0 0 4 4

max 1 2 3 4 28
x1 x2 x3 x4
1 2 2 3 20
2 1 3 2 20

Constraints
Final Shadow Constraint
Cell Name Value Price R.H. Side
$G$5 20 1.2 20
$G$6 20 0.2 20

Variable Cells
Final Reduced Objective
Cell Name Value Cost Coefficient
$C$2 0 -0.6 1
$D$2 0 -0.6 2
$E$2 4 0 3
$F$2 4 0 4

yes optimal solution is unique as

x1, x2 are NBV and have non zero value of relative profit shown in reduced cost column a
s1 , s2 are NBV and have non zero value of relative profit shown in shadow price column.
 leq 20
leq 20

Allowable Allowable
Increase Decrease
10 6.66666667 if 1st constraint is increased by 1 unit, the value of objective function will increase by 1.2
10 6.66666667 if 2nd constraint is increased by 1 unit, the value of objective function will increase by 0.2

Allowable Allowable
Increase Decrease
0.6 1E+030 if we increase the x1 coefficient in the objective function by 0.6 then in optimal solution w
0.6 1E+030 if we increase the x2 coefficient in the objective function by 0.6 then in optimal solution w
3 0.33333333
0.5 0.75

t shown in reduced cost column and

t shown in shadow price column.
ctive function will increase by 1.2 units
ective function will increase by 0.2 units

n by 0.6 then in optimal solution we will get positive value of x1

n by 0.6 then in optimal solution we will get positive value of x2
 1 3 0 0
min 3 1 1 1 6
x1 x2 x3 x4
-2 2 1 0 4
3 1 0 1 6

Variable Cells
Final Reduced Objective
Cell Name Value Cost Coefficient
$C$2 1 0 3
$D$2 3 0 1
$E$2 0 1 1
$F$2 0 0 1

Constraints
Final Shadow Constraint
Cell Name Value Price R.H. Side
$G$5 4 0 4
$G$6 6 1 6
 0 2 0
3 1 1
x1 x2 x3
= 4 -2 2 1
= 6 3 1 0

Allowable Allowable
Increase Decrease yes alternate optimal solution exist as
0 8 x4 is a NBV and have zero value of relative profit shown in reduced cost colu
0 1E+030 and also the slope of objective function line and constraint 2 is same.
1E+030 1 Therefore, we can say that this system of equation has multiple optimum so
1E+030 0
so converting x4 into BV and x1 in NBV
put x1,x3 = 0 in constraints to get value of x2,x4
Allowable Allowable hence alternate optimal solution is
Increase Decrease (x1,x2,x3,x4)=(0,2,0,4)
8 8
1E+030 4
 4
1 6
x4
0 4= 4
1 6= 6

profit shown in reduced cost column

e and constraint 2 is same.
equation has multiple optimum solutions and has alternate optimum solutions.
 30 50 40 0 0
min 6 3 4 100000 100000
x1 x2 x3 a1 a2
1 0 0 1 0
0 1 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 1
1 1 1 0 0

result are in both the cases

 0 30 50
100000 490 6 3
a3 x1 x2
0 30 geq 30 1 0
0 50 leq 50 0 1
0 40 geq 20 0 0
1 120 = 120 1 1

sult are in both the cases

 40
4 490
x3
0 30 geq 30
0 50 leq 50
1 40 geq 20
1 120 = 120
 0 4 0 12 0
min 0 0 0 0 1
x1 x2 x3 x4 a1
1 1 1 1 0
3 6 1 -2 0
0 1 1

0 4 9.33333333 16.6666667
max 3 4 2 0 34.6666667
x1 x2 x3 x4
1 1 1 1 30
3 6 1 -2 0
0 1 4
 0

16 leq 30
0 leq 0
4 geq 4

leq 30
leq 0
geq 4
 1000 1000 0
1 2 0 3000
max x1 x2 x3
-2 1 1 -1000 leq
-1 1 -1 0 leq

put x1=1000 and x2=1000

2
1
primal
1 0 0.5
min -2 -3 -1 -2.5
x1 x2 x3
1 2 1 leq
-1 -1 -1.5 leq
1 -1 2 2 leq

Dual
1.5 0 0.5
max -1 -2 -2 -2.5
y1 y2 y3
-1 1 -1 -2 leq
-2 -1 -3.5 leq
1 -2 -1 leq

as u2=.5 hence x2=0

y1=1.5 s1=0 x1=1
y3=.5 s3=0 x3=.5
1
2
2

-2
-3
-1