© All Rights Reserved

6 views

© All Rights Reserved

- Web Content Extraction A Heuristic Approach
- Computer Network - Assignment 03 Solution
- avltreefsds
- branch bound algorithm 0 1 mixed integer choice constraints
- BENSON Bi Criteria Linear Programming
- Knowledge
- Binary Tree
- 2010INFOCOM-[Hu]-A Balanced Consistency Maintainence Protocol for Structured P2P Systems
- A Distributed Algorithm for Finding All Best Swap Edges of a Minimum Diameter Spanning Tree Blog.ocularsystems.in
- Lecture Knapsack BB
- CS-62- jun 2007
- ds paper
- Networking Accafawimene
- 00117239
- QB
- catia materiales compuestos
- r12featurespresentation-inventorymanagement-120213032832-phpapp02
- Spray Wait
- Abb
- cs-8

You are on page 1of 60

1

Quotes of the Day

The time to relax is when you don't have time for it.

-- Attributed to Jim Goodwin and Sydney J. Harris

-- Mohandas K. Gandhi

2

Overview

problems.

enumerating, but it cuts out a lot of the

enumeration whenever possible.

techniques for integer programming.

3

Overview of this lecture

Complete Enumeration

4

Trading for Profit Game

iPad server Rat Pain tutoring dinner

Prize

1 2 3 4 5 6

Points 5 7 4 3 4 6

Utility 16 22 12 8 11 19

IP(1)

subject to 5x1 + 7x2 + 4x3 + 3x4 +4x5 + 6x6 14

xj binary for j = 1 to 6

5

Complete Enumeration

the decision variables.

If there are n binary variables, there are 2n

different ways.

Usual idea: iteratively break the problem in two.

At the first iteration, we consider separately the

case that x1 = 0 and x1 = 1.

problem plus additional constraints.

6

An Enumeration Tree

IP(1)

1

7

An Enumeration Tree

IP(1)

iPad 1

iPad

x1 = 0 x1 = 1

IP(2) 2 3 IP(3)

node 1 in the enumeration tree. We refer to

node 1 as the parent of nodes 2 and 3.

long as you dont mind pruning children.

8

Which of the following is false?

constraint x1 = 1.

taking the best solution from IP(2) and IP(3).

feasible for both IP(2) and IP(3).

9

IP(1)

1

x1 = 0 x1 = 1

IP(2) 2 3 IP(3)

x2 = 0 x2 = 1 x2 = 0 x2 = 1

10

An Enumeration Tree Number of leaves of the

tree: 64.

IP(1) number of leaves is 2n.

x1 = 0 x1 = 1

x2 = 0 x2 = 1 x2 = 0 x2 = 1

x3 = 0 x3 = 1 x3 = 0 x3 = 1 x3 = 0 x3 = 1 x3 = 0 x3 = 1

11

On complete enumeration

solutions per second.

Let n = number of binary variables

Solutions times

n = 30, 1 second

n = 40, 17 minutes

n = 50 11.6 days

n = 60 31 years

n = 70 31,000 years

12

On complete enumeration

Suppose that we could evaluate 1 trillion solutions per

second, and instantaneously eliminate 99.9999999% of

all solutions as not worth considering

Let n = number of binary variables

Solutions times

n = 70, 1 second

n = 80, 17 minutes

n = 90 11.6 days

n = 100 31 years

n = 110 31,000 years

13

Suppose that the number of binary variables is 150.

Suppose that we could evaluate 1 trillion solutions

of an integer program per second.

1. Complete enumeration would take more than

1000 years.

2. We couldnt even solve it in 1000 years if we only

had to enumerate 0.000000001 of the solutions.

3. No matter what algorithm we use for this

problem, it cannot be solved in less than 1000

years.

14

How to solve large integer programs faster

99.99999999999999999999%

of the solutions without

having to evaluate them.

15

Subtrees of an Enumeration Tree

Subtree from

node 2

1

Subtree from

x1 = 0 x1 = 1 node 6

2 3

x2 = 0 x2 = 1 x2 = 0 x2 = 1

4 5 6 7

x3 = 0 x3 = 1 x3 = 0 x3 = 1 x3 = 0 x3 = 1 x3 = 0 x3 = 1

16

The bottom nodes are leaves of the tree.

If we can eliminate an entire subtree in one step,

we can eliminate a fraction of all

complete solutions at in a single step.

1

x1 = 0 x1 = 1

2 3

x2 = 0 x2 = 1 x2 = 0 x2 = 1

4 5 6 7

x3 = 0 x3 = 1 x3 = 0 x3 = 1 x3 = 1 x3 = 0 x3 = 1

17

A simpler problem to work with

Maximize 24 x1 + 2 x2 + 20 x3 + 4 x4

subject to 8 x1 + 1 x2 + 5 x3 + 4 x4 9 IP(1)

xi {0,1} for i = 1 to 4.

to work with. I hope its

OK that we will be using

IP(1) now to mean this

4-variable problem.

18

The entire enumeration tree (16 leaves)

IP(1)

1

x1 = 0 x1 = 1

IP(2) 2 3 IP(3)

x2 = 0 x2 = 1 x2 = 0 x2 = 1

x3 = 0 x3 = 1 x3 = 0 x3 = 1 x3 = 0 x3 = 1 x3 = 0 x3 = 1

19

The entire enumeration tree (16 leaves)

IP(1)

In a branch and bound

1

tree, the nodes

x1 = 0 x1 = 1

represent integer

programs.

IP(2) 2 3 IP(3)

obtained from its parent

node by adding an IP(4) 4 IP(5) 5 IP(6) 6 7 IP(7)

additional constraint. x3 = 0 x3 = 1 x3 = 0 x3 = 1 x3 = 0 x3 = 1 x3 = 0 x3 = 1

obtained from its parent

node IP(2) by adding the

constraint x2 = 0.

20

What is the optimal objective value for IP(4)?

Maximize 24 x1 + 2 x2 + 20 x3 + 4 x4

Original IP

subject to 8 x1 + 1 x2 + 5 x3 + 4 x4 9

xi {0,1} for i = 1 to 4.

A. 24

B. 26

C. 9

21

Eliminating subtrees

IP(1)

We eliminate a subtree if

1

1. We have solved the IP

for the root of the x1 = 0 x1 = 1

subtree or

IP(2)

2. We have proved that 2 3 IP(3)

x2 = 0 x2 = 1 x2 = 0 x2 = 1

root of the subtree

cannot be optimal. IP(4) 4 IP(5) 5 IP(6) 6 7 IP(7)

x3 = 0 x3 = 1 x3 = 0 x3 = 1 x3 = 0 x3 = 1 x3 = 0 x3 = 1

dont need to look at its

children.

22

But how would

you ever solve

one of the IPs?

If we could do

that, wouldnt we Well explain this

just solve the soon. It all has to do

original with our ability to

problem? solve linear

programs.

23

The LP Relaxation of the IP

Maximize 24 x1 + 2 x2 + 20 x3 + 4 x4

subject to 8 x1 + 1 x2 + 5 x3 + 4 x4 9 LP(1)

0 xi 1 for i = 1 to 4.

The LP relaxation of the knapsack

If we drop the

problem can be solved using a greedy

requirements that

algorithm.

variables be

integer, we call it

Think of the objective in terms of

the LP relaxation of

dollars, and consider the constraint as a

the IP.

bound on the weight.

24

Solving this LP relaxation

Maximize 24 x1 + 2 x2 + 20 x3 + 4 x4

subject to 8 x1 + 1 x2 + 5 x3 + 4 x4 9 LP(1)

0 xi 1 for i = 1 to 4.

item 1 2 3 4

value/lb. $3 $2 $4 $1

Opt solution:

Now consider the value per

pound of the four items. Put x3 = 1

items into the knapsack in x1 = 1/2

decreasing order of value per

x2 = 0

pound. What do you get?

x4 = 0

z = 32 25

The LP relaxation of an IP

Maximize 24 x1 + 2 x2 + 20 x3 + 4 x4

subject to 8 x 1 + 1 x 2 + 5 x3 + 4 x 4 9

We get bounds

for each integer

program by

IP(1) xi {0,1} for i = 1 to 4.

solving the LP

relaxations.

LP(j) = the integer programming

I love LPs. relaxation of IP(j).

Maximize 24 x1 + 2 x2 + 20 x3 + 4 x4

subject to 8 x 1 + 1 x 2 + 5 x3 + 4 x4 9

LP(1) 0 xi 1 for i = 1 to 4.

26

This LP relaxation solves the IP.

Maximize 24 x1 + 2 x2 + 20 x3 + 4 x4

Usually, when we

solve the LP, we subject to 8 x 1 + 1 x 2 + 5 x3 + 4 x4 9

get fractional

solutions. But LP(4) x1 = 0, x2 = 0 for i = 1 to 4.

occasionally, we

get a solution that 0 x3 1 0 x4 1

satisfies all of the

integer constraints.

Opt solution for LP(4):

x1 = 0, x2 = 0, x3 = 1, x4 = 1, z = 24.

then it is also optimal for IP(k).

solution is feasible for the IP. There cant possibly be

an IP solution for IP(4) with value better than 24. 27

This LP relaxation also solves the IP.

Maximize 24 x1 + 2 x2 + 20 x3 + 4 x4

subject to 8 x 1 + 1 x 2 + 5 x 3 + 4 x4 9

And occasionally,

the LP relaxation is

infeasible.

LP(15) x1 = 1, x2 = 1, x3 = 1

0 x4 1

In this case, the IP

is also infeasible.

There is no feasible solution for LP(15):

There is no way that the constraint can be satisfied by

fractional values or integer values of x3 and x4.

28

We eliminate a subtree if

1. We have solved the IP for the root of the subtree or

2. We have proved that the IP solution at the root of the

subtree cannot be optimal.

I see that

sometimes

the IP gets

solved, Five slides ago you

almost by Well explain this

said that we could

accident. after the mental

eliminate a node if we

break.

can prove that the

optimal solution for

the IP is not optimal

for the original

problem. How is that

possible?

29

Mental Break

30

The Incumbent Solution

The incumbent is a feasible solution for the IP.

Occasionally, the It is the best solution so far in the B&B search.

algorithm will find

a feasible integer

In the vanilla version of Branch and Bound,

solution. We will

there is no initial incumbent. We need to wait

keep track of the

until an LP relaxation gives a feasible integer

feasible integer

solution.

solution with the

best objective In real versions of Branch and Bound, there

value so far. It is are special subroutines that seek out feasible

called the integer solutions with a large objective. The

incumbent. best of these is the initial incumbent.

Bound come in any

other flavors? I

prefer leafy flavors. 31

Bounds

Maximize 24 x1 + 2 x2 + 20 x3 + 4 x4

dont solve

IP(k) directly.

Instead, we

LP(1) 0 xi 1 for i = 1 to 4.

solve its LP

relaxation. Opt solution for LP(1):

We can use

this to obtain x1 = 1/2, x2 = 0, x3 = 1, x4 = 0, z = 32

bounds.

zIP(j) = optimal value for IP(j).

zLP(1) = 32

32

On computing bounds

Maximize 24 x1 + 2 x2 + 20 x3 + 4 x4

zIP(j) = optimal value

for IP(j). subject to 8 x 1 + 1 x 2 + 5 x 3 + 4 x4 9

IP(1) xi {0,1} for i = 1 to 4.

zLP(j) = optimal value

for LP(j).

Maximize 24 x1 + 2 x2 + 20 x3 + 4 x4

x(j) = optimal solution

subject to 8 x 1 + 1 x 2 + 5 x 3 + 4 x4 9

for LP(j)

LP(1) 0 xi 1 for i = 1 to 4.

But thats really hard. OBSERVATION.

Whats much easier is

to determine zLP(j) for zIP(j) zLP(j) for all j.

any j. We then rely an

an important

observation.

33

Im sorry. But I think I

zoned out for a minute. Im just about to. We can

Have you answered my prune the active node k

question from before the IP(k) if

break? It was about

eliminating subtrees from zLP(k) zI,

IP(k).

where zI is the objective

value of the incumbent.

A node is active if it

has not been pruned

and if LP(k) has not

been solved yet.

34

Pruning (fathoming) a node using bounding

incumbent is

subject to 8 x 1 + 1 x 2 + 5 x 3 + 4 x4 9

x1 = 0 x1 = 1, x2 = 1

LP(2) 0 xj 1 for j = 2, 3, 4 x3 = 0, x4 = 0

zI = 26

x1 = 0, x2 = 1, x3 = 1, x4 = 3/4

zLP(2) = 25.

x1 = 0 x1 = 1

IP(3)

IP(2)

22 3

35

Under which condition can we not

prune active node j from the B&B Tree

for a maximization problem?

IP(j) j

2.

LP(j) has a feasible solution, and zLP(j) > zI

3. LP(j) has a feasible solution, and zLP(j) < zI

4. The solution for LP(j) is feasible for the

original integer program.

36

The branch and bound algorithm in one slide.

zI: incumbent

obj. value

while there is some active nodes do

select an active node

mark j as inactive IP(j) j

Solve LP(j): denote solution as x(j);

Case 1 -- if zLP(j) zI then prune node j;

Case 2 -- if zLP(j) > zI and

if x(j) is feasible for IP(j)

then Incumbent := x(j), and zI := zLP(j);

then prune node j;

Case 3 -- If if zLP(j) > zI and

if x(j) is not feasible for IP(j) then

mark the children of node as active

endwhile

37

1

The following question is about x1 = 1

ANY branch and bound tree in

which node 3 was not pruned.

3

x2 = 0 x2 = 1

4 5

Which of the following is false?

1. ZIP(3) ZIP(4).

solution for IP(3).

and for IP(5)

4. Every feasible solution for IP(3) is feasible or for IP(4)

or IP(5) but not both. 38

Branch and Bound: Node 1

Maximize 24 x1 + 2 x2 + 20 x3 + 4 x4 No incumbent

subject to 8 x 1 + 1 x 2 + 5 x 3 + 4 x4 9

zI = -

0 xj 1 for j = 1, 2, 3, 4

1 x1 = 1/2; x2 = 0,

x3 = 1; x4 = 0

zLP(1) = 32.

39

Branch and Bound: Node 2

Maximize 24 x1 + 2 x2 + 20 x3 + 4 x4 No incumbent

subject to 8 x 1 + 1 x 2 + 5 x 3 + 4 x4 9

zI = -

x1 = 0

0 xj 1 for j = 2, 3, 4

1

x1 = 0; x2 = 1,

x1 = 0 x1 = 1

x3 = 1; x4 = 3/4

IP(2) 2 3 IP(3) zLP(2) = 25.

2

40

Sure. Any active

node can be

You selected selected. Have you noticed

node 2. Would it Sometimes it can that Tom is the

have been OK to make a difference one asking the

select node 3? It in speeding up questions, but

was also active. the algorithm. different people

But thats beyond keep answering

the scope of the them?

lecture.

41

Branch and Bound: Node 3

Maximize 24 x1 + 2 x2 + 20 x3 + 4 x4 No incumbent

subject to 8 x 1 + 1 x 2 + 5 x 3 + 4 x4 9

zI = -

x1 = 1

0 xj 1 for j = 2, 3, 4

Opt solution for LP(3):

IP(1)

1

x1 = 1; x2 = 0,

x1 = 0 x1 = 1

x3 = 1/4; x4 = 0

zLP(3) = 28.

IP(2) 2 33 IP(3)

x2 = 0 x2 = 1

IP(4) 4 IP(5) 5

42

I notice that when you

No. We could branch on any

create nodes 4 and 5, you

variable. If we branched on x4,

branch on variable x2.

then node 4 would correspond to

On one branch, we

the original IP with the additional

require x2 = 0. On the

constraints:

other side, we require

x1 = 0, x4 = 0.

that x2 = 1. Is that always

the way that B&B works?

Branching makes a big

difference in B&B. The best B&B

algorithms use heuristics to

choose the branching variable.

A good choice can lead to a

much faster solution.

43

Branch and Bound: Node 4

Maximize 24 x1 + 2 x2 + 20 x3 + 4 x4 No incumbent

subject to 8 x 1 + 1 x 2 + 5 x 3 + 4 x4 9

zI = -

x1 = 0 , x 2 = 0

0 xj 1 for j = 3, 4

Opt solution for LP(4):

IP(1)

x1 = 0; x2 = 0,

1

x3 = 1; x4 = 1

x1 = 0 x1 = 1

zLP(4) = 24.

IP(2) 2 3 IP(3)

x2 = 0 x2 = 1 x2 = 0 x2 = 1

IP(4) 4

4 IP(5) 5 IP(6) 6 7 IP(7)

44

Branch and Bound: Node 5

Maximize 24 x1 + 2 x2 + 20 x3 + 4 x4

x1 = 0, x2 = 0,

x3 = 1, x4 = 1

subject to 8 x 1 + 1 x 2 + 5 x 3 + 4 x4 9

zI = 24

x1 = 0 , x 2 = 1

Incumbent

0 xj 1 for j = 3, 4

Opt solution for LP(5):

IP(1)

x1 = 0; x2 = 1,

1

x3 = 1; x4 = 3/4

x1 = 0 x1 = 1

zLP(5) = 25.

IP(2) 2 3 IP(3)

x2 = 0 x2 = 1 x2 = 0 x2 = 1

IP(4) 4

4 IP(5) 55 IP(6) 6 7 IP(7)

45

Branch and Bound: Node 6

Maximize 24 x1 + 2 x2 + 20 x3 + 4 x4

x1 = 0, x2 = 0,

x3 = 1, x4 = 1

subject to 8 x 1 + 1 x 2 + 5 x 3 + 4 x4 9

zI = 24

x1 = 1 , x2 = 0

Incumbent

0 xj 1 for j = 3, 4

Opt solution for LP(6):

IP(1)

1 x1 = 1; x2 = 0,

x1 = 0 x1 = 1 x3 = 1/5; x4 = 0

IP(2)

zLP(6) = 28.

2 3 IP(3)

x2 = 0 x2 = 1 x2 = 0 x2 = 1

5

IP(4) 4

4

IP(5) IP(6)

66 7 IP(7)

x3 = 0 x3 = 1

46

Branch and Bound: Node 7

Maximize 24 x1 + 2 x2 + 20 x3 + 4 x4

x1 = 0, x2 = 0,

x3 = 1, x4 = 1

subject to 8 x 1 + 1 x 2 + 5 x 3 + 4 x4 9

zI = 24

x1 = 1 , x2 = 1

Incumbent

0 xj 1 for j = 3, 4

Opt solution for LP(7):

IP(1)

1 x1 = 1; x2 = 1,

x1 = 0 x1 = 1 x3 = 0; x4 = 0

IP(2)

zLP(7) = 26

2 3 IP(3)

x2 = 0 x2 = 1 x2 = 0 x2 = 1

IP(4) 4

4

IP(5) 5 IP(6) 6 77 IP(7)

x3 = 0 x3 = 1 x3 = 0 x3 = 1

47

Branch and Bound: Node 8

Maximize 24 x1 + 2 x2 + 20 x3 + 4 x4

x1 = 1,

0, x2 = 1,

0,

x3 = 0,

1, x4 = 0

1

subject to 8 x 1 + 1 x 2 + 5 x 3 + 4 x4 9

zI = 26

24

x1 = 0 , x2 = 1, x3 = 0

Incumbent

0 x4 1

Opt solution for LP(8):

IP(1)

1 x1 = 0; x2 = 1,

x1 = 0 x1 = 1 x3 = 0; x4 = 1

IP(2)

zLP(8) = 6

2 3 IP(3)

x2 = 0 x2 = 1 x2 = 0 x2 = 1

IP(4) 4

4

IP(5) 5 IP(6) 6 77 IP(7)

x3 = 0 x3 = 1 x3 = 0 x3 = 1

48

The labels are just

for convenience.

Why are the When node 4 was

children of node fathomed, we didnt

5 are labeled 8 need to create its

and 9? children. So, the How does he

Previously, they labels 8 and 9 could know about

were labeled 10 be used for the node 4? He

and 11? children of node 5. wasnt even

here for that

slide.

49

Branch and Bound: Node 9

Maximize 24 x1 + 2 x2 + 20 x3 + 4 x4

x1 = 1,

0, x2 = 1,

0,

x3 = 0,

1, x4 = 0

1

subject to 8 x 1 + 1 x 2 + 5 x 3 + 4 x4 9

zI = 26

24

x1 = 0 , x2 = 1, x3 = 1

Incumbent

0 x4 1

Opt solution for LP(9):

IP(1)

1 x1 = 0; x2 = 1,

x1 = 0 x1 = 1 x3 = 1; x4 = 3/4

IP(2)

zLP(9) = 25

2 3 IP(3)

x2 = 0 x2 = 1 x2 = 0 x2 = 1

IP(4) 4

4

IP(5) 5 IP(6) 6 77 IP(7)

x3 = 0 x3 = 1 x3 = 0 x3 = 1

8 9

50

Branch and Bound: Node 10

Maximize 24 x1 + 2 x2 + 20 x3 + 4 x4

x1 = 1,

0, x2 = 1,

0,

x3 = 0,

1, x4 = 0

1

subject to 8 x 1 + 1 x 2 + 5 x 3 + 4 x4 9

zI = 26

24

x1 = 1 , x2 = 0, x3 = 0

Incumbent

0 x4 1

Opt solution for LP(10):

IP(1)

1 x1 = 1; x2 = 0,

x1 = 0 x1 = 1 x3 = 0; x4 = 1/4

IP(2)

zLP(10) = 25

2 3 IP(3)

x2 = 0 x2 = 1 x2 = 0 x2 = 1

IP(4) 4

4

IP(5) 5 IP(6) 6 77 IP(7)

x3 = 0 x3 = 1 x3 = 0 x3 = 1

8 9 10

51

Branch and Bound: Node 11

Maximize 24 x1 + 2 x2 + 20 x3 + 4 x4

x1 = 1,

0, x2 = 1,

0,

x3 = 0,

1, x4 = 0

1

subject to 8 x 1 + 1 x 2 + 5 x 3 + 4 x4 9

zI = 26

24

x1 = 1 , x2 = 0, x3 = 1

Incumbent

0 x4 1

Opt solution for LP(11):

IP(1)

x1 = 0 x1 = 1

IP(2) 2 3 IP(3)

x2 = 0 x2 = 1 x2 = 0 x2 = 1

IP(4) 4

4

IP(5) 5 IP(6) 6 77 IP(7)

x3 = 0 x3 = 1 x3 = 0 x3 = 1

8 9 10 11

52

Branch and Bound: the end

Maximize 24 x1 + 2 x2 + 20 x3 + 4 x4

x1 = 1,

0, x2 = 1,

0,

x3 = 0,

1, x4 = 0

1

subject to 8 x 1 + 1 x 2 + 5 x 3 + 4 x4 9

zI = 26

24

x1 = 1 , x2 = 0, x3 = 1

Incumbent

0 x4 1

Opt solution for LP(11):

IP(1)

1

There is no feasible solution

x1 = 0 x1 = 1

IP(2) 2 3 IP(3)

x2 = 0 x2 = 1 x2 = 0 x2 = 1 The end

IP(4) 4

4

IP(5)

x3 = 0

5 IP(6)

x3 = 1 x3 = 0

6

x3 = 1

77 IP(7)

of B&B

8 9 10 11

53

Lessons Learned

Branch and Bound can speed up the search

Only 11 nodes (LPs) out of 31 were evaluated.

either because the IP at the node was solved, or

else because the IP solution cannot possibly be

optimum.

the running time) if there are more than 100

variables. (Even 50 variables would take too long.)

and Bound even faster.

54

There are several ways. One way is for the

B&B algorithm to have heuristics that

OK. Ill bite (so intelligently choose the best variable to

to speak). How branch on.

can one speed

up Branch and

Another technique is to use rounding.

Bound?

Ella explains this on the next slide.

bounds by adding valid inequalities. Ella

explains this two slides from now. This is

what the next lecture is all about.

55

Rounding down to improve bounds

If all cost coefficients of a maximization problem are

integer valued, then the optimal objective value (for the

IP) is integer. And zIP(j) zLP(j).

x1 = 1; x2 = 1/2,

subject to 2 x 1 + 2 x2 + 2 x3 + 2 x4 3

x3 = 0; x4 = 0

xi {0,1} for i = 1 to 4.

zLP = 5.5

So, zIP 5.

56

Adding constraints to improve bounds

satisfied by all integer solutions of an IP (but

possibly not the linear solutions of its LP

relaxation.)

bound.

the next slide. It is the focus of

the next lecture.

57

Max 4 x1 + 3 x2 + 3 x3 + 3 x4 Opt LP Solution

s.t. 2 x1 + 2 x2 + 2 x3 + 2 x4 3 A x1 = 1; x2 = 1/2,

x3 = 0; x4 = 0

xi {0,1} for i = 1 to 4.

zLP = 5.5

Max 4 x 1 + 3 x 2 + 3 x 3 + 3 x4

s.t. x1 + x2 + x3 + x4 1.5 B

xi {0,1} for i = 1 to 4.

s.t. x 1 + x2 + x 3 + x 4 1 C x1 = 1; x2 = 0,

x3 = 0; x4 = 0

xi {0,1} for i = 1 to 4.

zLP = 4

Summary

Making Branch and Bound work well in practice

requires lots of good ideas.

ideas in any detail.

to add valid inequalities, or improve the

inequalities. We cover this in the next lecture.

59

MIT OpenCourseWare

http://ocw.mit.edu

Spring 2013

For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use, visit: http://ocw.mit.edu/terms.

- Web Content Extraction A Heuristic ApproachUploaded byijcsis
- Computer Network - Assignment 03 SolutionUploaded byu_niku_l
- avltreefsdsUploaded byapi-3759413
- branch bound algorithm 0 1 mixed integer choice constraintsUploaded byapi-3862589
- BENSON Bi Criteria Linear ProgrammingUploaded byHằng Bùi
- KnowledgeUploaded byAlexander R. Povolotsky
- Binary TreeUploaded byaliasadsahu9304
- 2010INFOCOM-[Hu]-A Balanced Consistency Maintainence Protocol for Structured P2P SystemsUploaded byLei Jiang
- A Distributed Algorithm for Finding All Best Swap Edges of a Minimum Diameter Spanning Tree Blog.ocularsystems.inUploaded byocularsystems
- Lecture Knapsack BBUploaded byAlex Chen
- CS-62- jun 2007Uploaded bySunny Kumar
- ds paperUploaded byDinesh Kumar
- Networking AccafawimeneUploaded bysubtlecse1
- 00117239Uploaded byajmalhussain7676
- QBUploaded byManikandan Thangavelu
- catia materiales compuestosUploaded byMAX
- r12featurespresentation-inventorymanagement-120213032832-phpapp02Uploaded byVikram Reddy
- Spray WaitUploaded byraghavakesha
- AbbUploaded byAdrián Muñoz Moreno
- cs-8Uploaded byMahmoudKhedr
- CCB4333=lectureSet8 (1)Uploaded byVarsheta Sellappah
- All Questions IndexUploaded byVidwan Raj
- DSA.pdfUploaded byMaajith Marzook
- Introduction to Data StructuresUploaded bynv
- chap002tn- advanced operations management for competitive advantageUploaded byHenna.B
- bender.pdfUploaded byGirish Raguvir
- Lab06 HandoutUploaded byBatman
- 07-MILP-I_handout.pdfUploaded byNestor Ricardo Chigne Trelles
- Ma 30087Uploaded bysalim
- optimizationUploaded bySalim Boulkroune

- New Business StrategyUploaded byShashank Singla
- MIT15_053S13_lec18.pdfUploaded byShashank Singla
- MIT15_053S13_lec19.pdfUploaded byShashank Singla
- MIT15_053S13_lec16.pdfUploaded byShashank Singla
- MIT15_053S13_lec2Uploaded byShashank Singla
- MIT15_053S13_lec9.pdfUploaded byShashank Singla
- MIT15_053S13_lec15.pdfUploaded byShashank Singla
- MIT15_053S13_lec14.pdfUploaded byShashank Singla
- MIT15_053S13_lec8.pdfUploaded byShashank Singla
- MIT15_053S13_lec13.pdfUploaded byShashank Singla
- MIT15_053S13_lec17.pdfUploaded byShashank Singla
- MIT15_053S13_lec7.pdfUploaded byShashank Singla
- MIT15_053S13_lec10.pdfUploaded byShashank Singla
- MIT15_053S13_lec6.pdfUploaded byShashank Singla
- MIT15_053S13_lec11.pdfUploaded byShashank Singla
- MIT15_053S13_lec1.pdfUploaded byShashank Singla
- MIT15_053S13_lec3.pdfUploaded byShashank Singla
- MIT15_053S13_lec5.pdfUploaded byShashank Singla
- MIT15_053S13_lec4.pdfUploaded byShashank Singla
- Lscm IndiaUploaded byShashank Singla
- Corporate ValuationUploaded byShashank Singla

- Digital Design « Nityanand's WeblogUploaded byvlsijp
- subsetSumNPCompleteness(1)Uploaded bySachin Nagpal
- Curs Tp 6Uploaded byBugnaru Gelu
- 10 Block EncodingUploaded byRomana Shan
- all-hwexUploaded byHai S Le
- The Ring programming language version 1.4.1 book - Part 23 of 31Uploaded byMahmoud Samir Fayed
- API_I_C6Uploaded byvozoscribd
- EntropyUploaded byAnonymous Th1S33
- cnfsatUploaded byjoaopaulolemos
- CaseStudyWithProbabilisticModelsUploaded bySmita Bhutada
- MathMethodsHW4Uploaded byBimersha Gautam
- sol1.pdfUploaded byindoexchange
- Gauss Quadrature Rules Involving Some Non Classical Weight FunctionsUploaded bynomadic_justice
- Lecture 03Uploaded byKibrom Haftu
- Swift c Sharp PosterUploaded byilias
- java programsUploaded byArka Mitra
- tut04Uploaded byDayton Good Kush Allen
- Ieee 754 NotesUploaded byMohsin Bhat
- jhtp7_SSM_17Uploaded byFelipe Robles
- Using Linear Algebra to Solve Graph ProblemsUploaded byGo Bluth
- DM2_automata1Uploaded bylongpro2000
- Treap_reportUploaded byitzmanohar_bhat
- 42 45 SeqClustering.psUploaded bynpnbkck
- The Ring programming language version 1.4 book - Part 23 of 30Uploaded byMahmoud Samir Fayed
- ds adtUploaded byjayaprabamca
- static Huffman coding term paperUploaded byRavish Nirvan
- a STAR ALGOUploaded byreshu_holly
- Lecture Plan - AIUploaded byvaibhav2510
- H2007_03_Week9PredicateUploaded byGurjar Devyani
- DSP Question Bank B. TechUploaded bySayan Datta

## Much more than documents.

Discover everything Scribd has to offer, including books and audiobooks from major publishers.

Cancel anytime.