• Aucun résultat trouvé

Discovery of new complementarity functions for NCP and SOCCP

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2022

Partager "Discovery of new complementarity functions for NCP and SOCCP"

Copied!
23
0
0

Texte intégral

(1)

https://doi.org/10.1007/s40314-018-0660-0

Discovery of new complementarity functions for NCP and SOCCP

Peng-Fei Ma1 · Jein-Shan Chen2 · Chien-Hao Huang2 · Chun-Hsu Ko3

Received: 25 February 2017 / Revised: 20 May 2018 / Accepted: 30 May 2018 / Published online: 6 June 2018

© SBMAC - Sociedade Brasileira de Matemática Aplicada e Computacional 2018

Abstract It is well known that complementarity functions play an important role in dealing with complementarity problems. In this paper, we propose a few new classes of com- plementarity functions for nonlinear complementarity problems and second-order cone complementarity problems. The constructions of such new complementarity functions are based on discrete generalization which is a novel idea in contrast to the continuous general- ization of Fischer–Burmeister function. Surprisingly, these new families of complementarity functions possess continuous differentiability even though they are discrete-oriented exten- sions. This feature enables that some methods like derivative-free algorithm can be employed directly for solving nonlinear complementarity problems and second-order cone comple- mentarity problems. This is a new discovery to the literature and we believe that such new complementarity functions can also be used in many other contexts.

Communicated by Jinyun Yuan.

Peng-Fei Ma This research was supported by a grant from the National Natural Science Foundation of China(No.11626212).

Jein-Shan Chen The author’s work is supported by Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan.

B

Jein-Shan Chen jschen@math.ntnu.edu.tw Peng-Fei Ma

mathpengfeima@126.com Chien-Hao Huang qqnick0719@ntnu.edu.tw Chun-Hsu Ko

chko@isu.edu.tw

1 Department of Mathematics, Zhejiang University of Science and Technology, Hangzhou, Zhejiang 310023, P.R. China

2 Department of Mathematics, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei 11677, Taiwan 3 Department of Electrical Engineering, I-Shou University, Kaohsiung 840, Taiwan

(2)

Keywords NCP·SOCCP·Natural residual·Complementarity function Mathematics Subject Classification 26B05·26B35·90C33·65K05

1 Introduction

In general, the complementarity problem comes from the Karush–Kuhn–Tucker (KKT) con- ditions of linear and nonlinear programming problems. For different types of optimization problems, there arise various complementarity problems, for example, linear complemen- tarity problem, nonlinear complementarity problem (NCP), semidefinite complementarity problem, second-order cone complementarity problem (SOCCP), and symmetric cone complementarity problem. To deal with complementarity problems, the so-called comple- mentarity functions play an important role therein. In this paper, we focus on two classes of complementarity functions, which are used for the NCP and SOCCP, respectively.

The first class is the NCP that has attracted much attention since 1970s because of its wide applications in the fields of economics, engineering, and operations research, see (Cottle et al.1992; Facchinei and Pang 2003; Harker and Pang1990) and references therein. In mathematical format, the NCP is to find a pointx ∈Rn such that

x≥0, F(x)≥0, x,F(x) =0,

where·,·is the Euclidean inner product andF=(F1, . . . ,Fn)T is a map fromRntoRn. For solving NCP, the so-called NCP functionφ:R2→Rdefined as below

φ(a,b)=0 ⇐⇒ a,b≥0,ab=0

plays a crucial role. Generally speaking, with such NCP functions, the NCP can be refor- mulated as nonsmooth equations (Mangasarian1976; Pang1990; Yamashita and Fukushima 1997) or unconstrained minimization (Facchinei and Soares1997; Fischer1992; Geiger and Kanzow1996; Jiang1996; Kanzow1996; Pang and Chan1982; Yamashita and Fukushima 1995). Then, different kinds of approaches and algorithms are designed based on the afore- mentioned reformulations and various NCP functions. During the past four decades, around thirty NCP functions are proposed, see (Galántai2012) for a survey.

The second class is the SOCCP, which can be viewed as a natural extension of NCP and is to seek aζ ∈Rnsuch that

ζK, F(ζ )K, ζ,F(ζ ) =0,

whereF:Rn →Rnis a map andKis the Cartesian product of second-order cones (SOC), also called Lorentz cones (Faraut and Korányi1994). In other words,Kis expressed as:

K=Kn1× · · · ×Knm, wherem,n1, . . . ,nm≥1,n1+ · · · +nm=n, and

Kni := {(x1,x2)∈R×Rni−1| x2x1},

with · denoting the Euclidean norm. The SOCCP has important applications in engineering problems (Kanno et al.2006) and robust Nash equilibria (Hayashi et al.2005). Another important special case of SOCCP corresponds to the KKT optimality conditions for the second-order cone program (see Chen and Tseng2005for details):

(3)

minimizecTx

subject to Ax=b, xK,

where A∈ Rm×n has full row rank,b ∈Rm andc ∈ Rn. Many solution methods have been proposed for solving SOCCP, see (Chen and Pan2012) for a survey. For example, merit function approach based on reformulating the SOCCP as an unconstrained smooth minimization problem is studied in Chen and Tseng (2005), Chen (2006b), Pan et al. (2014).

In such approach, it is to find a smooth functionψ:Rn×Rn→R+such that

ψ(x,y)=0 ⇐⇒ x,y =0, xKn, yKn. (1) Then, the SOCCP can be expressed as an unconstrained smooth (global) minimization prob- lem:

ζ∈Rminn ψ(ζ,F(ζ )). (2)

In fact, a function ψ satisfying the condition in (1) (not necessarily smooth) is called a complementarity function for SOCCP (or complementarity function associated withKn).

Various gradient methods such as conjugate gradient methods and quasi-Newton methods (Bertsekas1999; Fletcher1987) can be applied for solving (2). In general, for this approach to be effective, the choice of complementarity functionψis also crucial.

Back to the complementarity functions for NCP, two popular choices of NCP functions are the well-known Fischer–Burmeister function (FB function, in short)φFB : R2 → R defined by see (Fischer1992,1997)

φFB(a,b)=

a2+b2(a+b), and the squared norm of Fischer–Burmeister function given by

ψFB(a,b)= 1

2φFB(a,b)2.

In addition, the generalized Fischer–Burmeister functionφp:R2→R, which includes the Fischer–Burmeister as a special case, is considered in Chen (2006a,2007), Chen et al. (2009), Chen and Pan (2008), Hu et al. (2009), Tsai and Chen (2014). In particular, the functionφp

is a natural “continuous extension” ofφFB, in which the 2-norm inφFB(a,b)is replaced by generalp-norm. In other words,φp :R2 →Ris defined as:

φp(a,b)= (a,b) p(a+b), p>1 (3) and its geometric view is depicted in Tsai and Chen (2014). The effect of perturbingpfor dif- ferent kinds of algorithms is investigated in Chen et al. (2010,2011), and Chen and Pan (2008) . We point it out that the generalized Fischer–Burmeisterφpgiven as in (3) is not differentiable, whereas the squared norm of generalized Fischer–Burmeister function is smooth so that it is usually adapted as a differentiable NCP function Pan et al. (2014). Moreover, all the afore- mentioned functions including Fischer–Burmeister function, generalized Fischer–Burmeister function and their squared norm can be extended to the setting of SOCCP via Jordan algebra.

A different type of popular NCP function is the natural residual functionφNR:R2→R given by

φNR(a,b)=a(ab)+=min{a,b}.

Recently, Chen et al. propose a family of generalized natural residual functionsφNRp defined by

φNRp (a,b)=ap(ab)+p,

(4)

wherep>1 is a positive odd integer,(ab)+p = [(ab)+]p, and(ab)+=max{ab,0}. Whenp=1,φNRp reduces to the natural residual functionφNR, i.e.,

φNR1 (a,b)=a(ab)+=min{a,b} =φNR(a,b).

As remarked in Chen et al. (2016), this extension is “discrete generalization”, not “continu- ous generalization”. Nonetheless, it possesses twice differentiability surprisingly so that the squared norm ofφNRp is not needed. Based on this discrete generalization, two families of NCP functions are further proposed in Chang et al. (2015) which have the feature of sym- metric surfaces. To the contrast, it is very natural to ask whether there is a similar “discrete extension” for Fischer–Burmeister function. We answer this question affirmatively.

In this paper, we apply the idea of “discrete generalization” to the Fischer–Burmeister function which gives the following function (denoted byφD−FBp ):

φD−FBp (a,b)= a2+b2

p

(a+b)p, (4) where p > 1 is a positive odd integer and(a,b) ∈ R2. Notice that when p = 1,φD−FBp reduces to the Fischer–Burmeister function. In Sect.3, we will see thatφD−FBp is an NCP function and is twice differentiable directly without taking its squared norm. Note that ifp is even, it is no longer an NCP function. Even though we have the feature of differentiability, we point out that the Newton method may not be applied directly because the Jacobian at a degenerate solution to NCP is singular see (Kanzow1996; Kanzow and Kleinmichel1995).

Nonetheless, this feature may enable that many methods like derivative-free algorithm can be employed directly for solving NCP. In addition, we investigate the differentiable properties ofφD−FBp , the computable formulas for their gradients and Jacobians. In order to have more insight for this new family of NCP function, we also depict the surfaces ofφD−FBp (a,b)with various values ofp.

In Sect.4, we show that the new functionφD−FBp can be further employed to the SOCCP setting as complementarity functions and merit functions. In other words, in the terms of Jordan algebra, we defineφD−FBp :Rn×Rn →Rnby

φD−FBp (x,y)= x2+y2

p

(x+y)p, (5) where p > 1 is a positive odd integer, x ∈ Rn, y ∈ Rn,x2 = xx is the Jordan product of x with itself and √

x with xKn being the unique vector such that √ x

x = x. We prove that eachφD−FBp (x,y)is a complementarity function associated with Kn and establish formulas for its gradient and Jacobian. These properties and formulas can be used to design and analyze non-interior continuation methods for solving second-order cone programs and complementarity problems. In addition, several variants ofφD−FBp are also shown to be complementarity functions for SOCCP.

Throughout the paper, we assumeK=Knfor simplicity and all the analysis can be carried over to the case whereKis a product of SOC without difficulty. The following notations will be used. The identity matrix is denoted byI andRn denotes the space of n-dimensional real column vectors. For any givenx ∈ Rn withn > 1, we write x = (x1,x2) where x1is the first entry ofx andx2 is the subvector that consists of the remaining entries. For every differentiable function f : Rn → R, ∇f(x) denotes the gradient of f at x. For every differentiable mappingF:Rn →Rm,∇F(x)is ann×mmatrix which denotes the transposed Jacobian ofFatx. For nonnegative scalar functionsαandβ, we writeα=o(β) to mean limβ→0α

β =0.

(5)

2 Preliminaries

In this section, we review some background materials about the Jordan algebra in Faraut and Korányi (1994), Fukushima et al. (2002). Then, we present some technical lemmas which are needed in subsequent analysis.

For anyx=(x1,x2),y=(y1,y2)∈R×Rn−1, we define theJordan productassociated withKnas:

xy := (x,y, y1x2+x1y2).

The identity element under this product ise := (1,0, . . . ,0)T ∈Rn. For any givenx = (x1,x2)∈R×Rn−1, we define symmetric matrix

Lx := x1 x2T x2 x1I

which can be viewed as a linear mapping fromRntoRn. It is easy to verify that Lxy=xy,x∈Rn.

Moreover, we haveLxis invertible forxKn 0 and

L−1x = 1 det(x)

x1x2T

−x2 det(x) x1

I+ 1 x1

x2x2T

,

where det(x) = x12− x2 2. We next recall from Chen and Pan (2012); Fukushima et al.

(2002) that eachx =(x1,x2)∈R×Rn−1admits a spectral factorization, associated with Kn, of the form

x =λ1u(1)+λ2u(2), (6)

whereλ1, λ2andu(1),u(2)are the spectral values and the associated spectral vectors ofx given by

λi =x1+(−1)i x2 ,

u(i)=

⎧⎪

⎪⎪

⎪⎪

⎪⎩

1 2

1, (−1)i x2

x2

ifx2=0;

1 2

1, (−1)iw2

ifx2=0,

fori = 1,2, withw2 being any vector in Rn−1 satisfying w2 = 1. Ifx2 = 0, the factorization is unique.

Given a real-valued functiong :R→R, we can define a vector-valued SOC function gsoc:Rn→Rnby

gsoc(x):=g(λ1)u(1)+g(λ2)u(2).

Ifgis defined on a subset ofR, thengsocis defined on the corresponding subset ofRn. The definition ofgsocis unambiguous whetherx2=0 orx2=0. In this paper, we will often use the vector-valued functions corresponding totp(t∈R)and√

t(t≥0), respectively, which are expressed as:

xp :=1(x))pu(1)+2(x))pu(2), ∀x ∈Rn

x :=√

λ1(x)u(1)+√

λ2(x)u(2),xKn.

(6)

We will see that the above two vector-valued functions play a role, showing thatφD−FBp given as in (5) is well defined in the SOC setting for anyx,y ∈Rn. Note that the other way to definexpand√

xis through Jordan product. In other words,xprepresentsxx◦ · · · ◦xfor p-times and

xKn satisfies√ x◦√

x=x.

Lemma 2.1 Suppose that p =2k+1where k=1,2,3,· · ·. Then, for any u, v∈R, we have up =vpif and only if u=v.

Proof The proof is straightforward and can be found in (Baggett et al.2012, Theorem 1.12).

Here, we provide an alternative proof.

“⇐” It is trivial.

“⇒” Forv=0, sinceup =vp, we haveu=v=0. Forv=0, from f(t)=tp−1 being a strictly monotone increasing function for anyt∈R, we have

u v

p

−1=0 if and only if u

v =1, which impliesu=v. Thus, the proof is complete.

Lemma 2.2 For p = 2m+1with m = 1,2,3,· · · and x = (x1,x2),y = (y1,y2) ∈ R×Rn−1, suppose that xpand yprepresent xx◦ · · · ◦x and yy◦ · · · ◦y for p-times, respectively. Then, xp=ypif and only if x=y.

Proof “⇐” This direction is trivial.

“⇒” Suppose thatxp =yp. By the spectral decomposition (6), we write x =λ1(x)u(1)x +λ2(x)u(2)x ,

y =λ1(y)u(y1)+λ2(y)u(y2).

Then,xp =1(x))pu(x1)+(λ2(x))pu(x2)andyp =1(y))pu(y1)+(λ2(y))pu(y2). Sincexp= yp and eigenvalues are unique, we obtain1(x))p =1(y))pand2(x))p =2(y))p. By Lemma2.1, this impliesλ1(x)=λ1(y)andλ2(x)=λ2(y). Moreover,{u(1)x ,u(2)x }and {u(1)y ,u(2)y }are Jordan frames, we haveu(1)x +u(2)x =u(1)y +u(2)y =e, whereeis the identity element. Fromxp =ypandu(x1)+u(x2)=u(y1)+u(y2), we get

1(x))p2(x))p

(u(1)xu(1)y )=0.

If1(x))p=2(x))p, we haveλ1(x)=λ2(x)andλ1(y)=λ2(y), that is,x=λ1(x)e=y.

Otherwise, if1(x))p=2(x))p, we must haveu(x1)=u(y1), which impliesu(x2)=u(y2).

3 New generalized Fischer–Burmeister function for NCP

In this section, we show that the functionφD−FBp defined as in (4) is an NCP function and present its twice differentiability. At the same time, we also depict the surfaces ofφD−FBp with various values ofpto have more insight for this new family of NCP functions.

Proposition 3.1 LetφD−FBp be defined as in(4)where p is a positive odd integer. Then,φD−FBp is an NCP function.

Proof SupposeφD−FBp (a,b) =0 , which says √

a2+b2 p

=(a+b)p. Using pbeing a positive odd integer and applying Lemma2.1, we have

a2+b2 p

=(a+b)p ⇐⇒

a2+b2=a+b.

(7)

It is well known that√

a2+b2 =a+bis equivalent toa,b ≥0,ab=0 becauseφFB is an NCP function. This shows thatφD−FBp (a,b)=0 impliesa,b≥0,ab=0. The converse direction is trivial. Thus, we prove thatφD−FBp is an NCP function.

Remark 3.1 We elaborate more about the new NCP functionφD−FBp .

(a) Forpbeing an even integer,φD−FBp is not an NCP function. A counterexample is given as below.

φD−FBp (−5,0)=(−5)2(−5)2=0. (b) The surface ofφD−FBp is symmetric, i.e.,φD−FBp (a,b)=φD−FBp (b,a).

(c) The functionφD−FBp (a,b)is positive homogenous of degree p, i.e.,φD−FBp (α(a,b)) = αpφD−FBp (a,b)forα≥0.

(d) The functionφD−FBp is neither convex nor concave function. To see this, takingp=3 and using the following argument verify the assertion.

53−73=φD−FB3 (3,4) > 1

2φ3D−FB(0,0)+1

2φ3D−FB(6,8)

= 1

2×0+1 2

103−143

=4 53−73 and

0=φD−FB3 (0,0) < 1

2φD−FB3 (−2,0)+1

2φD−FB3 (2,0)= 1

2×16+1

2×0=8.

Proposition 3.2 LetφD−FBp be defined as in(4)where p is a positive odd integer. Then, the following hold.

(a) For p>1,φD−FBp is continuously differentiable with

∇φD−FBp (a,b)= p a(

a2+b2)p−2(a+b)p−1 b(

a2+b2)p2(a+b)p1

. (b) For p>3,φD−FBp is twice continuously differentiable with

2φD−FBp (a,b)=

⎢⎢

2φD−FBp

∂a2

2φD−FBp

∂a∂b

2φD−FBp

∂b∂a

2φD−FBp

∂b2

⎥⎥

,

where

2φD−FBp

∂a2 = p

(p−1)a2+b2 (

a2+b2)p4(p−1)(a+b)p2 ,

2φD−FBp

∂a∂b = p

(p−2)ab(

a2+b2)p−4(p−1)(a+b)p−2

= 2φD−FBp

∂b∂a ,

2φD−FBp

∂b2 = p

a2+(p−1)b2 (

a2+b2)p−4(p−1)(a+b)p−2 . Proof The verifications of differentiability and computations of first and second derivatives

are straightforward, we omit them.

(8)

Next, we present some variants ofφD−FBp . Indeed, analogous to those functions in Sun and Qi (1999), the variants ofφD−FBp as below can be verified being NCP functions.

φ1(a,b)=φD−FBp (a,b)α(a)+(b)+, α >0. φ2(a,b)=φD−FBp (a,b)α ((a)+(b)+)2, α >0. φ3(a,b)= [φD−FBp (a,b)]2+α ((ab)+)4, α >0.

φ4(a,b)= [φD−FBp (a,b)]2+α ((ab)+)2, α >0.

In the above expressions, for anyt∈R, we definet+as max{0,t}.

Lemma 3.1 LetφD−FBp be defined as in(4)where p is a positive odd integer. Then, the value ofφD−FBp (a,b)is negative only in the first quadrant, i.e.,φD−FBp (a,b) <0if and only if a>0, b>0.

Proof We know that f(t)= tp is a strictly increasing function whenpis odd. Using this fact yields

a>0,b>0

⇐⇒a+b>0 and ab>0

⇐⇒

a2+b2 <a+b

⇐⇒

a2+b2 p

< (a+b)p

⇐⇒φD−FBp (a,b) <0,

which proves the desired result.

Proposition 3.3 All the above functionsφifor i∈ {1,2,3,4}are NCP functions.

Proof Applying Lemma3.1, the arguments are similar to those in [Chen et al. (2016), Propo-

sition 2.4], which are omitted here.

In fact, in light of Lemma2.1, we can construct more variants ofφD−FBp , which are also new NCP function. More specifically, consider thatkandmare positive integers,f :R×R→R, andg :R×R→Rwithg(a,b) =0 for alla,b ∈R, the following functions are new variants ofφD−FBp .

φ5(a,b)=

g(a,b)

a2+b2+ f(a,b)2m+12k+1

g(a,b)

a+b+ f(a,b)2m+12k+1 . φ6(a,b)=

g(a,b)(

a2+b2ab)k

m . φ7(a,b)=

g(a,b)(

a2+b2a+ f(a,b))2m+12k+1

−[g(a,b)(b+ f(a,b))]2m+12k+1 . φ8(a,b)=

g(a,b)(

a2+b2a+ f(a,b))2m+12k+1

−[g(a,b)(b+ f(a,b))]2m+12k+1 . φ9(a,b)=eφi(a,b)−1 wherei=5,6,7,8.

φ10(a,b)=ln(|φi(a,b)| +1)wherei=5,6,7,8.

(9)

Proposition 3.4 All the above functionsφifor i∈ {5,6,7,8,9,10}are NCP functions.

Proof This is an immediate consequence of Propositions3.1,3.1,3.3. By Lemma2.1and g(a,b)=0 fora,b∈R, we have

φ5(a,b)=0

⇐⇒

g(a,b)

a2+b2+ f(a,b)2m+12k+1

= g(a,b)

a+b+ f(a,b)2m+12k+1

⇐⇒ g(a,b)

a2+b2+ f(a,b)2m+12k+1 2m+1

= g(a,b)

a+b+ f(a,b)2m+12k+1 2m+1

⇐⇒

g(a,b)

a2+b2+ f(a,b)2k+1

= g(a,b)

a+b+ f(a,b)2k+1

⇐⇒g(a,b)

a2+b2+ f(a,b)

=g(a,b)

a+b+ f(a,b)

⇐⇒

a2+b2+ f(a,b)

=

a+b+ f(a,b)

⇐⇒

a2+b2=a+b.

The other functionsφifori∈ {6,7,8,9,10}are similar toφ5. According to the above results, we immediately obtain the following theorem.

Theorem 3.1 Suppose thatφ(a,b)= ϕ1(a,b)ϕ2(a,b)is an NCP function onR×R and k and m are positive integers. Then,

φ(a,b)k

m and

ϕ1(a,b)2m+12k+1

− [ϕ2(a,b)]2m+12k+1 are NCP functions.

Proof Usingkandmbeing positive integers and applying Lemma 2.1, we have φ(a,b)k

m =0

⇐⇒

φ(a,b)k

m

m

=0

⇐⇒

φ(a,b)k

=0

⇐⇒φ(a,b)=0.

Similarly, we have

ϕ1(a,b)2m+12k+1

− [ϕ2(a,b)]2m+12k+1 =0

⇐⇒

ϕ1(a,b)2m+12k+1

= [ϕ2(a,b)]2m+12k+1

⇐⇒

ϕ1(a,b)2m+12k+12m+1

=

2(a,b)]2m+12k+12m+1

⇐⇒

ϕ1(a,b)]2k+1 =

ϕ2(a,b)]2k+1

⇐⇒ϕ1(a,b)=ϕ2(a,b)

⇐⇒φ(a,b)=0.

The above arguments together with the assumption ofφ(a,b)being an NCP function yield

the desired result.

(10)

−10

−5 0

5

10 −10 −5 0 5 10

−10 0 10 20 30 40

b−axis a−axis

z−axis

Fig. 1 The surface ofz=φD−FB(a,b)and(a,b)∈ [−10,10] × [−10,10]

Remark 3.2 We elaborate more about Theorem3.1.

(a) Based on the existing well-known NCP functions, we can construct new NCP functions in light of Theorem3.1. This is a novel way to construct new NCP functions.

(b) Whenkis a positive integer,

φ(a,b)k

is an NCP function. This means that perturbing the parameterk gives new NCP functions. In addition, ifφ(a,b)is an NCP function, for any positive integerm,

φ(a,b)k

m is also an NCP function. Thus, we can determine suitable and nice NCP functions among these functions according to their numerical performance.

To close this section, we depict the surfaces ofφD−FBp with different values ofpso that we may have deeper insight for this new family of NCP functions. Figure1shows the surface if φD−FB(a,b)from which we see that it is convex. Figure2presents the surface ofφD−FB3 (a,b) in which we see that it is neither convex nor concave as mentioned in Remark3.1(c). In addition, the value ofφD−FBp (a,b)is negative only whena >0 andb >0 as mentioned in Lemma3.1. The surfaces ofφD−FBp with various values ofpare shown in Fig.3.

4 ExtendingφD−FBp andφNRp to SOCCP

In this section, we extend the new functionφD−FBp andφNRp to SOC setting. More specifically, we show that the functionφD−FBp andφNRp are complementarity functions associated withKn. In addition, we present the computing formulas for its Jacobian.

Proposition 4.1 LetφD−FBp be defined by (5). Then,φD−FBp is a complementarity function associated withKn, i.e., it satisfies

φD−FBp (x,y)=0 ⇐⇒ xKn, yKn, x,y =0.

(11)

−10

−5 0

5

10 −10 −5 0 5 10

−1

−0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5

x 104

b−axis a−axis

z−axis

Fig. 2 The surface ofz=φD3FB(a,b)and(a,b)∈ [−10,10] × [−10,10]

−5 0

−5 0 5 5

−1000

−500 0 500 1000 1500

a−axis b−axis

z−axis

(a)z=φ3D−FB(a, b)

−5 0 5

−5

0

5

−1

−0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5

x 105

a−axis b−axis

z−axis

(b)z=φ5D−FB(a, b)

−5

0

−5 5

0 5

−1

−0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 x 107

a−axis b−axis

z−axis

(c) z=φ7D−FB(a, b)

−5

0

−5 5

0 5

−1

−0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 x 109

a−axis b−axis

z−axis

(d)z=φ9D−FB(a, b) Fig. 3 The surface ofz=φDpFB(a,b)with different values ofp.

(12)

Proof SinceφD−FBp (x,y)=0 , we have x2+y2

p

=(x+y)p. Usingpbeing a positive odd integer and applying Lemma2.2yield

x2+y2

p

=(x+y)p ⇐⇒

x2+y2=x+y.

It is known thatφFB(x,y):=

x2+y2(x+y)is a complementarity function associated withKn. This indicates thatφD−FBp is a complementarity function associated withKn. With similar technique, we can prove thatφNRp can be extended as a complementarity function for SOCCP.

Proposition 4.2 The functionφNRp :Rn×Rn→Rndefined by

φNRp (x,y)=xp− [(x−y)+]p (7) is a complementarity function associated withKn, where p>1is a positive odd integer and (·)+means the projection ontoKn.

Proof From Lemma2.2, we see thatφNRp (x,y) =0 if and only ifx = (xy)+. On the other hand, it is known thatφNR(x,y) = x(xy)+is a complementarity function for SOCCP, which impliesx(xy)+ =0 if and only ifxKn,yKn, andx,y =0.

Hence,φNRp is a complementarity function associated withKn. To compute the Jacobian ofφD−FBp , we need to introduce some notations for convenience.

For anyx =(x1,x2)∈R×Rn−1andy=(y1,y2)∈R×Rn−1, we define

w(x,y):=x2+y2=(w1(x,y), w2(x,y))∈R×Rn1 and v(x,y):=x+y.

Then, it is clear thatw(x,y)Kn andλi(w)≥0,i =1,2.

Proposition 4.3 LetφD−FBp be defined as in(5)and gsoc(x)=(

|x|)p, hsoc(x)=xpare the vector-valued functions corresponding to g(t)= |t|2p and h(t)=tpfor t∈R, respectively.

Then,φD−FBp is continuously differentiable at any(x,y)∈Rn×Rn. Moreover, we have

xφD−FBp (x,y)=2Lx∇gsoc(w)− ∇hsoc(v),

yφD−FBp (x,y)=2Ly∇gsoc(w)− ∇hsoc(v),

wherew :=w(x,y)= x2+y2,v:=v(x,y)= x+y, t →sign(t)is the sign function, and

gsoc(w)=

⎧⎪

⎪⎩ p

2|w1|p21·sign(w1)I if w2=0;

b1(w) c1(w)w¯2T

c1(w)w¯2 a1(w)I+(b1(w)a1(w))w¯2w¯2T

if w2=0;

¯

w2 = w2

w2 ,

a1(w)= |λ2(w)|p2 − |λ1(w)|p2 λ2(w)λ1(w) , b1(w)= p

4

2(w)|p2−1+ |λ1(w)|p2−1 , c1(w)= p

4

2(w)|p2−1− |λ1(w)|p2−1 ,

(13)

and

hsoc(v)=

⎧⎨

pv1p−1I if v2=0;

b2(v) c2(v)v¯2T

c2(v)v¯2 a2(v)I+(b2(v)a2(v))v¯2v¯2T

if v2=0; (8)

¯ v2 = v2

v2 , (9)

a2(v)= 2(v))p1(v))p

λ2(v)λ1(v) , (10)

b2(v)= p 2

2(v))p1+1(v))p1

, (11)

c2(v)= p 2

2(v))p−11(v))p−1

, (12)

Proof From the definition ofφD−FBp , it is clear to see that for any(x,y)∈Rn×Rn, φD−FBp (x,y) =

x2+y2 p

(x+y)p

=

|x2+y2| p

(x+y)p

=

1(w)|p2u(1)(w)+ |λ2(w)|p2u(2)(w)

1(v))pu(1)(v)+2(v))pu(2)(v)

=gsoc(w)hsoc(v). (13) Forp≥3, since both|t|p2andtpare continuously differentiable onR, by [Chen et al. (2004), Proposition 5] and [Fukushima et al. (2002), Proposition 5.2], we know that the functiongsoc andhsocare continuously differentiable onRn. Moreover, it is clear thatw(x,y)=x2+y2is continuously differentiable onRn×Rn, then we conclude thatφD−FBp is continuously differ- entiable. Moreover, from the formula in [Chen et al. (2004), Proposition 4] and [Fukushima et al. (2002), Proposition 5.2], we have

gsoc(w)=

⎧⎪

⎪⎨

⎪⎪

p

2|w1|p2−1·sign(w1)I if w2=0; b1(w) c1(w)w¯2T

c1(w)w¯2 a1(w)I+(b1(w)a1(w))w¯2w¯2T

if w2=0;

∇hsoc(v)=

⎧⎪

⎪⎩

pv1p−1I if v2=0;

b2(v) c2(v)¯vT2

c2(v)v¯2 a2(v)I+(b2(v)a2(v))v¯2v¯2T

if v2=0;

where

¯

w2 = ww22 , v¯2= vv22

a1(w)=2(w)|

p

2−|λ1(w)|p2

λ2(w)−λ1(w) , a2(v)= 2(v))λ2(v)−λp−(λ11(v)(v))p, b1(w)= 4p

2(w)|2p−1+ |λ1(w)|p2−1

,b2(v)= 2p

2(v))p−1+1(v))p−1 , c1(w)= 4p

2(w)|2p1− |λ1(w)|p21

,c2(v)= 2p

2(v))p−11(v))p−1 .

(14)

By taking differentiation on both sides aboutxandyfor (13), respectively, and applying the chain rule for differentiation, it follows that

xφD−FBp (x,y)=2Lx∇gsoc(w)− ∇hsoc(v),

yφD−FBp (x,y)=2Lygsoc(w)− ∇hsoc(v).

Hence, we complete the proof.

With Lemma2.2and Proposition4.1, we can construct more complementarity functions for SOCCP which are variants ofφD−FBp (x,y). More specifically, consider that k andm are positive integers and fsoc(x,y) : Rn ×Rn → Rn is the vector-valued function cor- responding to a given real-valued function f, the following functions are new variants of φD−FBp (x,y).

φ1(x,y)= x2+y2+ fsoc(x,y) 2m+12k+1

x+y+ fsoc(x,y)2m+12k+1 . φ2(x,y)= x2+y2xy

k

m.

φ3(x,y)= x2+y2x+ fsoc(x,y) 2m+12k+1

y+ fsoc(x,y)2m+12k+1 . φ4(x,y)= x2+y2y+ fsoc(x,y)

2m+12k+1

x+ fsoc(x,y)2m+12k+1 .

Proposition 4.4 All the above functionsφifor i∈ {1,2,3,4}are complementarity functions associated withKn.

Proof The results follow from applying Lemma2.2and Proposition4.1.

In general, for complementarity functions associated withKn, we have the following parallel result to Theorem3.1.

Theorem 4.1 Suppose thatφ(x,y) = ϕ1(x,y)ϕ2(x,y)is a complementarity function associated withKn on Rn ×Rn, and k,m are positive integers. Then,

φ(x,y)k

m and ϕ1(x,y)2m+12k+1

− [ϕ2(x,y)]2m+12k+1 are complementarity functions associated withKn. Proof According tokandmare positive integers and using Lemma 2.2, we have

φ(x,y)k

m =0

⇐⇒

φ(x,y)k

m

m

=0

⇐⇒

φ(x,y)k

=0

⇐⇒φ(x,y)=0.

Similarly, we have

ϕ1(x,y)2m+12k+1

− [ϕ2(x,y)]2m+12k+1 =0

⇐⇒

ϕ1(x,y)2m+12k+1

= [ϕ2(x,y)]2m+12k+1

Références

Documents relatifs

Condition (1.19) states that if there is a positive shipment of the semi-product transacted from industrial producer i to industrial consumers j, then the sum of the marginal

Our purpose, in this pa- per, is to propose a class of simple and efficient methods for solving nonlinear complemen- tarity problems even in the complicated cases, when a

Algorithm 2, with the sequence of update param- eter θ k described above, guarantees strict feasibility of the iterates and quadratic convergence of the proximity measure.. As

In the second step, the kinematic contact variables, namely the contact distance between a slave node and its master segment d n and the relative tangential velocity, have to

Keywords Lorentz cone · Second-order cone eigenvalue complementarity problem · Semismooth Newton method · Lattice Projection Method..

Keywords Nonlinear complementarity problem · Loewner ordering · Cone-constrained eigenvalue problem · Semismooth Newton method..

By introducing new classes of functions and a suitable metric for performing the approximation, we provide bounds for the asymptotic set of the solution set and coercive

By introducing new classes of multi- functions we provide several existence (possibly allowing unbounded solution set), stability as well as sensitivity results which extend