American Institute of Mathematical Sciences

Advanced
March  2020, 10(1): 39-43. doi: 10.3934/naco.2019031

Initial guess sensitivity in computational optimal control problems

John T. Betts 1, , Stephen L. Campbell 2,, and  Claire Digirolamo 2,

1. 

Applied Mathematical Analysis, 24748 SE Mirromont Pl., Issaquah, WA 98027, USA
2. 

Department of Mathematics, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, 27695-8205, USA

* Corresponding author: Stephen L Campbell

Received  July 2018 Revised  April 2019 Published  May 2019

An optimal control problem is presented that exhibited unexpected initial guess dependence when being solved with direct transcription methods. This note presents that example and the cautionary tale it provides.

Keywords: Optimal control, initial guesses, interior point methods, IPOPT, GPOPS II.
Mathematics Subject Classification: Primary: 49M37; Secondary: 49K40, 49M25.
Citation: John T. Betts, Stephen L. Campbell, Claire Digirolamo. Initial guess sensitivity in computational optimal control problems. Numerical Algebra, Control and Optimization, 2020, 10 (1) : 39-43. doi: 10.3934/naco.2019031
References:
[1]

J. T. Betts, Methods for Optimal Control and Estimation using Nonlinear Programming, SIAM, Philadelphia, 2010.

[2]

C. L. Darby, W. W. Hager and A. V. Rao, An hp-adaptive pseudospectral method for solving optimal control problems, Optimal Control Applications and Methods, 32 (2011), 476-502.  doi: 10.1002/oca.957.

[3]

A. Forsgren, On warm starts for interior methods, in System Modeling and Optimization, IFIP International Federation for Information Processing (eds. F. Ceragioli, A. Dontchev, H. Furuta, K. Marti, and L. P. Pandolfi), Springer, Boston, 199 (2006), 51–66. doi: 10.1007/0-387-33006-2_6.

[4]

M. A. Patterson and A. V. Rao, GPOPS II: A MATLAB software for solving multiple-phase optimal control problems using hp-adaptive Gaussian quadrature collocation methods and sparse nonlinear programming, ACM Transactions Mathematical Software, 41 (2014), 1-37.  doi: 10.1145/2558904.

[5]

A. V. Rao, D. A. Benson, C. Darby, M. A. Patterson, C. Francolin, I. Sanders and G. T. Huntington, Algorithm 902: Gpops, a MATLAB software for solving multiple-phase optimal control problems using the Gauss pseudospectral method, ACM Transactions Mathematical Software, 37 (2010), 22: 1–22: 39. doi: 10.1145/2558904.

[6]

A. Wächter and L. T. Biegler, On the implementation of a primal-dual interior point filter line search algorithm for large-scale nonlinear programming, Mathematical Programming, 106 (2006), 25-57.  doi: 10.1007/s10107-004-0559-y.

[7]

A. Wächter and L. T. Biegler, Failure of global convergence for a class of interior point methods for nonlinear programming, Mathematical Programming, 88 (2000), 565-574.  doi: 10.1007/PL00011386.

[8]

E. A. Yildirim and S. J. Wright, Warm start strategies in interior-point methods for linear programming, SIAM J. Optimization, 12 (2002), 782-810.  doi: 10.1137/S1052623400369235.

[9]

E. A. Yildirim, Implementation of warm-start strategies in interior-point methods for linear programming in fixed dimensions, Computational Optimization and Applications, 41 (2008), 151-183.  doi: 10.1007/s10589-007-9096-y.

show all references

References:
[1]

J. T. Betts, Methods for Optimal Control and Estimation using Nonlinear Programming, SIAM, Philadelphia, 2010.

[2]

C. L. Darby, W. W. Hager and A. V. Rao, An hp-adaptive pseudospectral method for solving optimal control problems, Optimal Control Applications and Methods, 32 (2011), 476-502.  doi: 10.1002/oca.957.

[3]

A. Forsgren, On warm starts for interior methods, in System Modeling and Optimization, IFIP International Federation for Information Processing (eds. F. Ceragioli, A. Dontchev, H. Furuta, K. Marti, and L. P. Pandolfi), Springer, Boston, 199 (2006), 51–66. doi: 10.1007/0-387-33006-2_6.

[4]

M. A. Patterson and A. V. Rao, GPOPS II: A MATLAB software for solving multiple-phase optimal control problems using hp-adaptive Gaussian quadrature collocation methods and sparse nonlinear programming, ACM Transactions Mathematical Software, 41 (2014), 1-37.  doi: 10.1145/2558904.

[5]

A. V. Rao, D. A. Benson, C. Darby, M. A. Patterson, C. Francolin, I. Sanders and G. T. Huntington, Algorithm 902: Gpops, a MATLAB software for solving multiple-phase optimal control problems using the Gauss pseudospectral method, ACM Transactions Mathematical Software, 37 (2010), 22: 1–22: 39. doi: 10.1145/2558904.

[6]

A. Wächter and L. T. Biegler, On the implementation of a primal-dual interior point filter line search algorithm for large-scale nonlinear programming, Mathematical Programming, 106 (2006), 25-57.  doi: 10.1007/s10107-004-0559-y.

[7]

A. Wächter and L. T. Biegler, Failure of global convergence for a class of interior point methods for nonlinear programming, Mathematical Programming, 88 (2000), 565-574.  doi: 10.1007/PL00011386.

[8]

E. A. Yildirim and S. J. Wright, Warm start strategies in interior-point methods for linear programming, SIAM J. Optimization, 12 (2002), 782-810.  doi: 10.1137/S1052623400369235.

[9]

E. A. Yildirim, Implementation of warm-start strategies in interior-point methods for linear programming in fixed dimensions, Computational Optimization and Applications, 41 (2008), 151-183.  doi: 10.1007/s10589-007-9096-y.

Figure 1.  Graphs of computed optimal control $ w $ for Example (2) with DT approach and $ M = 2, T = 1. $
Figure Options

Download full-size image

Download as PowerPoint slide

Table 1.  Endpoints for Initial $ w $ guesses $ w_i $ for Example 2
$ i $ $ w_0 $ $ w_f $
1 1 0
2 -1 -1
3 1 -1
4 0 1
Table Options

Download as excel

$ i $ $ w_0 $ $ w_f $
1 1 0
2 -1 -1
3 1 -1
4 0 1
Table 2.  Adjusted Values of $ \eta(T) $ for Example (2) using DT and $ M = 2 $, $ T = 1 $ and 3 iterations for different values of $ \gamma^2 $ and $ w_i $
$ \gamma^2 $ $ w_1 $ $ w_2 $ $ w_3 $ $ w_4 $
4.3 18.0613 5.3457 18.0613 18.0613
4.4 18.0613 5.3457 18.0613 5.3457
4.5 18.0613 18.0613 5.3457 5.3457
4.6 18.0613 18.0613 18.0613 18.0613
4.7 5.3457 5.3457 18.0613 5.3457
Table Options

Download as excel

$ \gamma^2 $ $ w_1 $ $ w_2 $ $ w_3 $ $ w_4 $
4.3 18.0613 5.3457 18.0613 18.0613
4.4 18.0613 5.3457 18.0613 5.3457
4.5 18.0613 18.0613 5.3457 5.3457
4.6 18.0613 18.0613 18.0613 18.0613
4.7 5.3457 5.3457 18.0613 5.3457
Table 3.  Rerun of the results reported in Table Table 2. Bold entries have changed from Table 2
$ \gamma^2 $ $ w_1 $ $ w_2 $ $ w_3 $ $ w_4 $
4.3 18.0613 5.3457 18.0613 18.0613
4.4 18.0613 5.3457 18.0613 5.3457
4.5 18.0613 18.0613 5.3457 5.3457
4.6 5.3457 18.0613 5.3457 18.0613
4.7 5.3457 5.3457 18.0613 5.3457
Table Options

Download as excel

$ \gamma^2 $ $ w_1 $ $ w_2 $ $ w_3 $ $ w_4 $
4.3 18.0613 5.3457 18.0613 18.0613
4.4 18.0613 5.3457 18.0613 5.3457
4.5 18.0613 18.0613 5.3457 5.3457
4.6 5.3457 18.0613 5.3457 18.0613
4.7 5.3457 5.3457 18.0613 5.3457
Table 4.  Adjusted Values of $ \eta(T) $ for Example (2) using DT and $ M = 2 $, $ T = 1 $ and 3 iterations for cost (3)
$ \gamma^2 $ $ w_1 $ $ w_2 $ $ w_3 $ $ w_4 $
4.3 18.0613 18.0613 5.3457 18.0613
4.4 18.0613 18.0613 5.3457 5.3457
4.5 18.0613 18.0613 5.3457 18.0613
4.6 18.0613 18.0613 5.3457 18.0613
4.7 18.0613 18.0613 5.3457 5.3457
Table Options

Download as excel

$ \gamma^2 $ $ w_1 $ $ w_2 $ $ w_3 $ $ w_4 $
4.3 18.0613 18.0613 5.3457 18.0613
4.4 18.0613 18.0613 5.3457 5.3457
4.5 18.0613 18.0613 5.3457 18.0613
4.6 18.0613 18.0613 5.3457 18.0613
4.7 18.0613 18.0613 5.3457 5.3457
[1]

John T. Betts, Stephen Campbell, Claire Digirolamo. Examination of solving optimal control problems with delays using GPOPS-Ⅱ. Numerical Algebra, Control and Optimization, 2021, 11 (2) : 283-305. doi: 10.3934/naco.2020026
[2]

Guoqiang Wang, Zhongchen Wu, Zhongtuan Zheng, Xinzhong Cai. Complexity analysis of primal-dual interior-point methods for semidefinite optimization based on a parametric kernel function with a trigonometric barrier term. Numerical Algebra, Control and Optimization, 2015, 5 (2) : 101-113. doi: 10.3934/naco.2015.5.101
[3]

Z. Foroozandeh, Maria do rosário de Pinho, M. Shamsi. On numerical methods for singular optimal control problems: An application to an AUV problem. Discrete and Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2019, 24 (5) : 2219-2235. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2019092
[4]

Martin Benning, Elena Celledoni, Matthias J. Ehrhardt, Brynjulf Owren, Carola-Bibiane Schönlieb. Deep learning as optimal control problems: Models and numerical methods. Journal of Computational Dynamics, 2019, 6 (2) : 171-198. doi: 10.3934/jcd.2019009
[5]

Xiaowei Pang, Haiming Song, Xiaoshen Wang, Jiachuan Zhang. Efficient numerical methods for elliptic optimal control problems with random coefficient. Electronic Research Archive, 2020, 28 (2) : 1001-1022. doi: 10.3934/era.2020053
[6]

Chunjuan Hou, Yanping Chen, Zuliang Lu. Superconvergence property of finite element methods for parabolic optimal control problems. Journal of Industrial and Management Optimization, 2011, 7 (4) : 927-945. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2011.7.927
[7]

Ugur G. Abdulla. On the optimal control of the free boundary problems for the second order parabolic equations. II. Convergence of the method of finite differences. Inverse Problems and Imaging, 2016, 10 (4) : 869-898. doi: 10.3934/ipi.2016025
[8]

Thierry Horsin, Peter I. Kogut, Olivier Wilk. Optimal $L^2$-control problem in coefficients for a linear elliptic equation. II. Approximation of solutions and optimality conditions. Mathematical Control and Related Fields, 2016, 6 (4) : 595-628. doi: 10.3934/mcrf.2016017
[9]

Zhen-Zhen Tao, Bing Sun. Space-time spectral methods for a fourth-order parabolic optimal control problem in three control constraint cases. Discrete and Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2022  doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2022080
[10]

Miguel Ángel Evangelista-Alvarado, José Crispín Ruíz-Pantaleón, Pablo Suárez-Serrato. On computational Poisson geometry II: Numerical methods. Journal of Computational Dynamics, 2021, 8 (3) : 273-307. doi: 10.3934/jcd.2021012
[11]

Minzilia A. Sagadeeva, Sophiya A. Zagrebina, Natalia A. Manakova. Optimal control of solutions of a multipoint initial-final problem for non-autonomous evolutionary Sobolev type equation. Evolution Equations and Control Theory, 2019, 8 (3) : 473-488. doi: 10.3934/eect.2019023
[12]

Roberto Triggiani, Xiang Wan. From low to high-and lower-optimal regularity of the SMGTJ equation with Dirichlet and Neumann boundary control, and with point control, via explicit representation formulae. Evolution Equations and Control Theory, 2022  doi: 10.3934/eect.2022007
[13]

Liming Sun, Li-Zhi Liao. An interior point continuous path-following trajectory for linear programming. Journal of Industrial and Management Optimization, 2019, 15 (4) : 1517-1534. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2018107
[14]

Zheng-Hai Huang, Shang-Wen Xu. Convergence properties of a non-interior-point smoothing algorithm for the P*NCP. Journal of Industrial and Management Optimization, 2007, 3 (3) : 569-584. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2007.3.569
[15]

Behrouz Kheirfam, Morteza Moslemi. On the extension of an arc-search interior-point algorithm for semidefinite optimization. Numerical Algebra, Control and Optimization, 2018, 8 (2) : 261-275. doi: 10.3934/naco.2018015
[16]

Behrouz Kheirfam, Guoqiang Wang. An infeasible full NT-step interior point method for circular optimization. Numerical Algebra, Control and Optimization, 2017, 7 (2) : 171-184. doi: 10.3934/naco.2017011
[17]

Shuhong Chen, Zhong Tan. Optimal interior partial regularity for nonlinear elliptic systems. Discrete and Continuous Dynamical Systems, 2010, 27 (3) : 981-993. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2010.27.981
[18]

Markus Haltmeier, Richard Kowar, Antonio Leitão, Otmar Scherzer. Kaczmarz methods for regularizing nonlinear ill-posed equations II: Applications. Inverse Problems and Imaging, 2007, 1 (3) : 507-523. doi: 10.3934/ipi.2007.1.507
[19]

Isaac Harris, Dinh-Liem Nguyen, Thi-Phong Nguyen. Direct sampling methods for isotropic and anisotropic scatterers with point source measurements. Inverse Problems and Imaging, , () : -. doi: 10.3934/ipi.2022015
[20]

Yu-Hong Dai, Xin-Wei Liu, Jie Sun. A primal-dual interior-point method capable of rapidly detecting infeasibility for nonlinear programs. Journal of Industrial and Management Optimization, 2020, 16 (2) : 1009-1035. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2018190

 Impact Factor: 

Tools

Metrics

  • PDF downloads (615)
  • HTML views (822)
  • Cited by (0)

Other articles
by authors

[Back to Top]

Copyright © 2022 American Institute of Mathematical Sciences | Privacy Policy