If x1 and x2 solve an LP problem, show that there are

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jamin2112
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around demonstrating that if two distinct solutions, x1 and x2, exist for a linear programming (LP) problem, then there are infinitely many solutions. The context involves maximizing a linear objective function subject to linear inequalities and non-negativity constraints.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the implications of having two solutions and consider the use of convex combinations to find additional solutions. There are attempts to clarify the conditions under which the objective function remains unchanged while ensuring feasibility.

Discussion Status

Some participants have suggested checking the feasibility of a new solution defined as a convex combination of the two existing solutions. Others have raised questions about the assumptions regarding the equality of the objective function values at the two solutions and the implications of non-binding constraints.

Contextual Notes

There is a noted uncertainty regarding the equality of the values of the objective function at the two solutions, as well as the potential differences in the constraints that may affect the validity of certain assumptions.

Jamin2112
Messages
973
Reaction score
12

Homework Statement



If x1 and x2 solve the LP problem P, show that there are infinitely many solutions.

Homework Equations



(P): maximize of cTx subject to Axb, x0

(Though the problem doesn't say it, I'm sure we assume x1x2)

The Attempt at a Solution



So it'll suffice to show that Ax1 = Ax2 = sup{Ax | Axb, x0} implies the existence of another x3 = sup{Ax | Axb, x0}. I remember my professor saying something about convex sets (I wasn't taking notes so I can't remember the gist of it). I think I need to choose λ ε (0, 1) and then show that x3 = λx1 + (1 - λ)x2 = sup{Ax | Axb, x0}. How do I do this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Substitute x3 thus defined and check that it satisfies the conditions and that the value of the objective function does not change.

Then, please read up on the theory.
 
voko said:
Substitute x3 thus defined and check that it satisfies the conditions and that the value of the objective function does not change.

Suppose x ε ℝn and y ε ℝn, with xy, solve the linear program. Fix λ ε (0, 1) and set z = λx + (1 - λ)y.

Since xi, yi ≥ 0 for each i ε {1, ..., n}, and since λ, 1 - λ > 0, we have λxi, (1 - λ)yi ≥ 0 and subsequently zi = λxi + (1 - λ)yi ≥ 0 for each i ε {1, ..., n}. Hence z0. Similarly, since λ, 1 - λ < 1 we have have Azb. Hence z is a feasible solution for the LP. To see that cTz is optimal, look at zi = λxi + (1 - λ)yi = λ(xi - yi) + yi. Errrr not sure what to do from here
 
Last edited:
Jamin2112 said:
Suppose x ε ℝn and y ε ℝn, with xy, solve the linear program. Fix λ ε (0, 1) and set z = λx + (1 - λ)y.

Since xi, yi ≥ 0 for each i ε {1, ..., n}, and since λ, 1 - λ > 0, we have λxi, (1 - λ)yi ≥ 0 and subsequently zi = λxi + (1 - λ)yi ≥ 0 for each i ε {1, ..., n}. Hence z0. Similarly, since λ, 1 - λ < 1 we have have Azb. Hence z is a feasible solution for the LP. To see that cTz is optimal, look at zi = λxi + (1 - λ)yi = λ(xi - yi) + yi.


Errrr not sure what to do from here

Plug that into the objective function; mind its linearity.
 
Jamin2112 said:

Homework Statement



If x1 and x2 solve the LP problem P, show that there are infinitely many solutions.

Homework Equations



(P): maximize of cTx subject to Axb, x0

(Though the problem doesn't say it, I'm sure we assume x1x2)

The Attempt at a Solution



So it'll suffice to show that Ax1 = Ax2 = sup{Ax | Axb, x0} implies the existence of another x3 = sup{Ax | Axb, x0}. I remember my professor saying something about convex sets (I wasn't taking notes so I can't remember the gist of it). I think I need to choose λ ε (0, 1) and then show that x3 = λx1 + (1 - λ)x2 = sup{Ax | Axb, x0}. How do I do this?

You cannot assume [itex]Ax_1 = Ax_2,[/itex] because at both [itex]x_1 \text{ and } x_2[/itex] we can have some rows of Ax being strictly less than the corresponding components of b; and the differences between the right and left-hand sides at those "non-binding" constraints can be different at the two optima. In other words, in the situation you describe we usually have [itex]Ax_1 \neq Ax_2.[/itex] However, you DO both [itex]Ax_1 \leq b[/itex] and [itex]Ax_2 \leq b,[/itex] but with [itex]cx_1 = cx_2.[/itex] Now use convexity in the manner others have suggested.
RGV
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K