Pith. sign in

REVIEW

A Comparison of the Embedding Method to Multi-Parametric Programming, Mixed-Integer Programming, Gradient-Descent, and Hybrid Minimum Principle Based Methods

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1203.3341 v7 pith:Z4PXXT43 submitted 2012-03-15 math.OC cs.SYeess.SY

A Comparison of the Embedding Method to Multi-Parametric Programming, Mixed-Integer Programming, Gradient-Descent, and Hybrid Minimum Principle Based Methods

classification math.OC cs.SYeess.SY
keywords embeddingprogrammingapproachsolutionhybridmethodsautonomouscontrol
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

In recent years, the embedding approach for solving switched optimal control problems has been developed in a series of papers. However, the embedding approach, which advantageously converts the hybrid optimal control problem to a classical nonlinear optimization, has not been extensively compared to alternative solution approaches. The goal of this paper is thus to compare the embedding approach to multi-parametric programming, mixed-integer programming (e.g., CPLEX), and gradient-descent based methods in the context of five recently published examples: a spring-mass system, moving-target tracking for a mobile robot, two-tank filling, DC-DC boost converter, and skid-steered vehicle. A sixth example, an autonomous switched 11-region linear system, is used to compare a hybrid minimum principle method and traditional numerical programming. For a given performance index for each case, cost and solution times are presented. It is shown that there are numerical advantages of the embedding approach: lower performance index cost (except in some instances when autonomous switches are present), generally faster solution time, and convergence to a solution when other methods may fail. In addition, the embedding method requires no ad hoc assumptions (e.g., predetermined mode sequences) or specialized control models. Theoretical advantages of the embedding approach over the other methods are also described: guaranteed existence of a solution under mild conditions, convexity of the embedded hybrid optimization problem (under the customary conditions on the performance index), solvability with traditional techniques (e.g., sequential quadratic programming) avoiding the combinatorial complexity in the number of modes/discrete variables of mixed-integer programming, applicability to affine nonlinear systems, and no need to explicitly assign discrete/mode variables to autonomous switches.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.