ABSTRACT Quadratically constrained quadratic programming (QCQP) problems appear in a wide range of engineering fields, including computer science, communication engineering, and finance. A key difficulty in solving these problems lies in efficiently finding global solutions, especially for large-scale and nonconvex instances. To address this, Wen & Yin (2013) proposed a method that reformulates semidefinite programming (SDP) relaxations of QCQPs into a nonlinear and nonconvex low-rank problem. This reformulated problem can be efficiently solved using a curvilinear search method combined with Barzilai-Borwein (BB) steps, known as the CSBB algorithm. In this study, we compare two approaches for solving QCQPs: the conventional convex SDP relaxation and the nonconvex low-rank reformulation introduced by Wen and Yin. We propose a set of general QCQP models that are compatible with the low-rank framework and conduct a series of numerical experiments to evaluate their performance. This study evaluates performance using several classes of NP-hard problems, including Binary Integer Quadratic (BIQ) problems, Max-Cut problems, Boolean Least Squares (BLS) problems, and 0-1 Quadratic Knapsack Problems (QKP). The results demonstrate that the low-rank approach offers competitive performance and shows strong potential for solving large-scale QCQPs more efficiently than traditional convex methods.
The class of mixed-integer quadratically constrained quadratic programs (QCQP) consists of minimizing a quadratic function under quadratic constraints where the variables could be integer or continuous. On a previous paper we introduced a method called MIQCR for solving QCQPs with the following restriction: all quadratic sub-functions of purely continuous variables are already convex. In this paper, we propose an extension of MIQCR which applies to any QCQP. Let (P) be a QCQP. Our approach to solve (P) is first to build an equivalent mixed-integer quadratic problem (P∗). This equivalent problem (P∗) has a quadratic convex objective function, linear constraints, and additional variables y that are meant to satisfy the additional quadratic constraints y=xxT, where x are the initial variables of problem (P). We then propose to solve (P∗) by a branch-and-bound algorithm based on the relaxation of the additional quadratic constraints and of the integrality constraints. This type of branching is known as spatial branch-and-bound. Computational experiences are carried out on a total of 325 instances. The results show that the solution time of most of the considered instances is improved by our method in comparison with the recent implementation of QuadProgBB, and with the solvers Cplex, Couenne, Scip, BARON and GloMIQO.
We consider problem (QP) of minimizing a quadratic function subject to linear or quadratic constraints. Variables are integer and bounded. This very general problem can model many classical problems in Combinatorial Optimization.A major difference between (QP) and integer linear programs lies in the fact that, in general, its continuous relaxation is an NP-hard optimization problem. To overcome this difficulty, the Convex Quadratic Reformulation approach transforms (QP) into a problem (QP'), equivalent to (QP), but whose continuous relaxation is a convex problem. To compute a global optimal solution to (QP) it becomes possible to solve (QP') by an implicit enumeration algorithm based on continuous convex optimization.We make an overview of recent developments in this approach. We show in particular how positive semidefinite relaxations can be used to build the most interesting equivalent problems (QP'). In the case of binary variables, we give a vision of classical linearization as a special case of Convex Quadratic Reformulation.Finally, we illustrate the generality and the computational efficiency of the Quadratic Convex Reformulation approach for several combinatorial optimization problems.
Many combinatorial optimization problems can be formulated as the minimization of a 0–1 quadratic function subject to linear constraints. In this paper, we are interested in the exact solution of this problem through a two-phase general scheme. The first phase consists in reformulating the initial problem either into a compact mixed integer linear program or into a 0–1 quadratic convex program. The second phase simply consists in submitting the reformulated problem to a standard solver. The efficiency of this scheme strongly depends on the quality of the reformulation obtained in phase 1. We show that a good compact linear reformulation can be obtained by solving a continuous linear relaxation of the initial problem. We also show that a good quadratic convex reformulation can be obtained by solving a semidefinite relaxation. In both cases, the obtained reformulation profits from the quality of the underlying relaxation. Hence, the proposed scheme gets around, in a sense, the difficulty to incorporate these costly relaxations in a branch-and-bound algorithm.
Quadratic programming (QP) is a well-studied fundamental NP-hard optimization problem which optimizes a quadratic objective over a set of linear constraints. In this paper, we reformulate QPs as a mixed-integer linear problem (MILP). This is done via the reformulation of QP as a linear complementary problem, and the use of binary variables and big-M constraints, to model the complementary constraints. To obtain such reformulation, we show how to impose bounds on the dual variables without eliminating all the (globally) optimal primal solutions; using some fundamental results on the solution of perturbed linear systems. Reformulating non-convex QPs as MILPs provides an advantageous way to obtain global solutions as it allows the use of current state-of-the-art MILP solvers. To illustrate this, we compare the performance of our solution approach, labeled quadprogIP, with the current benchmark global QP solver quadprogBB, as well as with BARON, one of the leading non-linear programming (NLP) solvers, and CPLEX's non-convex QP solver, on a large variety of QP test instances. In practice, quadprogIP is shown to typically outperform by orders of magnitude quadprogBB, BARON, and CPLEX on standard QPs. For general QPs, quadprogIP outperforms quadprogBB, outperforms BARON in most instances, while CPLEX performs the best on these instances. For box-constrained QPs, quadprogIP has a comparable performance to quadprogBB and BARON in small- to medium-scale instances, but is outperformed by these solvers on large-scale instances; while CPLEX performs the best on box-constrained QP instances. Also, unlike quadprogBB, the solution approach proposed here is able to solve QP instances whose dual feasible set is unbounded. The MATLAB code, called quadprogIP, and the instances used to perform these numerical experiments are publicly available at https://github.com/xiawei918/quadprogIP.
Let
(QP) be an integer quadratic program that consists in minimizing a quadratic function subject to linear constraints. A such problem belongs to the class of
NP-Hard problems. Standard solvers that use a Branch and Bound algorithm can efficiently solve
(QP) in the specific case where its objective function is convex. Thus, to solve
(QP), we choose to reformulate it into an equivalent problem with a convex objective function. Two reformulations are possible: either we reformulate
(QP) into a linear program, or we reformulate it into a convex quadratic program. \par In the first part of this dissertation, we present several linearizations of
(QP), i.e. reformulations into an equivalent program with a linear objective function. Many linearization methods for the quadratic binary programs are known. A natural approach when considering
(QP) is therefore to reformulate it into a quadratic binary program. This can be done by the binary decomposition of each integer variable and then the linearization of each new product of two binary variables. However, this method, that we denote by \texttt{BBL (Binary Binary Linearization)}, leads to a linear program with a large number of variables and constraints. We then present a new approach, \texttt{BIL (Binary Integer Linearization)}, that consists in reformulating
(QP) into a particular quadratic integer program where each quadratic term is the product of an integer variable by a binary variable. As in the \texttt{BBL} approach, the binary variables come from the binary decomposition of the initial integer variables. Then, we linearize the obtained program by replacing each quadratic term by a new real variable and a set of inequalities. As the number of quadratic terms is lower than in the \texttt{BBL} approach, the number of additional variables is reduced. Hence, the obtained integer linear program is significantly smaller in the \texttt{BIL} approach. Moreover, contrary to what one might think, the \texttt{BIL} approach provides a better bound obtained by continuous relaxation than the \texttt{BBL} approach. Each reformulation leads to an integer linear program that is equivalent to
(QP) and that we improve by adding valid inequalities. \par In a second part, we present several quadratic convex reformulations of
(QP), i.e. we reformulate
(QP) into an equivalent program, with a quadratic convex objective function. We first introduce a simple approach to convexify
(QP) that consists in expressing linearly the squares of integer variables using their unary decompositions, and then to convexify with the smallest eigenvalue of the Hessian matrix of
(QP). We call this approach \texttt{NC (Naive Convexification)}. Then, we introduce a new convex reformulation scheme that perturbs the objective function of
(QP) with the linear expression of the products of integer variables, and the equality constraints of
(QP). Then, we show that we can compute, within this scheme, an optimal reformulation of
(QP) in terms of bound obtained by continuous relaxation : the \texttt{IQCR (Integer Quadratic Convex Reformulation)} approach. This reformulation is based on the optimal dual solution of a semi-definite relaxation of
(QP). Moreover, we show that the method \texttt{IQCR} is easily adaptable to mixed-integer programming. This adaptation, that we call \texttt{IQCRs}, also allows us to integrate the inequality constraints of
(QP) into the perturbation of the objective function of our convex reformulation scheme. Then, we present an interesting restriction of the method \texttt{IQCR}, called \texttt{CQCR (Compact Quadratic Convex Reformulation)}. The difference between this last approach and \texttt{IQCR} is that \texttt{CQCR} only uses the linear expression of the integer variable squares to perturb the objective function, while \texttt{IQCR} uses all the products. The interest is that \texttt{CQCR} produces a reformulated problem with a reduced size in comparison with the \texttt{IQCR} approach, what could be profitable experimentally. Finally, we apply these
3 methods \texttt{NC}, \texttt{CQCR} and \texttt{IQCR} to binary quadratic programming. We show that \texttt{NC} and \texttt{CQCR} are equivalent to existing binary convex reformulations. An interesting result is that \texttt{IQCR} is an improvement of existing convexifications for binary quadratic programming.\par In a third part, we design a specific Branch and Bound algorithm based on a projection property of the \texttt{IQCR} approach.\par Finally, we compare the four obtained linearizations and the three obtained quadratic convex reformulations from the computational point of view. For integer programming, computational experiences are carried out with two classes of instances of
(QP), the first having one equality constraint, and the other having one inequality constraint. The results show that most of the considered instances with up to
40 variables can be solved in one hour of CPU time by the \texttt{IQCR} and \texttt{CQCR} approaches. We then test \texttt{IQCR} on binary quadratic programming. The results corroborate that our approach \texttt{IQCR} improves existing convexifications.