(eBook PDF) Linear Programming and Resource Allocation Modelinginstant download
(eBook PDF) Linear Programming and Resource Allocation Modelinginstant download
https://ebooksecure.com/product/ebook-pdf-linear-programming-and-
resource-allocation-modeling/
http://ebooksecure.com/product/ebook-pdf-regression-linear-
modeling-best-practices-and-modern-methods/
http://ebooksecure.com/product/ebook-pdf-translational-medicine-
in-cns-drug-development-volume-29/
https://ebooksecure.com/download/progress-in-heterocyclic-
chemistry-ebook-pdf/
http://ebooksecure.com/product/ebook-pdf-differential-equations-
and-linear-algebra-3rd-edition/
(eBook PDF) Differential Equations and Linear Algebra
4th Edition
http://ebooksecure.com/product/ebook-pdf-differential-equations-
and-linear-algebra-4th-edition-2/
http://ebooksecure.com/product/ebook-pdf-linear-system-theory-
and-design-4th-edition/
http://ebooksecure.com/product/ebook-pdf-linear-algebra-and-its-
applications-4th-edition/
http://ebooksecure.com/product/linear-algebra-and-its-
applications-5th-edition-ebook-pdf/
http://ebooksecure.com/product/differential-equations-and-linear-
algebra-4th-edition-ebook-pdf/
vii
Contents
Preface xi
Symbols and Abbreviations xv
1 Introduction 1
2 Mathematical Foundations 13
2.1 Matrix Algebra 13
2.2 Vector Algebra 20
2.3 Simultaneous Linear Equation Systems 22
2.4 Linear Dependence 26
2.5 Convex Sets and n-Dimensional Geometry 29
6 Duality Theory 95
6.1 The Symmetric Dual 95
6.2 Unsymmetric Duals 97
6.3 Duality Theorems 100
6.4 Constructing the Dual Solution 106
6.5 Dual Simplex Method 113
6.6 Computational Aspects of the Dual Simplex Method 114
6.7 Summary of the Dual Simplex Method 121
Preface
Introduction
This book deals with the application of linear programming to firm decision
making. In particular, an important resource allocation problem that often
arises in actual practice is when a set of inputs, some of which are limited in
supply over a particular production period, is to be utilized to produce, using
a given technology, a mix of products that will maximize total profit. While a
model such as this can be constructed in a variety of ways and under different
sets of assumptions, the discussion that follows shall be limited to the linear
case, i.e. we will consider the short-run static profit-maximizing behavior of
the multiproduct, multifactor competitive firm that employs a fixed-coefficients
technology under certainty (Dorfman 1951, 1953; Naylor 1966).
How may we interpret the assumptions underlying this profit maximiza-
tion model?
Linear Programming and Resource Allocation Modeling, First Edition. Michael J. Panik.
© 2019 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Published 2019 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
2 1 Introduction
Why is this linear model for the firm important? It is intuitively clear that the
more sophisticated the type of capital equipment employed in a production proc-
ess, the more inflexible it is likely to be relative to the other factors of production
with which it is combined. That is, the machinery in question must be used in
fixed proportions with regard to certain other factors of production (Dorfman
1953, p. 143). For the type of process just described, no factor substitution is pos-
sible; a given output level can be produced by one and only one input combina-
tion, i.e. the inputs are perfectly complementary. For example, it is widely
recognized that certain types of chemical processes exhibit this characteristic
in that, to induce a particular type of chemical reaction, the input proportions
(coefficient) must be (approximately) fixed. Moreover, mechanical processes such
as those encountered in cotton textile manufacturing and machine-tool produc-
tion are characterized by the presence of this limitationality, i.e. in the latter case,
constant production times are logged on a fixed set of machines by a given num-
ber of operators working with specific grades of raw materials.
For example, suppose that a firm produces three types of precision tools
(denoted x1, x2, and x3) made from high-grade steel. Four separate production
operations are used: casting, grinding, sharpening, and polishing. The set of
input–output coefficients (expressed in minutes per unit of output), which
describe the firm’s technology (the firm’s stage one problem, as alluded to
1 Introduction 3
above, has been solved) is presented in Table 1.1. (Note that each of the three
columns represents a separate input activity or process.)
Additionally, capacity limitations exist with respect to each of the four pro-
duction operations in that upper limits on their availability are in force. That
is, per production run, the firm has at its disposal 5000 minutes of casting time,
3000 minutes of grinding time, 3700 minutes of sharpening time, and 2000 min-
utes of polishing time. Finally, the unit profit values for tools x1, x2, and x3 are
$22.50, $19.75, and $26.86, respectively. (Here these figures each depict unit
revenue less unit variable cost and are computed before deducting fixed costs.
Moreover, we are tacitly assuming that what is produced is sold.) Given this
information, it is easily shown that the optimization problem the firm must
solve (i.e. the stage-two problem mentioned above) will look like (1.1):
max f = 22 50x1 + 19 75x2 + 26 86x3 s t subject to
13x1 + 10x2 + 16x3 ≤ 5000
12x1 + 8x2 + 20x3 ≤ 3000
11
8x1 + 4x2 + 9x3 ≤ 3700
5x1 + 4x2 + 6x3 ≤ 2000
x1 , x2 ,x3 ≥ 0
How may we rationalize the structure of this problem? First, the objective func-
tion f represents total profit, which is the sum of the individual (gross) profit
contributions of the three products, i.e.
3
total profit = total profit from xj sales
j=1
3
= unit profit from xj sales number of units of xj sold
j=1
Tools
x1 x2 x3 Operations
13 10 16 Casting
12 8 20 Grinding
8 4 9 Sharpening
5 4 6 Polishing
4 1 Introduction
Next, if we consider the first structural constraint inequality (the others can be
interpreted in a similar fashion), we see that total casting time used per produc-
tion run cannot exceed the total amount available, i.e.
3
total casting time used = total casting time used by xj
j=1
3
= casting time used per unit of xj
j=1
number of units of xj produced ≤ 5000
Finally, the activity levels (product quantities) x1, x2, and x3 are nonnegative,
thus indicating that the production activities are nonreversible, i.e. the fixed
inputs cannot be created from the outputs.
To solve (1.1) we shall employ a specialized computational technique called the
simplex method. The details of the simplex routine, as well as its mathematical
foundations and embellishments, will be presented in Chapters 2–5. Putting com-
putational considerations aside for the time being, the types of information sets
that the firm obtains from an optimal solution to (1.1) can be characterized as
follows. The optimal product mix is determined (from this result management
can specify which product to produce in positive amounts and which ones to omit
from the production plan) as well as the optimal activity levels (which indicate
the exact number of units of each product produced). In addition, optimal
resource utilization information is also generated (the solution reveals the
amounts of the fixed or scarce resources employed in support of the optimal
activity levels) along with the excess (slack) capacity figures (if the total amount
available of some fixed resource is not fully utilized, the optimal solution indicates
the amount left idle). Finally, the optimal dollar value of total profit is revealed.
Associated with (1.1) (hereafter called the primal problem) is a symmetric
problem called its dual. While Chapter 6 presents duality theory in considerable
detail, let us simply note without further elaboration here that the dual problem
deals with the internal valuation (pricing) of the firm’s fixed or scarce resources.
These (nonmarket) prices or, as they are commonly called, shadow prices serve
to signal the firm when it would be beneficial, in terms of recouping forgone
profit (since the capacity limitations restrict the firm’s production and thus
profit opportunities) to acquire additional units of the fixed factors. Relative
to (1.1), the dual problem appears as
min g = 5000u1 + 3000u2 + 3700u3 + 2000u4 s t
13u1 + 12u2 + 8u3 + 5u4 ≥ 22 50
10u1 + 8u2 + 4u3 + 4u4 ≥ 19 75 12
16u1 + 20u2 + 9u3 + 6u4 ≥ 26 86
u1 ,u2 ,u3 ,u4 ≥ 0,
1 Introduction 5
where the dual variables u1, …, u4 are the shadow prices associated with the pri-
mal capacity constraints.
What is the interpretation of the form of this dual problem? First, the objec-
tive g depicts the total imputed (accounting) value of the firm’s fixed
resources, i.e.
total imputed value of all fixed resources
4
= total imputed value of the ith resource
i=1
4
= number of units of the ith resource available
i=1
shadow price of the ith resource
Clearly, the firm must make the value of this figure as small as possible. That is,
it must minimize forgone profit. Next, looking to the first structural constraint
inequality in (1.2) (the rationalization of the others follows suit), we see that the
total imputed value of all resources going into the production of a unit of x1
cannot fall short of the profit per unit of x1, i.e.
total imputed value of all resources per unit of x1
4
= imputed value of the ith resource per unit of x1
i=1
4
= number of units of the ith resource per unit of x1
i=1
shadow price of the ith resource ≥ 22 50
Finally, as is the case for any set of prices, the shadow prices u1, …, u4 are all
nonnegative.
As will become evident in Chapter 6, the dual problem does not have to be
solved explicitly; its optimal solution is obtained as a byproduct of the optimal
solution to the primal problem (and vice versa). What sort of information is pro-
vided by the optimal dual solution? The optimal (internal) valuation of the
firm’s fixed resources is exhibited (from this data the firm can discern which
resources are in excess supply and which ones are “scarce” in the sense that total
profit could possibly be increased if the supply of the latter were augmented)
along with the optimal shadow price configuration (each such price indicates
the increase in total profit resulting from a one unit increase in the associated
fixed input). Moreover, the optimal (imputed) value of inputs for each prod-
uct is provided (the solution indicates the imputed value of all fixed resources
entering into the production of a unit of each of the firm’s outputs) as well as the
optimal accounting loss figures (here, management is provided with informa-
tion pertaining to the amount by which the imputed value of all resources used
6 1 Introduction
to produce a unit of some product exceeds the unit profit level for the same).
Finally, the optimal imputed value of all fixed resources is determined. Inter-
estingly enough, this quantity equals the optimal dollar value of total profit
obtained from the primal problem, as it must at an optimal feasible solution
to the primal-dual pair of problems.
In the preceding model we made the assumption that the various production
activities were technologically independent. However, if we now assume that they
are technologically interdependent in that each product can be produced by
employing more than one process, then we may revise the firm’s objective to
one where a set of production quotas are to be fulfilled at minimum cost. By invok-
ing this assumption we may construct what is called a joint production model.
As far as a full description of this type of production program is concerned, let
us frame it in terms of the short-run static cost-minimizing behavior of a multi-
product, multifactor competitive firm that employs a fixed-coefficients technol-
ogy. How can we interpret the assumptions given in support of this model?
1) Perfect competition in the factor markets – the prices of the firm’s primary
and shadow inputs are given.
2) The firm employs a static model – all prices, the technology, and the output
quotas remain constant over the production period.
3) The firm operates under conditions of certainty – the model is deterministic
in that all prices and the technology behave in a completely systematic (non-
random) fashion.
4) All factors and products are perfectly divisible – fractional quantities of fac-
tors and products are admissible at an optimal feasible solution.
5) The character of the firm’s production activities, which now represent ways
of producing a set of outputs from the application of one unit of a primary
input, is determined by a set of technical decisions internal to the firm. These
output activities are:
a) independent in that no interaction effects exist among activities;
b) linear, i.e. the output/input ratios for each activity are constant along
with the input response to an increase in outputs (if the production of
all outputs in an activity increases by a fixed amount, then the input level
required by the process must increase by the same amount);
c) additive, e.g. if two activities are used simultaneously, the final quantities
of inputs and outputs will be the arithmetic sums of the quantities which
would result if these activities were operated separately. Moreover, the
total cost figure resulting from all output activities equals the sum of
the costs from each individual activity; and
d) finite – the number of output activities or processes available for use dur-
ing any production period is limited.
6) All structural relations exhibit direct proportionality – the objective func-
tion and all constraints are linear; unit cost and the fixed-output per unit of
1 Introduction 7
input values for each activity are directly proportional to the level of oper-
ation of the activity. (Thus marginal cost equals average cost.)
7) The firm’s objective is to minimize total cost subject to a set of structural
activities, fixed output quotas, and nonnegativity restrictions on the activity
levels. This objective is also accomplished in two stages, i.e. in stage one a
technical optimization problem is solved in that the firm chooses a set of out-
put activities which yield the maximum amounts of the various outputs per
unit of the primary factors. Second, the firm solves the indicated constrained
minimization problem.
8) The short-run prevails in that the firm’s minimum output requirements are
fixed in quantity.
For the type of output activities just described, no output substitution is possi-
ble; producing more of one output and less of another is not technologically
feasible, i.e. the outputs are perfectly complementary or limitational in that
they must all change together.
As an example of the type of model just described, let us assume that a firm
employs three grades of the primary input labor (denoted x1, x2, and x3) to pro-
duce four separate products: chairs, benches, tables, and stools. The set of out-
put–input coefficients (expressed in units of output per man-hour) which
describe the firm’s technology appears in Table 1.2. (Here each of the three col-
umns depicts a separate output activity.) Additionally, output quotas exist with
respect to each of the four products in that lower limits on the number of units
produced must not be violated, i.e. per production run, the firm must produce at
least eight chairs, four benches, two tables, and eight stools. Finally, the unit cost
coefficients for the labor grades x1, x2, and x3 are $8.50, $9.75, and $9.08, respec-
tively. (Each of these latter figures depicts unit primary resource cost plus unit
Grades of Labor
x1 x2 x3 Outputs
1 1 1
Chairs
16 14 18
1 1 1
Benches
4 4 6
1 1 1
Tables
20 25 30
1 1 1
Stools
4 3 6
Discovering Diverse Content Through
Random Scribd Documents
the population. We must wait because a society is alive, and includes
all its members. It cannot outstrip its own inferior parts, however
neglected and behindhand they may be. And their numbers—
numbers resultant from their low condition—complicate the problem
hopelessly. That is, hopelessly on this old fallacious notion that the
child can have no help from all the strong, rich world, save what his
father and mother can filter through their personal limitations. We
are beginning to change this by our efforts at free public education.
We shall change it more and more as we grow consciously awake to
our true social responsibility to the child.
We cannot afford to have one citizen grow up below the standards
of common comfort, health, and general education. To the scared
cry, "But, if you take the responsibility off these people, they will
simply flood the world with wretched babies!" comes the answer of
natural law, "Improve the individual, and you check this crude
fecundity." It is because they are neglected and inferior that they
have so many children. Make higher-class people of the children,
and you check this constant influx of low-grade life, and gradually
introduce a better-born population.
When the wise, beneficent parental love of Human Society for its
young really does its duty, tenderly removing obstructions from the
path of all our little ones, we shall give to them those common
human advantages without which they cannot grow to the happiness
which is their right, the usefulness which is their duty. All parents
who are able to do more for their children would be free to do so, as
those who can afford private schools, or educate their little ones at
home, are not compelled to send them to the public schools.
As now society provides the school for the young citizen, on the
ground of public advantage, without regard to the inability of the
parent, so we must learn to provide a far richer and more complete
education, and all else that the parent falls short in, because it is
necessary for the good of society, and because we love our children.
Index.
Absence of mind, 54.
"Acquired traits not transmissible," 9.
experiments with guinea-pigs, 11.
Action, bodily, directed by mental processes, 57.
Adult, our houses built only for the, 121.
Age, the presumption of, 156.
not necessarily superiority, 159.
Aged persons, cause of the respect and care for, 160.
Ambition of youth a force to lift mankind, the, 23.
American Revolution, the, mentioned, 35.
Animal mother, the authority of the, 42.
Animals, obedience in, 29.
Arbitrary punishment, effect on the moral sense of, 84.
Authority of the animal mother, the, 42.
effect of, coming between the mind and action of the child,
60.
Obedience, 27.
the use of, 28.
in animals, 29.
in human education, 29.
the reason for, 31.
our reverence for, easily traced, 32.
in child training, 36.
of the Jesuits, 34.
is demanded from the child, reasons why, 37.
effect of, on the growing mind, 37.
the injurious reaction from, 39.
consideration of others not identical with, 40.
effect of, on the brain, 41.
qualities developed by, 45.
Observation of children, method of, 206.
Old, the advantage of the young over the, 158.
Over-indulgence of children, the, 75.
Parent, continued life of the, 6.
Parentage, traits acquired before, transmissible, 14.
all possible improvement in the individual should be made
before, 21.
not a profession, 165.
selfishness of human, 178.
Parental knowledge, result of the child's deed made dependent
upon, 82.
duty the gift of nature, 164.
instinct, 177.
love, the law of, 177.
Parenthood, prolonged human, 8.
the work of, 37.
Parents, want of publicity and community in the action of, 75.
the punishment of children by, 75.
duty of, to children, 161.
demands of, on their children, 162.
Parents' Congress, the, 70.
social responsibility to the child, 280.
Penology, the advance in, 73.
People, need for a better kind of, 251.
Perception, delicacy of a child's, weakened by false impressions,
111.
Personal example, social duty shown by, 112.
Personal rights of the child, the, 174.
Personality, the place for a mother's, 286.
Philadelphia water supply, the, 289.
Playgrounds, childrens', beginning to appear, 120.
Plaything, a baby considered a, 175.
Precept, example better than, 51.
Prepared Food Association, the, 254.
Presence of mind, 54.
the child trained to constant, 55.
Printing press, main value of the, 5.
Profession, parentage not a, 165.
Progress born into the race, 7.
Protestant Reformation, the, 35.
Public nursery, a, suggested, 123.
baby garden, a, 124.
duty of mothers, 288.
Punishment, retributive, 73.
of children, the, 74.
by parents, 75.
arbitrary, effect of, on the moral sense, 84.
(Mrs. G. H. GILMAN)
ebooksecure.com