You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Hi. I wonder whether it is possible to add the upper bound constraints, i.e., gps<=fmax, which are opposite to the lower bound constraints, i.e., gps>=fmin. It seems to be possible to add the upper bound constraints to the "comput_safe_set" functioon when lipschitz constant L is infinite.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi. I wonder whether it is possible to add the upper bound constraints, i.e., gps<=fmax, which are opposite to the lower bound constraints, i.e., gps>=fmin. It seems to be possible to add the upper bound constraints to the "comput_safe_set" functioon when lipschitz constant L is infinite.
Sorry for the late reply - sure, there's nothing that stops you from doing that. However, it's easy to already do this in the current format. Rather than a constraint f(x) <= fmax you can simply model -f(x) with a GP instead and have a constraint -f(x) >= -fmax.
Hi. I wonder whether it is possible to add the upper bound constraints, i.e., gps<=fmax, which are opposite to the lower bound constraints, i.e., gps>=fmin. It seems to be possible to add the upper bound constraints to the "comput_safe_set" functioon when lipschitz constant L is infinite.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: