0
Research Papers

Contractors and Linear Matrix Inequalities

[+] Author and Article Information
Jeremy Nicola

Lab STICC, ENSTA Bretagne, 2 Rue Francois Verny, 29806 Brest Cedex 9, France e-mail: jeremy.nicola@ensta-bretagne.org

Luc Jaulin

Lab STICC, ENSTA Bretagne, 2 Rue Francois Verny, 29806 Brest Cedex 9, France e-mail: luc.jaulin@ensta-bretagne.org

Manuscript received October 25, 2014; final manuscript received June 3, 2015; published online July 1, 2015. Assoc. Editor: Alba Sofi.

ASME J. Risk Uncertainty Part B 1(3), 031004 (Jul 01, 2015) (6 pages) Paper No: RISK-14-1076; doi: 10.1115/1.4030781 History: Received October 25, 2014; Accepted June 04, 2015; Online July 01, 2015

Linear matrix inequalities (LMIs) comprise a large class of convex constraints. Boxes, ellipsoids, and linear constraints can be represented by LMIs. The intersection of LMIs are also classified as LMIs. Interior-point methods are able to minimize or maximize any linear criterion of LMIs with complexity, which is polynomial regarding to the number of variables. As a consequence, as shown in this paper, it is possible to build optimal contractors for sets represented by LMIs. When solving a set of nonlinear constraints, one may extract from all constraints that are LMIs in order to build a single optimal LMI contractor. A combination of all contractors obtained for other non-LMI constraints can thus be performed up to the fixed point. The resulting propogation is shown to be more efficient than other conventional contractor-based approaches.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Moore, R. E., and Yang, C. T., 1959, “Interval Analysis,” Lockheed Missiles and Space Division, Sunnyvale, CA, LMSD-285875.
Jaulin, L., Kieffer, M., Didrit, O., and Walter, É., 2001, Applied Interval Analysis. With Examples in Parameter and State Estimation, Robust Control and Robotics, Springer, London.
Kearfott, R. B., and Kreinovich, V., eds., 1996, Applications of Interval Computations, Kluwer, Dordrecht.
Jaulin, L., Braems, I., and Walter, E., 2002, “Interval Methods for Nonlinear Identification and Robust Control,” Proceedings of the 41st IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, Dec. 2002, IEEE, New York, Vol. 4, pp. 4676–4681.
Jaulin, L., 2009, “A Nonlinear Set-Membership Approach for the Localization and Map Building of an Underwater Robot Using Interval Constraint Propagation,” IEEE Trans. Rob., 25(1), pp. 88–98. 10.1109/TRO.2008.2010358
Messine, F., 2004, “Deterministic Global Optimization Using Interval Constraint Propagation Techniques,” RAIRO—Oper. Res.—Recherche Opérationnelle, 38(4), pp. 277–293. 10.1051/ro:2004026
Jaulin, L., and Walter, E., 1993, “Set Inversion Via Interval Analysis for Nonlinear Bounded-Error Estimation,” Automatica, 29(4), pp. 1053–1064. 10.1016/0005-1098(93)90106-4
Jaulin, L., and Henrion, D., 2005, “Contracting Optimally an Interval Matrix Without Loosing any Positive Semi-Definite Matrix is a Tractable Problem,” Reliab. Comput., 11(1), pp. 1–17. 10.1007/s11155-005-5939-3
Araya, I., Trombettoni, G., and Neveu, B., 2012, “A Contractor Based on Convex Interval Taylor,” 9th International Conferenceon Integration of AI and OR Techniques in Contraint Programming for Combinatorial Optimzation Problems—CPAIOR 2012, Nantes, France, May 28–June 1, Springer, Berlin, pp. 1–16.
Boyd, S., El Ghaoui, L., Feron, E., and Balakrishnan, V., 1994, Linear Matrix Inequalities in System and Control Theory (Studies in Applied Mathematics, Vol. 15), SIAM, Philadelphia, PA.
Boyd, S., and Vandenberghe, L., 2004, Convex Optimization, Cambridge University Press, New York.
Ben-Tal, A., and Nemirovskii, A., 2001, Lectures on Modern Convex Optimization: Analysis, Algorithms, and Engineering Applications, SIAM, Philadelphia, PA.
Arzelier, D., Clement, B., and Peaucelle, D., 2006, “Multi-Objective H2/H ∞ /Impulse-to-Peak Control of a Space Launch Vehicle,” Eur. J. Control, 12(1), pp. 57–70. 10.3166/ejc.12.57-70
Karmarkar, M., 1984, “A New Polynomial-Time Algorithm for Linear Programming,” Combinatorica, 4(4), pp. 373–395. 10.1007/BF02579150
Nesterov, Y., and Nemirovskii, A., 1994, Interior-Point Polynomial Methods in Convex Programming, SIAM, Philadelphia, PA.
Benhamou, F., Goualard, F., Granvilliers, L., and Puget, J.-F., 1999, “Revising Hull and Box Consistency,” International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP), MIT Press, Cambridge, pp. 230–244.
Fujisawa, K., Fukuda, M., Kobayashi, K., Kojima, M., Nakata, K., Nakata, M., and Yamashita, M., 2008, “SDPA (Semidefinite Programming Algorithm) User’s Manual—Version 7.0.5,” Technical report, http://www.is.titech.ac.jp/research/research-report/B/B-448.pdf.
Araya, I., Trombettoni, G., Neveu, B., and Chabert, G., 2014, “Upper Bounding in Inner Regions for Global Optimization Under Inequality Constraints,” J. Global Optim., 60(2), pp. 145–164. 10.1007/s10898-014-0145-7
Chabert, G., and Jaulin, L., 2009, “Contractor Programming,” Artif. Intell., 173(11), pp. 1079–1100. 10.1016/j.artint.2009.03.002
Ninin, J., Messine, F., and Hansen, P., 2009, “An Automatic Linear Reformulation Technique Based on Affine Arithmetic,” International Symposium on Mathematical Programming (ISMP), Chicago, Aug. 23–28, University of Chicago Press, p. 52, http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/.
Neumaier, A., and Shcherbina, O., 2004, “Safe Bounds in Linear and Mixed-Integer Linear Programming,” Math. Program., 99(2), pp. 283–296. [CrossRef]
Drevelle, V., and Nicola, J., 2014, “Vibes: A Visualizer for Intervals and Boxes,” Math. Comput. Sci., 8(3–4), pp. 563–572. [CrossRef]
Jaulin, L., 2011, “Range-Only SLAM With Occupancy Maps: A Set-Membership Approach,” IEEE Trans. Rob., 27(5), pp. 1004–1010. 10.1109/TRO.2011.2147110
Blanco, J. L., Gonzalez, J., and Fernández-Madrigal, J. A., 2008, “A Pure Probabilistic Approach to Range-Only SLAM,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Pasadena, CA, IEEE, New York, pp. 1436–1441.
Drevelle, V., and Bonnifait, P., 2009, “High Integrity GNSS Location Zone Characterization Using Interval Analysis,” Proceedings of the 22nd International Technical Meeting of The Satellite Division of the Institute of Navigation (ION GNSS 2009), Savannah, GA.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Characterization of [S1∩S2]: (a) maximization of x1, (b) minimization of x1, (c) minimization of x2, and (d) maximization of x2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Illustration of a minimal and nonminimal contractor for the set X: C2 is minimal and C1 is not

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Subpaving of F (a) with forward-backward contractors only and (b) with a forward-backward and a LMI contractor

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Characterization of E (a) with forward-backward contractions only and (b) with a forward-backward contractor and the LMI contractor

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Characterization of S (a) with forward-backward contractions only and (b) with forward-backward contractors and LMI contractors

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Articles from Part A: Civil Engineering
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In