Skip to main content
Log in

Solving Posynomial Geometric Programming Problems via Generalized Linear Programming

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

Abstract

This paper revisits an efficient procedure for solving posynomial geometric programming (GP) problems, which was initially developed by Avriel et al. The procedure, which used the concept of condensation, was embedded within an algorithm for the more general (signomial) GP problem. It is shown here that a computationally equivalent dual-based algorithm may be independently derived based on some more recent work where the GP primal-dual pair was reformulated as a set of inexact linear programs. The constraint structure of the reformulation provides insight into why the algorithm is successful in avoiding all of the computational problems traditionally associated with dual-based algorithms. Test results indicate that the algorithm can be used to successfully solve large-scale geometric programming problems on a desktop computer.

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.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. M. Avriel, R. Dembo, and U. Passy, “Solution of generalized geometric programs,” International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, vol. 9, pp. 149–168, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  2. P.A. Beck and J.G. Ecker, “Some computational experience with a modified convex simplex algorithm for geometric programming,” Armament Development and Test Center, Elgin AFB, Florida, Technical Report ADTC-72-70, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  3. C.S. Beightler and D.T. Phillips, Applied Geometric Programming, John Wiley: New York, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  4. D.L. Bricker and H.Y. Chang, “Apath-following algorithm for posynomial geometric programming,” presented at the 25th Anniversary Geometric Programming Conference, August 3–5, 1992, Colorado School of Mines, Golden, CO.

  5. G.B. Dantzig, Linear Programming and Extensions, Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, 1963.

    Google Scholar 

  6. R.S. Dembo, “Aset of geometric programming test problems and their solutions,” Mathematical Programming, vol. 10, pp. 192–213, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  7. R.S. Dembo, “Current state of the art of algorithms and computer software for geometric programming,” Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, vol. 26, pp. 149–183, 1978a.

    Google Scholar 

  8. R.S Dembo, “Dual to primal conversion in geometric programming,” Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, vol. 26, pp. 243–252, 1978b.

    Google Scholar 

  9. R.J. Duffin, “Linearizing geometric programs,” SIAM Review, vol. 12, pp. 211–237, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  10. R.J. Duffin, E.L. Peterson, and C. Zener, Geometric Programming—Theory and Applications, John Wiley: New York, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  11. A.V. Fiacco and A. Ghaemi, “Sensitivity analysis of a nonlinear water pollution control model using an upper Hudson river data base,” Operations Research, vol. 30, pp. 1–28, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  12. W. Gochet, Y. Smeers, and K.O. Kortanek, “Using semi-infinite programming in geometric programming,” in Proceedings of the 20th International Meeting of TIMS, Tel Aviv, Israel, E. Shlifer (Ed.), Academic Press: New York, 1973, vol. 2, pp. 430–438.

    Google Scholar 

  13. S. Jha, K.O. Kortanek, and H. No, “Lotsizing and setup time reduction under stochastic demand: A geometric programming approach,” Department of Management Science, University of Iowa, IA, Working Paper Series No. 88–12, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  14. K.O. Kortanek and H. No, “A second order affine scaling algorithm for the geometric programming dual with logarithmic barrier,” Optimization, vol. 23, pp. 303–322, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  15. K.O. Kortanek, X. Xu, and Y.Ye, “An infeasible interior-point algorithm for solving primal and dual geometric programs,” Mathematical Programming, vol. 76, pp. 155–181, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  16. R.E. Marsten, “The design of the XMP linear programming library,” ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software, vol. 7, pp. 481–497, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  17. J. Rajgopal, “An alternative approach to the refined duality theory of geometric programming,” Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, vol. 167, pp. 266–288, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  18. J. Rajgopal and D.L. Bricker, “Posynomial geometric programming as a special case of semi-infinite linear programming,” Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, vol. 66, pp. 455–475, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  19. J. Rajgopal and D.L. Bricker, “On subsidiary problems in geometric programming,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 63, pp. 102–113, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  20. M.J. Rijckaert and X.M. Martens, “Comparison of generalized geometric programming algorithms,” Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, vol. 26, pp. 205–242, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  21. P.V.L.N. Sarma, X.M. Martens, G.V. Reklaitis, and M.J. Rijckaert, “A comparison of computational strategies for geometric programs,” Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, vol. 26, pp. 185–203, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  22. W.I. Zangwill, Nonlinear Programming: A Unified Approach, Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rajgopal, J., Bricker, D.L. Solving Posynomial Geometric Programming Problems via Generalized Linear Programming. Computational Optimization and Applications 21, 95–109 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013500514075

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013500514075

Navigation