Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Sample-path optimization of convex stochastic performance functions

  • Published:
Mathematical Programming Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper we propose a method for optimizing convex performance functions in stochastic systems. These functions can include expected performance in static systems and steady-state performance in discrete-event dynamic systems; they may be nonsmooth. The method is closely related to retrospective simulation optimization; it appears to overcome some limitations of stochastic approximation, which is often applied to such problems. We explain the method and give computational results for two classes of problems: tandem production lines with up to 50 machines, and stochastic PERT (Program Evaluation and Review Technique) problems with up to 70 nodes and 110 arcs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. H. Attouch,Variational Convergence for Functions and Operators (Pitman, Boston, MA, 1984).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. S.P. Bradley, A.C. Hax, and T.L. Magnanti,Applied Mathematical Programming (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1977).

    Google Scholar 

  3. R. Correa and C. Lemaréchal, “Convergence of some algorithms for convex minimization”,Mathematical Programming 62 (1993) 261–275.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Y.M. Ermoliev and A.A. Gaivoronski, “Stochastic quasigradient methods for optimization of discrete event systems”,Annals of Operations Research 39 (1992) 1–39.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. B.-R. Fu, “Modeling and analysis of discrete tandem production lines using continuous flow models”, Ph.D. Dissertation (Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison (Madison, WI, 1996).

    Google Scholar 

  6. A.A. Gaivoronski, “Interactive program SQG-PC for solving stochastic programming problems on IBM PC/XT/AT compatibles, user guide”, Working Paper WP-88-11, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (Laxenburg, Austria, 1988).

    Google Scholar 

  7. A.A. Gaivoronski, E. Messina, and A. Sciomachen, “A statistical generalized programming algorithm for stochastic optimization problems”,Annals of Operations Research 58 (1995) 297–321.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. A.A. Gaivoronski and L. Nazareth, “Combining generalized programming and sampling techniques for stochastic programs with recourse”, in: G. Dantzig and P. Glynn, eds.,Resource Planning under Uncertainty for Electric Power Systems (Stanford University, 1989).

  9. S.B. Gershwin and I.C. Schick, “Continuous model of an unreliable two-stage material flow system with a finite interstage buffer”, Technical Report LIDS-R-1039, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (Cambridge, MA, 1980).

    Google Scholar 

  10. S.B. Gershwin and I.C. Schick, “Modeling and analysis of three-stage transfer lines with unreliable machines and finite buffers”,Operations Research 31 (1983) 354–380.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. P. Glasserman,Gradient Estimation Via Perturbation Analysis (Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA, 1991).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. P.W. Glynn, “Likelihood ratio gradient estimation: an overview”, in:Proceedings of the 1987 Winter Simulation Conference (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, 1987), pp. 366–374.

    Google Scholar 

  13. P.W. Glynn, “Optimization of stochastic systems via simulation”, in:Proceedings of the 1989 Winter Simulation Conference (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, 1989), pp. 90–105.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. K. Healy and L.W. Schruben, “Retrospective simulation response optimization”.Proceedings of the 1991 Winter Simulation Conference (1991) 901–907.

  15. M. Held, P. Wolfe, and H.P. Crowder, “Validation of subgradient optimization”,Mathematical Programming 6 (1974) 62–88.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  16. J.L. Higle and S. Sen, “Statistical verification of optimality conditions for stochastic programs with recourse”,Annals of Operations Research 30 (1991) pp. 215–240.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. J.L. Higle and S. Sen, “Stochastic decomposition: an algorithm for two-stage linear programs with recourse”,Mathematics of Operations Research 16 (1991) pp. 650–669.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Y.C. Ho, “Performance evaluation and perturbation analysis of discrete event dynamic systems”,IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 32 (1987) 563–572.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Y.C. Ho and X.R. Cao,Perturbation Analysis of Discrete Event Dynamic Systems (Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA 1991).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. J.-Q. Hu, “Convexity of sample path performance and strong consistency of infinitesimal perturbation analysis estimates”,IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 37 (1992) 258–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. P. Kall, “Approximation to optimization problems: an elementary review”,Mathematics of Operations Research 11 (1986) 9–18.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  22. K.C. Kiwiel, “Proximity control in bundle methods for convex nondifferentiable minimization”,Mathematical Programming 46 (1990) 105–122.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  23. P. L'Ecuyer, “Efficient and portable combined random number generators”,Communications of the ACM 31 (1988) 742–774.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  24. P. L'Ecuyer and P.W. Glynn, “Stochastic optimization by simulation: convergence proofs for the GI/G/1 queue in steady state”,Management Science 40 (1994) 1562–1578.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. P. L'Ecuyer, N. Giroux and P.W. Glynn, “Stochastic optimization by simulation: numerical experiments with the M/M/I queue in steady state”,Management Science 40 (1994) 1245–1261.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  26. D.G. Malcolm, J.H. Roseboom, C.E. Clark and W. Fazar, “Application of a technique for research and development program evaluation”,Operations Research 7 (1959) 646–669.

    Google Scholar 

  27. M.S. Meketon, “A tutorial on optimization in simulations”, Unpublished tutorial presented at the 1983 Winter Simulation Conference.

  28. A. Mongalo and J. Lee, “A comparative study of methods for probabilistic project scheduling”,Computers in Industrial Engineering 19 (1990) 505–509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. G.L. Nemhauser and L.A. Wolsey,Integer and Combinatorial Optimization (Wiley, New York, 1988).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. E. Nummelin, “Regeneration in tandem queues”,Advances in Applied Probability 13 (1981) 221–230.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  31. E.L. Plambeck, B.-R. Fu, S.M. Robinson and R. Suri, “Throughput optimization in tandem production lines via nonsmooth programming”, in: J. Schoen, ed.,Proceedings of the 1993 Summer Computer Simulation Conference (Society for Computer Simulation. San Diego, CA, 1993) pp. 70–75.

    Google Scholar 

  32. H. Robbins and S. Monro, “A stochastic approximation method”,Annals of Mathematical Statistics 22 (1951) 400–407.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. S.M. Robinson, “Analysis of sample-path optimization”, accepted byMathematics of Operations Research.

  34. R.T. Rockafellar,Convex Analysis (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1970).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  35. R.Y. Rubinstein and A. Shapiro,Discrete Event Systems: Sensitivity Analysis and Stochastic Optimization by the Score Function Method (Wiley, Chichester, 1993).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  36. H. Schramm and J. Zowe, A version of the bundle idea for minimizing a nonsmooth function: conceptual idea, convergence analysis, numerical results, Technical Report 209, Mathematisches Institut, Universität Bayreuth (Bayreuth, Germany, 1990).

    Google Scholar 

  37. J.G. Shanthikumar and D.D. Yao, “Second-order stochastic properties in queueing systems”,Proceedings of the IEEE 77 (1989) 162–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. J.G. Shanthikumar and D.D. Yao, “Strong stochastic convexity: closure properties and applications”,Journal of Applied Probability 28 (1991) 131–145.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  39. A. Shapiro and Y. Wardi, “Nondifferentiability of the steady-state function in discrete event dynamic systems”,IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 39 (1994) 1707–1711.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  40. R. Suri, “Perturbation analysis: the state of the art and research issues explained via the GI/G/l queue”,Proceedings of the IEEE 77 (1989) 114–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. R. Suri and B.-R. Fu. “On using continuous flow lines for performance estimation of discrete production lines”, in:Proceedings of the 1991 Winter Simulation Conference (IEEE. Piscataway, NJ, 1991), pp. 968–977.

  42. R. Suri and B.-R. Fu, “On using continuous flow lines to model discrete production lines”,Discrete Event Dynamic Systems 4 (1994) 129–169.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  43. R. Suri and B.-R. Fu, “Using continuous flow models to enable rapid analysis and optimization of discrete production lines—a progress report”, in:Proceedings of the 19th Annual NSF Grantees Conference on Design and Manufacturing Systems Research (Charlotte, NC. 1993), pp. 1229–1238.

  44. R. Suri and Y.T. Leung, “Single run optimization of discrete event simulations—an empirical study using the M/M/l queue”,IIE Transactions 34 (1989) 35–49.

    Google Scholar 

  45. R. Suri and M. Zazanis, “Perturbation analysis gives strongly consistent sensitivity estimates for the M/G/1 queue”,Management Science 34 (1988) 39–64.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  46. R.M. Van Slyke, “Monte Carlo Methods and the PERT problem”,Operations Research 11 (1963) 839–860.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. R.M. Van Slyke and R.J.-B. Wets, “L-shaped linear programs with applications to optimal control and stochastic programming”,SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics 17 (1969) 638–663.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  48. S.W. Wallace, “Bounding the expected time-cost curve for a stochastic PERT network from below”,Operations Research Letters 8 (1989) 89–94.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  49. K.C. Wei, Q.Q. Tsao and N.C. Otto, “Determining buffer size requirements using stochastic approximation methods”, Technical Report SR-89-73, Manufacturing Systems Department. Ford Motor Company, Dearborn, MI, 1989).

    Google Scholar 

  50. R.D. Wollmer, “Critical path planning under uncertainty”,Mathematical Programming Study 25 (1985) 164–171.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  51. J. Zowe, “The BT-algorithm for minimizing a nonsmooth functional subject to linear constraints”, in: F.H. Clarke et al., eds.,Nonsmooth Optimization and Related Topics (Plenum Press, New York, 1989).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1513 University Avenue, 53706-1539, Madison, WI, USA

    Erica L. Plambeck, Bor-Ruey Fu, Stephen M. Robinson & Rajan Suri

Authors
  1. Erica L. Plambeck
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bor-Ruey Fu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Stephen M. Robinson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Rajan Suri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Sponsored by the National Science Foundation under grant number CCR-9109345, by the Air Force Systems Command, USAF, under grant numbers F49620-93-1-0068 and F49620-95-1-0222, by the U.S. Army Research Office under grant number DAAL03-92-G-0408, and by the U.S. Army Space and Strategic Defense Command under contract number DASG60-91-C-0144. The U.S. Government has certain rights in this material, and is authorized to reproduce and distribute reprints for Governmental purposes notwithstanding any copyright notation thereon.

Sponsored by a Wisconsin/Hilldale Research Award, by the U.S. Army Space and Strategic Defense Command under contract number DASG60-91-C-0144, and the Air Force Systems Command, USAF, under grant number F49620-93-1-0068.

Sponsored by the National Science Foundation under grant number DDM-9201813.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Plambeck, E.L., Fu, BR., Robinson, S.M. et al. Sample-path optimization of convex stochastic performance functions. Mathematical Programming 75, 137–176 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02592150

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02592150

Keywords

Search

Navigation