Skip to main content
Log in

Hierarchical sets in mathematical programming modeling languages

  • Published:
Computational Optimization and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The mathematical notation commonly applied for the formulation of mathematical programming models is extended to include hierarchical structures. The proposed notation is related to hierarchical set concepts in the languages UIMP, AMPL, and LPL. With the proposed notation it is possible to aggregate and disaggregate over hierarchical structures. In addition, views are introduced to permit the use of hierarchical substructures and to create new hierarchies out of existing ones. The proposed notation for hierarchical sets and views is illustrated by applying it to the representation and estimation of social accounting matrices (SAMs).

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.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. J.M. Anthonisse, “An input system for linear programming problems,” Statistica Neerlandica 24 (1970), 71–81.

    Google Scholar 

  2. J.J. Bisschop and C.A.C. Kuip, “Compound sets in mathematical programming modeling languages,” Memorandum 834, University of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  3. J.J. Bisschop and A. Meeraus, “On the development of a general algebraic modeling system in a strategic planning environment,” Mathematical Programming Study 20 (1982), 1–29.

    Google Scholar 

  4. G.H. Bradley and R.D. ClemenceJr, “A type calculus for executable modeling languages,” IMA J. of Math. in Management 1 (1987), 277–291.

    Google Scholar 

  5. R.P. Byron, “The estimation of large social account matrices,” J. of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A 141 (1978), 359–367.

    Google Scholar 

  6. V. Chvátal, Linear Programming, Freeman: New York, NY, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  7. A. Drud, W. Grais, and G. Pyatt, “The transaction value approach: A systematic method of defining economywide models based on social accounting matrices,” in Dynamic Modelling and Control of National Economies, T. Basar and L.F. Pau, eds., Pergamon Press: New York, NY, 1983, 241–248.

    Google Scholar 

  8. A. Drud and D. Kendrick, Hercules, A System For Large Economywide Models, third ed., ARKI Consulting and Development A/S: Bagsvaerd, Denmark, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  9. E.F.D. Ellison and G. Mitra, “UIMP: User interface for mathematical programming,” ACM Trans. on Math. Software, 8 (1982), 229–255.

    Google Scholar 

  10. R. Fourer, “Modeling languages versus matrix generators for linear programming,” ACM Trans. on Math. Software, 9 (1983), 143–183.

    Google Scholar 

  11. R. Fourer, D.M. Gay, and B.W. Kernighan, “A modeling language for mathematical programming,” Mgmt. Sci. 36 (1990), 519–554.

    Google Scholar 

  12. A.M. Geoffrion, “An introduction to structured modeling,” Mgmt. Sci. 33 (1987), 547–588.

    Google Scholar 

  13. A.M. Geoffrion, “The formal aspects of structured modeling,” Operations Res. 37(1) (1989), 30–51.

    Google Scholar 

  14. A.M. Geoffrion, “Indexing in modeling languages for mathematical programming,” Working paper 371, Western Management Science Institute, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  15. H.J. Greenberg, “A functional description of ANALYZE: A computer-assisted analysis system for linear programming models,” ACM Trans. on Math. Software, 9 (1983), 18–56.

    Google Scholar 

  16. H.J. Greenberg, “A natural language discourse model to explain linear programming models and solutions,” Decision Support Systems, 3 (1987), 333–342.

    Google Scholar 

  17. T. Hürlimann and J. Kohlas, “LPL: A structured language for linear programming modeling,” OR Spektrum, 10, (1988), 55–63.

    Google Scholar 

  18. C.V. Jones, “An introduction to graph-based modeling systems, Part I: Overview.” ORSA J. on Computing, 2(2) (1990), 136–151.

    Google Scholar 

  19. C.A.C. Kuip, “Algebraic languages for mathematical programming,” Memorandum 902, Faculty of Applied Mathematics, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands, 1990 (to be published in European J. of Operational Res.).

    Google Scholar 

  20. C. Lucas and G. Mitra, “Computer-assisted mathematical programming (modeling) system: CAMPS,” The Computer J. 31 (1988), 364–375.

    Google Scholar 

  21. A. Meeraus, “An algebraic approach to modeling,” J. of Economic Dynamics and Control 5 (1983), 81–108.

    Google Scholar 

  22. G. Pyatt and J.I. Round, eds., Social Accounting Matrices, a Basis for Planning, The World Bank: Washington, D.C. 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  23. I. Sagi, “Computer-aided modeling and planning (CAMP),” ACM Trans. on Math. Software 12 (1986), 225–248.

    Google Scholar 

  24. D. Steiger and R. Sharda, “Modeling languages for personal computers: A comparison,” Presented at the APMOD91, London and to be published in the Annals of Operations Res..

  25. R. Stone, “The development of economic data systems,” in Social Accounting for Development Planning with Special Reference to Sri Lanka, G. Pyatt and A.R. Roe, eds., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 1977, xvi-xxx.

    Google Scholar 

  26. H.P. Williams, Model building in mathematical programming, 3rd Ed., Wiley: Chichester, England, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bisschop, J.J., Kuip, C.A.C. Hierarchical sets in mathematical programming modeling languages. Comput Optim Applic 1, 415–438 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00248765

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00248765

Keywords

Navigation