0
$\begingroup$

I have a mathematical model $P$ for which I optimize two cost functions say $F_1$ and $F_2$ subject to a set of constraints $C1$$C10$.

In $F_2$, I want it to be included only when its expression violates a certain quantity. In fact, $F_2$ involves the product of two decision variables to be specific and its quantity should be multiplied by a penalty parameter say $\sigma$ only when it is greater than another quantity say $\alpha_i^{k,l}$.

$$F_2=\sigma \sum_{\mathcal{R}_i \in \mathcal{R}}\sum_{p^j_{(s^j, d^j)} \in \mathcal{P}} \sum_{(v^i_k, v^i_l) \in \mathcal{L}^i} x^{i, k}_{s^j}\times x^{i, l}_{d^j} d^j_{(s^j, d^j)}.$$

$x$ is a binary decision variable, $d$ is a constant.

How do I model this and what should be the constraints I need to add into the set of existing constraints?

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ @RobPratt, the const function F_2 is now explicitly defined. $\endgroup$
    – LyLa
    Commented Dec 1, 2023 at 21:18
  • $\begingroup$ @RobPratt, x is a binary decision variable and d is a constant. $\endgroup$
    – LyLa
    Commented Dec 1, 2023 at 21:28

1 Answer 1

2
$\begingroup$

I will simplify the notation to illustrate the idea. You want to minimize $$\sigma \max\left(\sum_{i,j} d_{ij} x_i x_j - \alpha, 0\right).$$ Introduce binary decision variable $y_{ij}$ to represent the product $x_i x_j$, and introduce nonnegative decision variable $z$ to represent the $\max$. Now minimize $\sigma z$ subject to linear constraints \begin{align} y_{ij} &\ge x_i + x_j - 1 \\ z &\ge \sum_{i,j} d_{ij} y_{ij} - \alpha \end{align}

$\endgroup$
8
  • $\begingroup$ I will implement it and let you know if it worked. Thanks ! $\endgroup$
    – LyLa
    Commented Dec 1, 2023 at 21:49
  • $\begingroup$ it did not actually work as expected. Is there something I need to consider as well ? $\endgroup$
    – LyLa
    Commented Dec 11, 2023 at 16:45
  • $\begingroup$ @LyLa What unexpected behavior did you see? $\endgroup$
    – RobPratt
    Commented Dec 11, 2023 at 17:15
  • $\begingroup$ I am solving a relaxed version of the problem where I introduced the McCormick envelope for the product of the x^{i, k}_{s^j} by x^{i, l}_{d^j}. So, I ended up in a relaxed version that I round off but the cost function value (F1+F2) is lesser in the rounded solution than in the optimal one with your suggestion. $\endgroup$
    – LyLa
    Commented Dec 11, 2023 at 17:26
  • $\begingroup$ One possible source of discrepancy is that my suggestion penalizes only the part above $\alpha$ rather than the whole sum if it is at least $\alpha$, but that would tend to yield a smaller cost for my suggestion (the opposite of what you are seeing). Are you sure that the rounded solution satisfies all the constraints? $\endgroup$
    – RobPratt
    Commented Dec 11, 2023 at 18:11

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .