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
We discussed this with @frapac this week. Given 0 <= f ⟂ g >= 0, there are two possibilities: add a constraint that the product is zero or add one that the product is nonpositive. According to @frapac , the latter is more appropriate if the solver is interior point. So it's unclear which one should be added by default but we can start by creating a bridge (probably parametrized by a Bool indicating which approach is employed).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Rather than the w' (x - l) <= 0 type constraint, we should add a disaggregated [i in 1:n], w[i] * (x[i] - l[i]) <= 0
Something like this:
F(x) perp l <= x <= u
y == F(x)
if isfinite(l) && isfinite(u)
(x - l) * y <= 0
(x - u) * y <= 0
elseif isfinite(l)
(x - l) * y <= 0
y >= 0
elseif isfinite(u)
(x - u) * y <= 0
y <= 0
end
odow
linked a pull request
Dec 12, 2024
that will
close
this issue
We discussed this with @frapac this week. Given
0 <= f ⟂ g >= 0
, there are two possibilities: add a constraint that the product is zero or add one that the product is nonpositive. According to @frapac , the latter is more appropriate if the solver is interior point. So it's unclear which one should be added by default but we can start by creating a bridge (probably parametrized by aBool
indicating which approach is employed).The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: