skip to main content
research-article

Stochastic approximation algorithms for constrained optimization via simulation

Published:04 February 2011Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

We develop four algorithms for simulation-based optimization under multiple inequality constraints. Both the cost and the constraint functions are considered to be long-run averages of certain state-dependent single-stage functions. We pose the problem in the simulation optimization framework by using the Lagrange multiplier method. Two of our algorithms estimate only the gradient of the Lagrangian, while the other two estimate both the gradient and the Hessian of it. In the process, we also develop various new estimators for the gradient and Hessian. All our algorithms use two simulations each. Two of these algorithms are based on the smoothed functional (SF) technique, while the other two are based on the simultaneous perturbation stochastic approximation (SPSA) method. We prove the convergence of our algorithms and show numerical experiments on a setting involving an open Jackson network. The Newton-based SF algorithm is seen to show the best overall performance.

References

  1. Bertsekas, D. P. and Tsitsiklis, J. N. 1996. Neuro-Dynamic Programming. Athena Scientific, Belmont, MA. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Bhatnagar, S. 2005. Adaptive multivariate three-timescale stochastic approximation algorithms for simulation based optimization. ACM Trans. Model. Comput. Simul. 15, 1, 74--107. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Bhatnagar, S. 2007. Adaptive Newton-based smoothed functional algorithms for simulation optimization. ACM Trans. Model. Comput. Simul. 18, 1, 27--62. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Bhatnagar, S. 2010. An actor-critic algorithm with function approximation for discounted cost constrained Markov decision processes. Syst. Control Lett. 59, 760--766.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Bhatnagar, S. and Borkar, V. S. 1998. A two time scale stochastic approximation scheme for simulation based parametric optimization. Prob. Eng. Inf. Sci. 12, 519--531.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Bhatnagar, S. and Borkar, V. S. 2003. Multiscale chaotic SPSA and smoothed functional algorithms for simulation optimization. Simulation 79, 10, 568--580.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Bhatnagar, S., Fu, M. C., Marcus, S. I., and Bhatnagar, S. 2001. Two timescale algorithms for simulation optimization of hidden Markov models. IIE Trans. 33, 3, 245--258.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Borkar, V. S. 1997. Stochastic approximation with two timescales. Syst. Control Lett. 29, 291--294. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Borkar, V. S. 2005. An actor-critic algorithm for constrained Markov decision processes. Syst. Control Lett. 54, 207--213.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Brandiere, O. 1998. Some pathological traps for stochastic approximation. SIAM J. Control Optim. 36, 1293--1314. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Cassandras, C. G. 1993. Discrete Event Systems: Modeling and Performance Analysis. Aksen Associates, Boston, MA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Chen, H. F., Duncan, T. E., and Pasik-Duncan, B. 1999. A Kiefer-Wolfowitz algorithm with randomized differences. IEEE Trans. Auto. Cont. 44, 3, 442--453.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Hirsch, M. W. 1989. Convergent activation dynamics in continuous time networks. Neural Netw. 2, 331--349. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Ho, Y. C. and Cao, X. R. 1991. Perturbation Analysis of Discrete Event Dynamical Systems. Kluwer, Boston.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Katkovnik, V. Y. and Kulchitsky, Y. 1972. Convergence of a class of random search algorithms. Autom. Remote Control 8, 1321--1326.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Kushner, H. J. and Yin, G. G. 1997. Stochastic Approximation Algorithms and Applications. Springer, Berlin.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Mas-Colell, A., Whinston, M. D., and Green, J. R. 1995. Microeconomic Theory. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Meyn, S. P. and Tweedie, R. L. 1993. Markov Chains and Stochastic Stability. (2nd ed.), Springer, Berlin.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Sadegh, P. 1997. Constrained optimization via stochastic approximation with a simultaneous perturbation gradient approximation. Automatica 33, 889--892. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Spall, J. C. 1992. Multivariate stochastic approximation using a simultaneous perturbation gradient approximation. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 37, 3, 332--341.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Spall, J. C. 2000. Adaptive stochastic approximation by the simultaneous perturbation method. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 45, 1839--1853.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Styblinski, M. A. and Tang, T.-S. 1990. Experiments in nonconvex optimization: Stochastic approximation with function smoothing and simulated annealing. Neural Netw. 3, 467--483. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Tadic, V. B., Doucet, A., and Singh, S. 2003. Two time-scale stochastic approximation for constrained stochastic optimization and constrained Markov decision problems. In Proceedings of the American Control Conference, 4736--4741.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Wang, I.-J. and Spall, J. C. 2008. Stochastic optimization with inequality constraints using simultaneous perturbations and penalty functions. Int. J. Control 81, 8, 1232--1238.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Whitney, J. E. and Hill, S. D. 2001. Constrained optimization over discrete sets via SPSA with application to non-separable resource allocation. In Proceedings of the Winter Simulation Conference, 313--317. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Stochastic approximation algorithms for constrained optimization via simulation

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in

      Full Access

      • Published in

        cover image ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation
        ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation  Volume 21, Issue 3
        March 2011
        141 pages
        ISSN:1049-3301
        EISSN:1558-1195
        DOI:10.1145/1921598
        Issue’s Table of Contents

        Copyright © 2011 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 4 February 2011
        • Revised: 1 August 2010
        • Accepted: 1 August 2010
        • Received: 1 May 2009
        Published in tomacs Volume 21, Issue 3

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader