-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 16
Handle finitely many arbitrary convex constraints with DFO-LS #18
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Handle finitely many arbitrary convex constraints with DFO-LS #18
Conversation
|
I think for the model increase error, the safest thing would be to change the error output to "model increase or multiple constraints active" (rather than just model increase), to alert the user that there is a valid reason for this output |
|
I've had a look at the documentation and example code, and have a couple of suggestions:
A question that has (sadly) only just occurred to me: what do you expect to happen if you feed in inconsistent projections (i.e. projections to non-intersecting sets)? I assume Dykstra will fail to find a good location for x0, but what does DFO-LS return in this case? Also a note for later, that we should add suitable citations to our paper once we have an arXiv link. I also need to create a contributors page to make sure you get suitable credit! |
|
I believe I have updated the docs etc with all those suggestions now. Regarding what happens when the intersection of sets is empty, the output of DFO-LS is unpredictable. Dykstra assumes the intersection is non-empty. |
|
Thanks Matthew! For reference, I have now created release 1.3, which should be able to be downloaded using pip now. I made some small changes:
|
TODO
Note 1 [See update below]
Often get model increase error when optimal point is where two constraints intersect. But is at correct solution, so not really an error. The current example for arbitrary constraints has this problem. In the docs I edited the output to what it should look like. That is, instead of showing error, it shows success.
Update in response to Note 1
Now when using multiple projections and get a model increase error from our TR subproblem, output something like the following: