[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Constrained minimization

From: Windhorn, Allen E [ACIM/LSA/MKT]
Subject: RE: Constrained minimization
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2020 22:01:02 +0000


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Juan Pablo Carbajal <address@hidden>

> > 5. Are any of the other options preferable to sqp?

> when I am serious about optimization I use nlopt
> (the octave interface is
> outdated, but last time I tried (5.0.0) was still working) and
> sometimes bayesopt (uses nlopt)
> If you update nlopt interface with Octave do let the authors know,
> they are (at least were!) very open to collaborations.

I looked at this and it was difficult to understand, but I may try it later
if I don't get good results with sqp.  Meanwhile, I have rewritten the
objective function with different variables (the original ones turned out
to be really messy and had singularities), and sqp seems to be sort of
working now (I get result 104, but the optimized X and objective are
pretty consistent, with different starting points).

Thanks again for your help.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]