Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- ZIB-Report (52)
- In Proceedings (28)
- Article (22)
- In Collection (4)
- Master's Thesis (2)
- Book chapter (1)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
Keywords
Conflict Analysis for MINLP
(2020)
The generalization of MIP techniques to deal with nonlinear, potentially non-convex, constraints have been a fruitful direction of research for computational MINLP in the last decade. In this paper, we follow that path in order to extend another essential subroutine of modern MIP solvers towards the case of nonlinear optimization: the analysis of infeasible subproblems for learning additional valid constraints. To this end, we derive two different strategies, geared towards two different solution approaches. These are using local dual proofs of infeasibility for LP-based branch-and-bound and the creation of nonlinear dual proofs for NLP-based branch-and-bound, respectively. We discuss implementation details of both approaches and present an extensive computational study, showing that both techniques can significantly enhance performance when solving MINLPs to global optimality.
Conflict learning plays an important role in solving mixed integer programs (MIPs) and is implemented in most major MIP solvers. A major step for MIP conflict learning is to aggregate the LP relaxation of an infeasible subproblem to a single globally valid constraint, the dual proof, that proves infeasibility within the local bounds. Among others, one way of learning is to add these constraints to the problem formulation for the remainder of the search.
We suggest to not restrict this procedure to infeasible subproblems, but to also use global proof constraints from subproblems that are not (yet) infeasible, but can be expected to be pruned soon. As a special case, we also consider learning from integer feasible LP solutions. First experiments of this conflict-free learning strategy show promising results on the MIPLIB2017 benchmark set.
Conflict learning plays an important role in solving mixed integer programs (MIPs) and is implemented in most major MIP solvers. A major step for MIP conflict learning is to aggregate the LP relaxation of an infeasible subproblem to a single globally valid constraint, the dual proof, that proves infeasibility within the local bounds. Among others, one way of learning is to add these constraints to the problem formulation for the remainder of the search.
We suggest to not restrict this procedure to infeasible subproblems, but to also use global proof constraints from subproblems that are not (yet) infeasible, but can be expected to be pruned soon. As a special case, we also consider learning from integer feasible LP solutions. First experiments of this conflict-free learning strategy show promising results on the MIPLIB2017 benchmark set.
Undercover Branching
(2013)
In this paper, we present a new branching strategy for nonconvex MINLP that aims at driving the created subproblems towards linearity. It exploits the structure of a minimum cover of an MINLP, a smallest set of variables that, when fixed, render the remaining system linear: whenever possible, branching candidates in the cover are preferred. Unlike most branching strategies for MINLP, Undercover branching is not an extension of an existing MIP branching rule. It explicitly regards the nonlinearity of the problem while branching on integer variables with a fractional relaxation solution. Undercover branching can be naturally combined with any variable-based branching rule. We present computational results on a test set of general MINLPs from MINLPLib, using the new strategy in combination with reliability branching and pseudocost branching. The computational cost of Undercover branching itself proves negligible. While it turns out that it can influence the variable selection only on a smaller set of instances, for those that are affected, significant improvements in performance are achieved.
MILP. Try. Repeat.
(2021)
This study investigates the progress made in LP and MILP solver performance during the last two decades by comparing the solver software from the beginning of the millennium with the codes available today.
On average, we found out that for solving LP/MILP, computer hardware got about 20 times faster, and the algorithms improved by a factor of about nine for LP and around 50 for MILP, which gives a total speed-up of about 180 and 1,000 times, respectively.
However, these numbers have a very high variance and they considerably underestimate the progress made on the algorithmic side: many problem instances can nowadays be solved within seconds, which the old codes are not able to solve within any reasonable time.
Since railway companies have to apply for long-term public contracts to operate railway lines in public tenders, the question how they can estimate the operating cost for long-term periods adequately arises naturally. We consider a rolling stock rotation problem for a time period of ten years, which is based on a real world instance provided by an industry partner. We use a two stage approach for the cost estimation of the required rolling stock. In the first stage, we determine a weekly rotation plan. In the second stage, we roll out this weekly rotation plan for a longer time period and incorporate scheduled maintenance treatments. We present a heuristic approach and a mixed integer programming model to implement the process of the second stage. Finally, we discuss computational results for a real world tendering scenario.
Branch-and-bound methods for mixed-integer programming (MIP) are traditionally based on solving a linear programming (LP) relaxation and branching on a variable which takes a fractional value in the (single) computed relaxation optimum. In this paper, we study branching strategies for mixed-integer programs that exploit the knowledge of multiple alternative optimal solutions (a cloud ) of the current LP relaxation. These strategies naturally extend common methods like most infeasible branching, strong branching, pseudocost branching, and their hybrids, but we also propose a novel branching rule called cloud diameter branching. We show that dual degeneracy, a requirement for alternative LP optima, is present for many instances from common MIP test sets. Computational experiments show significant improvements in the quality of branching decisions as well as reduced branching effort when using our modifications of existing branching rules. We discuss different ways to generate a cloud of solutions and present extensive computational results showing that through a careful implementation, cloud modifications can speed up full strong branching by more than 10 % on standard test sets. Additionally, by exploiting degeneracy, we are also able to improve the state-of-the-art hybrid branching rule and reduce the solving time on affected instances by almost 20 % on average.
The analysis of infeasible subproblems plays an important role in solving mixed integer programs (MIPs) and is implemented in most major MIP solvers. There are two fundamentally different concepts to generate valid global constraints from infeasible subproblems. The first is to analyze the sequence of implications, obtained by domain propagation, that led to infeasibility. The result of this analysis is one or more sets of contradicting variable bounds from which so-called conflict constraints can be generated. This concept is called conflict graph analysis and has its origin in solving satisfiability problems and is similarly used in constraint programming. The second concept is to analyze infeasible linear programming (LP) relaxations. Every ray of the dual LP provides a set of multipliers that can be used to generate a single new globally valid linear constraint. This method is called dual proof analysis. The main contribution of this paper is twofold. Firstly, we present three enhancements of dual proof analysis: presolving via variable cancellation, strengthening by applying mixed integer rounding functions, and a filtering mechanism. Further, we provide an intense computational study evaluating the impact of every presented component regarding dual proof analysis. Secondly, this paper presents the first integrated approach to use both conflict graph and dual proof analysis simultaneously within a single MIP solution process. All experiments are carried out on general MIP instances from the standard public test set MIPLIB 2017; the presented algorithms have been implemented within the non-commercial MIP solver SCIP and the commercial MIP solver FICO Xpress.
Computing hardware has mostly thrashed out the physical limits for speeding up individual computing cores. Consequently, the main line of progress for new hardware is growing the number of computing cores within a single CPU. This makes the study of efficient parallelization schemes for computation-intensive algorithms more and more important. A natural precondition to achieving reasonable speedups from parallelization is maintaining a high workload of the available computational resources. At the same time, reproducibility and reliability are key requirements for software that is used in industrial applications. In this paper, we present the new parallelization concept for the state-of-the-art MIP solver FICO Xpress-Optimizer. MIP solvers like Xpress are expected to be deterministic. This inevitably results in synchronization latencies which render the goal of a satisfying workload a challenge in itself. We address this challenge by following a partial information approach and separating the concepts of simultaneous tasks and independent threads from each other. Our computational results indicate that this leads to a much higher CPU workload and thereby to an improved, almost linear, scaling on modern high-performance CPUs. As an added value, the solution path that Xpress takes is not only deterministic in a fixed environment, but also, to a certain extent, thread-independent. This paper is an extended version of Berthold et al. [Parallelization of the FICO Xpress-Optimizer, in Mathematical Software – ICMS 2016: 5th International Conference, G.-M. Greuel, T. Koch, P. Paule, and A. Sommere, eds., Springer International Publishing, Berlin, 2016, pp. 251–258] containing more detailed technical descriptions, illustrative examples and updated computational results.