Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Interfaces to PATH 3.0: Design, Implementation and Usage

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

Abstract

Several new interfaces have recently been developed requiring PATH to solve a mixed complementarity problem. To overcome the necessity of maintaining a different version of PATH for each interface, the code was reorganized using object-oriented design techniques. At the same time, robustness issues were considered and enhancements made to the algorithm. In this paper, we document the external interfaces to the PATH code and describe some of the new utilities using PATH. We then discuss the enhancements made and compare the results obtained from PATH 2.9 to the new version.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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. S.C. Billups, “Algorithms for complementarity problems and generalized equations,” Ph.D. Thesis, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  2. S.C. Billups, “Improving the robustness of complementarity solvers using proximal perturbations,” UCD/CCM Report No. 96, University of Colorado at Denver, Denver, Colorado, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  3. S.C. Billups, S.P. Dirkse, and M.C. Ferris, “A comparison of large scale mixed complementarity problem solvers,” Computational Optimization and Applications, vol. 7, pp. 3–25, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  4. S.C. Billups and M.C. Ferris, “QPCOMP: A quadratic program based solver for mixed complementarity problems,” Mathematical Programming, vol. 76, pp. 533–562, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  5. C. Bischof, A. Carle, P. Khademi, A. Mauer, and P. Hovland, “ADIFOR 2.0 user's guide,” Mathematics and Computer Science Division Report ANL/MCS-TM-192, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  6. A. Brooke, D. Kendrick, and A. Meeraus, GAMS: A User's Guide, The Scientific Press: South San Francisco, CA, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Chunhui Chen and O.L. Mangasarian, “A class of smoothing functions for nonlinear and mixed complementarity problems,” Computational Optimization and Applications, vol. 5, pp. 97–138, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  8. R.W. Cottle and G.B. Dantzig, “Complementary pivot theory of mathematical programming,” Linear Algebra and Its Applications, vol. 1, pp. 103–125, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  9. J. Czyzyk, M.P. Mesnier, and J.J. Moré, “The network-enabled optimization server,” Preprint MCS-P615–0996, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  10. S.P. Dirkse, “Robust solution of mixed complementarity problems,” Ph.D. Thesis, Computer Sciences Department, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, 1994. Available from ftp://ftp.cs.wisc.edu/math-prog/tech-reports/.

    Google Scholar 

  11. S.P. Dirkse and M.C. Ferris, “MCPLIB: A collection of nonlinear mixed complementarity problems,” Optimization Methods and Software, vol. 5, pp. 319–345, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  12. S.P. Dirkse and M.C. Ferris, “The PATH solver: A non-monotone stabilization scheme for mixed complementarity problems,” Optimization Methods and Software, vol. 5, pp. 123–156, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  13. S.P. Dirkse and M.C. Ferris, “A pathsearch damped Newton method for computing general equilibria,” Annals of Operations Research, 1996.

  14. S.P. Dirkse and M.C. Ferris, “Crash techniques for large-scale complementarity problems,” in Complementarity and Variational Problems: State of the Art, M.C. Ferris and J.S. Pang (Eds.), SIAM Publications: Philadelphia, PA, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  15. S.P. Dirkse and M.C. Ferris, “Modeling and solution environments for MPEC: GAMS & MATLAB,” in Reformulation—Nonsmooth, Piecewise Smooth, Semismooth and Smoothing Methods, M. Fukushima and L. Qi (Eds.), Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1998, pp. 127–148, forthcoming.

  16. S.P. Dirkse, M.C. Ferris, P.V. Preckel, and T. Rutherford, “The GAMS callable program library for variational and complementarity solvers,” Mathematical Programming Technical Report 94–07, Computer Sciences Department, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  17. A. Drud, “CONOPT: A GRG code for large sparse dynamic nonlinear optimization problems,” Mathematical Programming, vol. 31, pp. 153–191, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  18. S.K. Eldersveld and M.A. Saunders, “A block-LU update for large-scale linear programming,” SIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and Applications, vol. 13, pp. 191–201, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  19. M.C. Ferris, R. Fourer, and D.M. Gay, “Expressing complementarity problems and communicating them to solvers,” Mathematical Programming Technical Report 98–02, Computer Sciences Department, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  20. M.C. Ferris and S. Lucidi, “Nonmonotone stabilization methods for nonlinear equations,” Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, vol. 81, pp. 53–71, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  21. M.C. Ferris, M.P. Mesnier, and J. Moré, “NEOS and condor: Solving nonlinear optimization problems over the Internet,” Mathematical Programming Technical Report 96–08, Computer Sciences Department, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, 1996 (revised 1998). Also available as ANL/MCS-P708–0398, Mathematics and Computer Science Division, Argonne National Laboratory.

    Google Scholar 

  22. R. Fletcher and S.P.J. Matthews, “Stable modifications of explicit LU factors for simplex updates,” Mathematical Programming, vol. 30, pp. 267–284, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  23. R. Fourer, D.M. Gay, and B.W. Kernighan, AMPL: A Modeling Language for Mathematical Programming, Duxbury Press, 1993.

  24. D.M. Gay, “Hooking your solver to AMPL,” Technical Report, Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill, NJ, 1997. (revised 1994, 1997).

    Google Scholar 

  25. P.E. Gill, W. Murray, M.A. Saunders, and M.H. Wright, “Maintaining LU factors of a general sparse matrix,” Linear Algebra and Its Applications, vol. 88/89, pp. 239–270, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  26. P.E. Gill, W. Murray, M.A. Saunders, and M.H. Wright, “A practical anti-cycling procedure for linearly constrained optimization,” Mathematical Programming, vol. 45, pp. 437–474, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  27. A. Griewank, D. Juedes, and J. Utke, “ADOL-C: A package for the automatic differentiation of algorithms written in C/C++,” ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software, 1996.

  28. N.H. Josephy, “Newton's method for generalized equations,” Technical Summary Report 1965, Mathematics Research Center, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  29. C.E. Lemke and J.T. Howson, “Equilibrium points of bimatrix games,” SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics, vol. 12, pp. 413–423, 1964.

    Google Scholar 

  30. M.J. Litzkow, M. Livny, and M.W. Mutka, “Condor: A hunter of idle workstations,” in Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, June 1988, pp. 104–111.

  31. B.A. Murtagh and M.A. Saunders, “MINOS 5.0 user's guide,” Technical Report SOL 83.20, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  32. D. Ralph, “Global convergence of damped Newton's method for nonsmooth equations, via the path search,” Mathematics of Operations Research, vol. 19, pp. 352–389, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  33. S.M. Robinson, “Normal maps induced by linear transformations,” Mathematics of Operations Research, vol. 17, pp. 691–714, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  34. S.M. Robinson, “Newton's method for a class of nonsmooth functions,” Set Valued Analysis, vol. 2, pp. 291–305, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  35. T.F. Rutherford, “MILES: A mixed inequality and nonlinear equation solver,” Working Paper, Department of Economics, University of Colorado, Boulder, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  36. T.F. Rutherford, “Extensions of GAMS for complementarity problems arising in applied economic analysis,” Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, vol. 19, pp. 1299–1324, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  37. T.F. Rutherford, “Applied general equilibrium modeling with MPSGE as a GAMS subsystem: An overview of the modeling framework and syntax,” Computational Economics, 1998, forthcoming.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Computer Sciences Department, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1210 West Dayton Street, Madison, Wisconsin, 53706

    Michael C. Ferris & Todd S. Munson

Authors
  1. Michael C. Ferris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Todd S. Munson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ferris, M.C., Munson, T.S. Interfaces to PATH 3.0: Design, Implementation and Usage. Computational Optimization and Applications 12, 207–227 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008636318275

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008636318275

Search

Navigation