| in the objective by a new variable z, and add two constraints z ≥ x and z ≥ -x.

Ya i know the first way as its stated in the textbook but the way the question is being asked to be done is how you stated in (2).

So if I replace |x2| in this case by z and add the two constraints like you said, what i am wondering is what do the x2 and -x2 mean in the constraints because they are not in the objective function

Min 2x1 +3z

S.T x1 + x2 ≥ 6
z ≥ x2 and z ≥ -x2
 
Yo388 said:
Ya i know the first way as its stated in the textbook but the way the question is being asked to be done is how you stated in (2).

So if I replace |x2| in this case by z and add the two constraints like you said, what i am wondering is what do the x2 and -x2 mean in the constraints because they are not in the objective function

Min 2x1 +3z

S.T x1 + x2 ≥ 6
z ≥ x2 and z ≥ -x2

Stop worrying; your formulation is OK exactly as it stands. When you try to make z small, that will restrict x_2 in the constraints, so everything *really is* connected together. If you don't believe it, try solving both formulations (either by hand or by using an LP computer package).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person

Similar threads

  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K