Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- ZIB-Report (52)
- In Proceedings (28)
- Article (21)
- In Collection (4)
- Master's Thesis (2)
- Book chapter (1)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
Keywords
The Feasibility Pump (FP) is one of the best-known primal heuristics for mixed-integer programming (MIP): more than 15 papers suggested various modifications of all of its steps. So far, no variant considered information across multiple iterations, but all instead maintained the principle to optimize towards a single reference integer point. In this paper, we evaluate the usage of multiple reference vectors in all stages of the FP algorithm. In particular, we use LP-feasible vectors obtained during the main loop to tighten the variable domains before entering the computationally expensive enumeration stage. Moreover, we consider multiple integer reference vectors to explore further optimizing directions and introduce alternative objective scaling terms to balance the contributions of the distance functions and the original MIP objective. Our computational experiments demonstrate that the new method can improve performance on general MIP test sets. In detail, our modifications provide a 29.3% solution quality improvement and 4.0% running time improvement in an embedded setting, needing 16.0% fewer iterations over a large test set of MIP instances. In addition, the method’s success rate increases considerably within the first few iterations. In a standalone setting, we also observe a moderate performance improvement, which makes our version of FP suitable for the two main use-cases of the algorithm.
The analysis of infeasible subproblems plays an import 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 the analysis is one or more sets of contradicting variable bounds from which so-called conflict constraints can be generated. This concept 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. The dual LP solution provides a set of multipliers that can be used to generate a single new globally valid linear constraint. The main contribution of this short paper is an empirical evaluation of two ways to combine both approaches. Experiments are carried out on general MIP instances from standard public test sets such as Miplib2010; the presented algorithms have been implemented within the non-commercial MIP solver SCIP. Moreover, we present a pool-based approach to manage conflicts which addresses the way a MIP solver traverses the search tree better than aging strategies known from SAT solving.
The analysis of infeasible subproblems plays an import 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 the analysis is one or more sets of contradicting variable bounds from which so-called conflict constraints can be generated. This concept 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. The dual LP solution provides a set of multipliers that can be used to generate a single new globally valid linear constraint. The main contribution of this short paper is an empirical evaluation of two ways to combine both approaches. Experiments are carried out on general MIP instances from standard public test sets such as Miplib2010; the presented algorithms have been implemented within the non-commercial MIP solver SCIP. Moreover, we present a pool-based approach to manage conflicts which addresses the way a MIP solver traverses the search tree better than aging strategies known from SAT solving.
Conflict Analysis for MINLP
(2021)
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 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.
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.
Conflict learning algorithms are an important component of modern MIP and CP solvers. But strong conflict information is typically gained by depth-first search. While this is the natural mode for CP solving, it is not for MIP solving. Rapid Learning is a hybrid CP/MIP approach where CP search is applied at the root to learn information to support the remaining MIP solve. This has been demonstrated to be beneficial for binary programs. In this paper, we extend the idea of Rapid Learning to integer programs, where not all variables are restricted to the domain {0, 1}, and rather than just running a rapid CP search at the root, we will apply it repeatedly at local search nodes within the MIP search tree. To do so efficiently, we present six heuristic criteria to predict the chance for local Rapid Learning to be successful. Our computational experiments indicate that our extended Rapid Learning algorithm significantly speeds up MIP search and is particularly beneficial on highly dual degenerate problems.
Mixed integer nonlinear programs (MINLPs) are arguably among the hardest optimization problems, with a wide range of applications. MINLP solvers that are based on linear relaxations and spatial branching work similar as mixed integer programming (MIP) solvers in the sense that they are based on a branch-and-cut algorithm, enhanced by various heuristics, domain propagation, and presolving techniques. However, the analysis of infeasible subproblems, which is an important component of most major MIP solvers, has been hardly studied in the context of MINLPs. There are two main approaches for infeasibility analysis in MIP solvers: conflict graph analysis, which originates from artificial intelligence and constraint programming, and dual ray analysis.
The main contribution of this short paper is twofold. Firstly, we present the first computational study regarding the impact of dual ray analysis on convex and nonconvex MINLPs. In that context, we introduce a modified generation of infeasibility proofs that incorporates linearization cuts that are only locally valid. Secondly, we describe an extension of conflict analysis that works directly with the nonlinear relaxation of convex MINLPs instead of considering a linear relaxation. This is work-in-progress, and this short paper is meant to present first theoretical considerations without a computational study for that part.