4.6 Article

Bounding convex relaxations of process models from below by tractable black-box sampling

Journal

COMPUTERS & CHEMICAL ENGINEERING
Volume 153, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.compchemeng.2021.107413

Keywords

Convex relaxations; Black-box sampling; Derivative-free methods; Global optimization; Subgradients

Funding

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) [RGPIN-2017-05944]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This article demonstrates that useful and accurate affine underestimators and lower bounds of convex relaxations can be generated tractably just by black-box sampling, without the need for additional assumptions or computation of subgradients or gradients. Variants of these methods are presented to address numerical error or noise in the sampling process.
Several chemical engineering applications demand global optimization of nonconvex process models, including safety verification and determination of thermodynamic equilibria. Methods for deterministic global optimization typically generate crucial bounding information by minimizing convex relaxations of the process model. However, gradients or subgradients of these convex relaxations may be unavailable in practice for several reasons, which may hinder computation of this bounding information. This article shows that useful, correct affine underestimators and lower bounds of convex relaxations may be generated tractably just by black-box sampling. No additional assumptions are required, and no subgradients or gradients must be computed at any point. Variants of these methods are presented to account for numerical error or noise in the sampling procedure. Several numerical examples are presented for illustration, including application of the new sampling-based underestimators in global optimization problems. (c) 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available