Abstract
Linear programming has had a tremendous impact in the modeling and solution of a great diversity of applied problems, especially in the efficient allocation of resources. As a result, this methodology forms the backbone of introductory courses in operations research. What students, and others, may not appreciate is that linear programming transcends its linear nomenclature and can be applied to an even wider range of important practical problems. The objective of this article is to present a selection, and just a selection, from this range of problems that at first blush do not seem amenable to linear programming formulation. The exposition focuses on the most basic models in these selected applications, with pointers to more elaborate formulations and extensions. Thus, our intent is to expand the modeling awareness of those first encountering linear programming. In addition, we hope this article will be of interest to those who teach linear programming and to seasoned academics and practitioners, alike.
References
Agarwal R, Karahanna E (2000) Time flies when you’re having fun: cognitive absorption and beliefs about information technology usage. MIS Q 24(4):665–694
Anderson D, Bjarnadottir M (2019) As good as it gets? An upper bound methodology (submitted for publication)
Appa G (2002) On the uniqueness of solutions to linear programs. J Oper Res Soc 53(10):1127–1132
Assad AA, Gass SI (2011) Profiles in operations research: pioneers and innovators. Springer, New York
Chandran B, Golden B, Wasil E (2005) Linear programming models for estimating weights in the analytic hierarchy process. Comput Oper Res 32(9):2235–2254
Charnes A, Cooper WW (1961) Management models and industrial applications of linear programming. Wiley, New York
Charnes A, Cooper WW (1962) Programming with linear fractional functionals. Naval Res Logist Q 9(3–4):181–186
Charnes A, Lemke CE (1954) Minimization of non-linear separable convex functionals. Naval Res Logist Q 1(4):301–312
Dantzig G, Fulkerson R, Johnson S (1954) Solution of a large-scale traveling-salesman problem. Oper Res 2(4):365–462
DiNardo G, Levy D, Golden B (1989) Using decision analysis to manage Maryland’s river herring fishery: an application of AHP. J Environ Manag 29(2):192–213
Dongarra J, Sullivan F (2000) Guest editors’ introduction: the top 10 algorithms. Comput Sci Eng 2(1):22–23
Emrouznejad A, Marra M (2017) The state of the art development of AHP (1979–2017): a literature review with a social network analysis. Int J Prod Res 55(22):6653–6675
Emrouznejad A, Yang G-L (2018) A survey and analysis of the first 40 years of scholarly literature in DEA: 1978–2016. Socio-Econ Plan Sci 61:4–8
Fisher RA (1936) The use of multiple measurements in taxonomic problems. Ann Eugen 7(2):179–188
Flavell R (1976) A new goal programming formulation. Omega 4(6):731–732
Freed N, Glover F (1981) Simple but powerful goal programming models for discriminant problems. Eur J Oper Res 7(1):44–60
Freed N, Glover F (1986) Evaluating alternative linear programming models to solve the two-group discriminant problem. Decis Sci 17(2):151–162
Gochet W, Stam A, Srinivasan V, Chen S (1997) Multigroup discriminant analysis using linear programming. Oper Res 45(2):213–225
Golden BL, Wasil EA, Harker PT (eds) (1989) The analytic hierarchy process: applications and studies. Springer, Berlin
Jones D, Tamiz M (2010) Practical goal programming. Springer, Berlin
Koehler GJ (1990) Considerations for mathematical programming models in discriminant analysis. Manag Decis Econ 11(4):227–234
Lenstra JK, Rinnooy Kan AHG, Schrijver A (eds) (1991) History of mathematical programming: a collection of personal reminiscences. Centrum voor Wiskunde en Informatica
Retchless T, Golden B, Wasil E (2007) Ranking US army generals of the 20th century: a group decision-making application of the analytic hierarchy process. Interfaces 37(2):163–175
Saaty TL (1977) A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. J Math Psychol 15(3):234–281
Saaty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill, New York
Shinmura S (2016) New theory of discriminant analysis after R. Fisher. Springer, Berlin
Stigler SM (1981) Gauss and the invention of least squares. Ann Stat 9(3):465–474
von Neumann J, Morgenstern O (1944) Theory of Games and Economic Behavior (60th Anniversary Commemorative Edition). Princeton University Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1r2gkx
Wang Y (2017) Operations Research 04G: goal programming. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1xYQdnmKvY. Accessed 8 Jan 2020
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
This work is dedicated to the memory of Saul I. Gass (1926–2013).
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendices
Appendix A: On the uniqueness of solutions to linear programs
The author in Appa (2002) presents a method which examines whether an LP has a unique optimal solution, and, in the case that the solution is not unique, it provides an alternative optimal solution. In particular, this is achieved by solving an additional LP as described below.
Consider a LP in the standard form:
Let \(x^* = \{x^*_1, x^*_2, \ldots , x^*_n\}\) be an optimal solution to the above LP, and let T denote the set of all variables in \(x^*\) that are equal to zero. We also define parameter \(d_j\) to be equal to 1 if j is in T, and to equal 0 otherwise. In order to check if \(x^*\) is unique, we can solve the following LP:
Let \({\bar{x}}= \{{\bar{x}}_1, {\bar{x}}_2, \ldots , {\bar{x}}_n\}\) be an optimal solution to the above LP. If the objective value equals zero when solved optimally (i.e., \(\sum _{j=1}^{n} d_j {\bar{x}}_j = 0\)), then \(x^*\) is a unique optimal solution to the initial LP. On the other hand, if \(\sum _{j=1}^{n} d_j {\bar{x}}_j > 0\), then \({\bar{x}}\) is an alternative optimal solution of the initial LP. In other words, what the second LP does is that it forces the variables in \(x^*\) that are equal to zero to take strictly positive values if it is possible (objective function (69)), while maintaining the same objective value obtained in the initial LP [constraint (71)].
Note that, if the reduced costs are available, we can modify the definitions of T and \(d_j\). In particular, we can let T denote the set of all variables in \(x^*\) that are equal to zero and have a reduced cost of 0. If T is empty, then there are no multiple optimal solutions. If T is not empty, set coefficient \(d_j\) equal to 1 if j is in T, and equal to 0 otherwise. Then, we solve the above LP.
Appendix B: An example of a first stage LP for AHP
For the pairwise comparison matrix in Fig. 9, the first stage LP given below emerges:
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Golden, B., Schrage, L., Shier, D. et al. The power of linear programming: some surprising and unexpected LPs. 4OR-Q J Oper Res 19, 15–40 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10288-020-00441-2
Received:
Revised:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10288-020-00441-2