I am trying to get solution for variable x using cplex in Matlab , but I'm confused how to write the syntax since I wanna the solution x∈{a,b}.
For example, assume that I have this LP problem:
Maximize x1 + 2 x2 + 3 x3
Subject to
- x1 + x2 + x3 <= 20
x1 - 3 x2 + x3 <= 30
Bounds
0 <= x1 <= 40
0 <= x2
0 <= x3
Retrieved from: http://www-01.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/SSSA5P_12.6.3/ilog.odms.cplex.help/CPLEX/MATLAB/topics/example_cplexlpex.html
But, in this problem, I wanna add the constraint x∈{20,30} s.t solution values are 20 or 30. How could I write the syntax for this additional constraint? I wanna use ctype, but ctype can only be used for 'I,B,S,N,C'.
I'm not overly familiar with the capabilities cplex in Matlab, but if all else fails you can always define
x = 20 + 10*B,
where B is a binary variable. That way x can only take 2 values. This approach gets messy when you want more options though, such as
x \in {20, 23, 30, 103}.
Then you would have to define
x = 20*B_1 + 23*B_2 etc
sum_i (B_i) = 1.
It works, but your solution speed would deteriorate fast.
Related
x + y ≤ 44,
2x + y ≤ 64,
9,000x + 5,000y ≤ 300,000
objective function: 30,000x + 20,000y
I would like to find the Optimal solution in Matlab
But there are error message Problem is unbounded.
Here is my code
A = [1 1;2 1;9 5];
b = [44 64 300];
f = [3 2];
x = linprog(f,A,b)
suppose ans: x=20,y=24
Reference
https://www.mathworks.com/help/optim/ug/linprog.html
It's not a direct answer to your question, but one reason you're having difficulties is that you're using Matlab. Other languages would offer more expressive and easier-to-understand ways of expressing your problem.
Python for instance, coupled with cvxpy gives us:
#!/usr/bin/env python3
import cvxpy as cp
x = cp.Variable()
y = cp.Variable()
constraints = [
x + y <= 44,
2 * x + y <= 64
]
objective = cp.Maximize(9000*x + 5000*y)
prob = cp.Problem(objective, constraints)
N
optimum_value = prob.solve()
print("optimum value", optimum_value)
print("x", x.value)
print("y", y.value)
The code is very readable and the model is easily extended even to non-linear regimes such as quadratic programs and second-order cones.
This returns
optimum value 300000.00000076543
x 20.00000000075882
y 23.999999998787203
Good afternoon!
First things first, I looked for similar questions for a while, but (probably because of my inexperience) I've found nothing similar to what I'm going to ask.
I'm using matlab for the first time to solve this kind of problems, so I'm not sure of what to do. A brief explenation:
I'm doing a project for my Optimal Control course: I have to replicate the results of a paper about employment, and I'm stuck with the plots. I have the following data:
five variable functions (U(t), T(t), R(t), V1(t) and V2(t))
four control functions(u1(t), u2(t), u3(t), u4(t))
constraints on the control variables (each u must be between 0 and 1)
initial values for U, T, R, V1 and V2 (in t=0, in particular V1 and V2 are constant over time)
final values for the λ coefficients in the hamiltonian
(note: for the controls, I've already found the optimal expression, which is in this form: ui = min{1, max{0,"expression"}}. If needed, I can give also the four expressions, neglected to
synthesize a little)
Under professor's suggestions, I've tried to use fmincon, that theoretically should give me directly the information that I need to plot some result using only the cost function of the problem. But in this case I have some issues involving time in the calculations. Below, the code that I used for fmincon:
syms u
%note: u(5) corresponds to U(t), but this is the only way I've found to get
%a result, the other u(i) are in ascending order (u(1) = u1 and so on...)
g = #(u) 30*u(5) + (20/2)*(u(1))^2 + (20/2)*(u(2))^2 + (10/2)*(u(3))^2 + (40/2)*(u(4))^2;
%initial guesses
u0 = [0 0 0 0 100000]; %
A = [];
b = [];
Aeq = [];
beq = [];
lb = 0.0 * ones(1,2,3,4);
ub = 1.0 * ones(1,2,3,4);
[x,fval,output,lambda] = fmincon(g, u0, A, b, Aeq, beq, lb, ub);
Whit this code, i get (obviously) only one value for each variable as result, and since I've not found any method to involve time, as I said before, I start looking for other solving strategies.
I found that ode45 is a differential equation solver that has the "time iteration" already included in the algorithm, so I tried to write the code to get it work with my problem.
I took all the equations from the paper and put them in a vector as shown in the mathworks examples, and this is my matlab file:
syms u1(t) u2(t) u3(t) u4(t)
syms U(t) T(t) R(t) V1(t) V2(t)
syms lambda_u lambda_t lambda_r lambda_v1 lambda_v2
%all the parameters provided by the paper
delta = 500;
alpha1 = 0.004;
alpha2 = 0.005;
alpha3 = 0.006;
gamma1 = 0.001;
gamma2 = 0.002;
phi1 = 0.22;
phi2 = 0.20;
delta1 = 0.09;
delta2 = 0.05;
k1 = 0.000003;
k2 = 0.000002;
k3 = 0.0000045;
%these two variable are set constant
V1 = 200;
V2 = 100;
%weight values for the cost function (only A1 is used in this case, but I left them all since the unused ones are irrelevant)
A1 = 30;
A2 = 20;
A3 = 20;
A4 = 10;
A5 = 40;
%ordering the unknowns in an array
x = [U T R u1 u2 u3 u4];
%initial conditions, ordered as the x vector (for the ui are guesses)
y0 = [100000 2000 1000 0 0 0 0];
%system set up
f = #(t,x) [delta - (1 + x(4))*k1*x(1)*V1 - (1 + x(5))*k2*x(1)*V2 - alpha1*x(1) + gamma1*x(2) + gamma2*x(3);...
(1 + x(4))*k1*x(1)*V1 - k3*x(2)*V2 - alpha2*x(2) - gamma1*x(2);...
(1 + x(5))*k2*x(1)*V2 - alpha3*x(3) - gamma2*x(3) + k3*x(2)*V2;...
alpha2*x(2) + gamma1*x(2) + (1 + x(6))*phi1*x(1) + k3*x(2)*V2 - delta1*V1;...
alpha3*x(3) + gamma2*x(3) + (1 + x(7))*phi2*x(1) - delta2*V2;...
-A1 + (1 + x(4))*k1*V1*(lambda_u - lambda_t) + (1 + x(5))*k2*V2*(lambda_u - lambda_r) + lambda_u*alpha1 - lambda_v1*(1 + x(6))*phi1 - lambda_v2*(1 + x(7))*phi2;...
-lambda_u*gamma1 + (alpha2 + gamma1)*(lambda_t - lambda_v1) + k3*V2*(lambda_t - lambda_r - lambda_v1);...
-lambda_u*gamma2 + (alpha3 + gamma2)*(lambda_r - lambda_v2);...
(1 + x(4))*k1*x(1)*(lambda_u - lambda_t) + lambda_v1*delta1;...
(1 + x(5))*k2*x(1)*(lambda_u -lambda_r) + k3*x(2)*(lambda_t - lambda_r - lambda_v1) + lambda_v2*delta2];
%using ode45 to solve over the chosen time interval
[t,xa] = ode45(f,[0 10],y0);
With this code, I get the following error:
Error using odearguments (line 95)
#(T,X)[DELTA-(1+X(4))*K1*X(1)*V1-(1+X(5))*K2*X(1)*V2-ALPHA1*X(1)+GAMMA1*X(2)+GAMMA2*X(3);(1+X(4))*K1*X(1)*V1-K3*X(2)*V2-ALPHA2*X(2)-GAMMA1*X(2);(1+X(5))*K2*X(1)*V2-ALPHA3*X(3)-GAMMA2*X(3)+K3*X(2)*V2;ALPHA2*X(2)+GAMMA1*X(2)+(1+X(6))*PHI1*X(1)+K3*X(2)*V2-DELTA1*V1;ALPHA3*X(3)+GAMMA2*X(3)+(1+X(7))*PHI2*X(1)-DELTA2*V2;-A1+(1+X(4))*K1*V1*(LAMBDA_U-LAMBDA_T)+(1+X(5))*K2*V2*(LAMBDA_U-LAMBDA_R)+LAMBDA_U*ALPHA1-LAMBDA_V1*(1+X(6))*PHI1-LAMBDA_V2*(1+X(7))*PHI2;-LAMBDA_U*GAMMA1+(ALPHA2+GAMMA1)*(LAMBDA_T-LAMBDA_V1)+K3*V2*(LAMBDA_T-LAMBDA_R-LAMBDA_V1);-LAMBDA_U*GAMMA2+(ALPHA3+GAMMA2)*(LAMBDA_R-LAMBDA_V2);(1+X(4))*K1*X(1)*(LAMBDA_U-LAMBDA_T)+LAMBDA_V1*DELTA1;(1+X(5))*K2*X(1)*(LAMBDA_U-LAMBDA_R)+K3*X(2)*(LAMBDA_T-LAMBDA_R-LAMBDA_V1)+LAMBDA_V2*DELTA2]
returns a vector of length 10, but the length of initial conditions vector is 7. The vector returned by
#(T,X)[DELTA-(1+X(4))*K1*X(1)*V1-(1+X(5))*K2*X(1)*V2-ALPHA1*X(1)+GAMMA1*X(2)+GAMMA2*X(3);(1+X(4))*K1*X(1)*V1-K3*X(2)*V2-ALPHA2*X(2)-GAMMA1*X(2);(1+X(5))*K2*X(1)*V2-ALPHA3*X(3)-GAMMA2*X(3)+K3*X(2)*V2;ALPHA2*X(2)+GAMMA1*X(2)+(1+X(6))*PHI1*X(1)+K3*X(2)*V2-DELTA1*V1;ALPHA3*X(3)+GAMMA2*X(3)+(1+X(7))*PHI2*X(1)-DELTA2*V2;-A1+(1+X(4))*K1*V1*(LAMBDA_U-LAMBDA_T)+(1+X(5))*K2*V2*(LAMBDA_U-LAMBDA_R)+LAMBDA_U*ALPHA1-LAMBDA_V1*(1+X(6))*PHI1-LAMBDA_V2*(1+X(7))*PHI2;-LAMBDA_U*GAMMA1+(ALPHA2+GAMMA1)*(LAMBDA_T-LAMBDA_V1)+K3*V2*(LAMBDA_T-LAMBDA_R-LAMBDA_V1);-LAMBDA_U*GAMMA2+(ALPHA3+GAMMA2)*(LAMBDA_R-LAMBDA_V2);(1+X(4))*K1*X(1)*(LAMBDA_U-LAMBDA_T)+LAMBDA_V1*DELTA1;(1+X(5))*K2*X(1)*(LAMBDA_U-LAMBDA_R)+K3*X(2)*(LAMBDA_T-LAMBDA_R-LAMBDA_V1)+LAMBDA_V2*DELTA2]
and the initial conditions vector must have the same number of elements.
Error in ode45 (line 115)
odearguments(FcnHandlesUsed, solver_name, ode, tspan, y0, options, varargin);
Error in test (line 62)
[t,xa] = ode45(f,[0 10],y0);
For which I can't find a solution, since I have used all the initial values given in the paper. The only values that I have left are the final values for the lambda coefficients, since they are final values, and I am not sure if they can be used.
In this case, I can't also understand where I should put the bounds on the control variable.
For completeness, I will provide also the link to the paper in question:
https://www.ripublication.com/ijss17/ijssv12n3_13.pdf
Can you help me figure out what I can do to solve my problems?
P.S: I know this is a pretty bad code, but I'm basing on the basics tutorials on mathworks; for sure this should need to be refactored and ordered in various file (one for the cost function and one for the constraints for example) but firstly I would like to understand where the problem is and then I will put all in a pretty form.
Thank you so much!
Generally you confused something with Vectors. In initial conditions you declared 7 values:
%initial conditions, ordered as the x vector (for the ui are guesses)
y0 = [100000 2000 1000 0 0 0 0];
But you declared 10 ODE's:
%system set up
f = #(t,x) [delta - (1 + x(4))*k1*x(1)*V1 - (1 + x(5))*k2*x(1)*V2 - alpha1*x(1) + gamma1*x(2) + gamma2*x(3);...
(1 + x(4))*k1*x(1)*V1 - k3*x(2)*V2 - alpha2*x(2) - gamma1*x(2);...
(1 + x(5))*k2*x(1)*V2 - alpha3*x(3) - gamma2*x(3) + k3*x(2)*V2;...
alpha2*x(2) + gamma1*x(2) + (1 + x(6))*phi1*x(1) + k3*x(2)*V2 - delta1*V1;...
alpha3*x(3) + gamma2*x(3) + (1 + x(7))*phi2*x(1) - delta2*V2;...
-A1 + (1 + x(4))*k1*V1*(lambda_u - lambda_t) + (1 + x(5))*k2*V2*(lambda_u - lambda_r) + lambda_u*alpha1 - lambda_v1*(1 + x(6))*phi1 - lambda_v2*(1 + x(7))*phi2;...
-lambda_u*gamma1 + (alpha2 + gamma1)*(lambda_t - lambda_v1) + k3*V2*(lambda_t - lambda_r - lambda_v1);...
-lambda_u*gamma2 + (alpha3 + gamma2)*(lambda_r - lambda_v2);...
(1 + x(4))*k1*x(1)*(lambda_u - lambda_t) + lambda_v1*delta1;...
(1 + x(5))*k2*x(1)*(lambda_u -lambda_r) + k3*x(2)*(lambda_t - lambda_r - lambda_v1) + lambda_v2*delta2];
Every line in above code is recognized as one ODE.
But that's not all. The second problem is with your construction. You mixed symbolic math (lambda declared as syms) with numerical solving, which will be tricky. I'm not familiar with the exact scientific problem you are trying to solve, but if you can't avoid symbolic math, maybe you should try dsolve from Symbolic Math Toolbox?
I want to solve:
I use following MATLAB code, but it does not work.
Can someone please guide me?
function f=objfun
f=-f;
function [c1,c2,c3]=constraint(x)
a1=1.1; a2=1.1; a3=1.1;
c1=f-log(a1)-log(x(1)/(x(1)+1));
c2=f-log(a2)-log(x(2)/(x(2)+1))-log(1-x(1));
c3=f-log(a3)-log(1-x(1))-log(1-x(2));
x0=[0.01;0.01];
[x,fval]=fmincon('objfun',x0,[],[],[],[],[0;0],[1;1],'constraint')
You need to flip the problem around a bit. You are trying to find the point x (which is (l_1,l_2)) that makes the minimum of the 3 LHS functions the largest. So, you can rewrite your problem as, in pseudocode,
maximise, by varying x in [0,1] X [0,1]
min([log(a1)+log(x(1)/(x(1)+1)) ...
log(a2)+log(x(2)/(x(2)+1))+log(1-x(1)) ...
log(a3)+log(1-x(1))+log(1-x(2))])
Since Matlab has fmincon, rewrite this as a minimisation problem,
minimise, by varying x in [0,1] X [0,1]
max(-[log(a1)+log(x(1)/(x(1)+1)) ...
log(a2)+log(x(2)/(x(2)+1))+log(1-x(1)) ...
log(a3)+log(1-x(1))+log(1-x(2))])
So the actual code is
F=#(x) max(-[log(a1)+log(x(1)/(x(1)+1)) ...
log(a2)+log(x(2)/(x(2)+1))+log(1-x(1)) ...
log(a3)+log(1-x(1))+log(1-x(2))])
[L,fval]=fmincon(F,[0.5 0.5])
which returns
L =
0.3383 0.6180
fval =
1.2800
Can also solve this in the convex optimization package CVX with the following MATLAB code:
cvx_begin
variables T(1);
variables x1(1);
variables x2(1);
maximize(T)
subject to:
log(a1) + x1 - log_sum_exp([0, x1]) >= T;
log(a2) + x2 - log_sum_exp([0, x2]) + log(1 - exp(x1)) >= T;
log(a3) + log(1 - exp(x1)) + log(1 - exp(x2)) >= T;
x1 <= 0;
x2 <= 0;
cvx_end
l1 = exp(x1); l2 = exp(x2);
To use CVX, each constraint and the objective function has to be written in a way that is proveably convex using CVX's ruleset. Making the substitution x1 = log(l1) and x2 = log(l2) allows one to do that. Note that: log_sum_exp([0,x1]) = log(exp(0) + exp(x1)) = log(1 + l1)
This also returns the answers: l1 = .3383, l2 = .6180, T = -1.2800
I'm very new to Matlab and have problem plotting this nonlinear 2D function graph using Matlab.
a lot of errors generated after the below is run.
fun1 = 20 + 10 + 15;
fun2 = 20 + (x * 0.00125 ) + 15;
fun3 = (x * 0.0025) + 15;
fplot(fun1,[0 8000])
fplot(fun2,[8000 16000])
fplot(fun2,[16000 positive infinity])
I appreciate a lot to your efforts and kindness for replying my question
Best Regards
Your first three expressions do not define functions. Please read the documentation about the correct syntax.
fun1 = #(x)(20 + 10 + 15);
First create a file fun.m which contains your function definition
function y = fun(x)
if x < 8000
y = 20 + 10 + 15;
elseif x < 16000
y = 20 + (x * 0.00125) + 15;
else
y = x * 0.0025 + 15;
end
end
Then you can plot it with
fplot(#fun, [0 24000])
which results in
If you do some reading in fplot you will find out that
for fplot(fun,limits)
fun must be
The name of a function
A string with variable x that may be passed to eval, such as 'sin(x)', 'diric(x,10)', or '[sin(x),cos(x)]'
A function handle
so in your case you need to change all of you fun to strings just add ' before and after the expression
as for the last line change it to be
fplot(fun2,[16000 inf])
although i don't think this would give you any good results
I have a set of three equations in my script that are fairly simple, yet they use sin and cos values, thus making me to set a limit on them. Below are those equations:
y1 = 23/200 - cos(q1)*((67*cos(q2 + q3))/100 - (17*sin(q2))/25 + 13/50)
y2 = - sin(q1)*((67*cos(q2 + q3))/100 - (17*sin(q2))/25 + 13/50) - 47/50
y3 = 67/100 - (17*cos(q2))/25 - (67*sin(q2 + q3))/100
I obviously tried 'limit' to set individual limit before using 'solve' function, as follows:
y1 = Pax - eq1;
y2 = Pay - eq2;
y3 = Paz - eq3;
limit(y1,q1,-1);
limit(y1,q1,1);
limit(y1,q2,-1);
limit(y1,q2,1);
limit(y1,q3,-1);
limit(y1,q3,1);
limit(y2,q1,-1);
limit(y2,q1,1);
limit(y2,q2,-1);
limit(y2,q2,1);
limit(y2,q3,-1);
limit(y2,q3,1);
limit(y3,q1,-1);
limit(y3,q1,1);
limit(y3,q2,-1);
limit(y3,q2,1);
limit(y3,q3,-1);
limit(y3,q3,1);
rozw=solve(y1,y2,y3,'q1,q2,q3');
q1_1 = rozw.q1
q2_1 = rozw.q2
q3_1 = rozw.q3
I also tried this with the 'left' and 'right' limit, yet, I still end up with not only wrong values, but values exceeding my limits.
Could you possibly suggest some solutions?
I infer that you're using the Symbolic Toolbox, then you can use assume():
syms q1 q2 q3
assume([q1 >= -1 & q1 <= 1
q2 >= -1 & q2 <= 1
q3 >= -1 & q3 <= 1])