Abstract
Decomposition of large matrix inequalities for matrices with chordal sparsity graph has been recently used by Kojima et al. (Math Program 129(1):33–68, 2011) to reduce problem size of large scale semidefinite optimization (SDO) problems and thus increase efficiency of standard SDO software. A by-product of such a decomposition is the introduction of new dense small-size matrix variables. We will show that for arrow type matrices satisfying suitable assumptions, the additional matrix variables have rank one and can thus be replaced by vector variables of the same dimensions. This leads to significant improvement in efficiency of standard SDO software. We will apply this idea to the problem of topology optimization formulated as a large scale linear semidefinite optimization problem. Numerical examples will demonstrate tremendous speed-up in the solution of the decomposed problems, as compared to the original large scale problem. In our numerical example the decomposed problems exhibit linear growth in complexity, compared to the more than cubic growth in the original problem formulation. We will also give a connection of our approach to the standard theory of domain decomposition and show that the additional vector variables are outcomes of the corresponding discrete Steklov–Poincaré operators.
Highlights
General purpose algorithms and software for semidefinite optimization (SDO) are dominated by interior point and barrier type methods
For problems with large matrix inequalities, it is often the first bottleneck that dominates the CPU time and that prevents the user from solving large scale problems
The group developed a preprocessing software for semidefinite optimization named SparseCoLO [2] that performs the decomposition of matrix constraints automatically
Summary
General purpose algorithms and software for semidefinite optimization (SDO) are dominated by interior point and barrier type methods Any such software exhibits two bottlenecks regarding computational complexity, and CPU time, and memory requirements. The second goal is to apply both decomposition techniques to the topology optimization problem. This problem arises from finite element discretization of a partial differential equation. If A ∈ Sn(Ns) its restriction ( A)Ns is a dense matrix This is not true for A ∈ Sn(Gs), the sparsity pattern of which is given by the set of edges Es. In particular, Sn(Gs) = Sn(Ns) if and only if Gs is a maximal clique. For functions from Rd → R we will use bold italics (such as u or u(ξ )), while for vectors resulting from finite element discretization of these functions, we will use the same symbol but in italics (e.g. u ∈ Rn)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.