[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Bug-glpk] numerical instability (cycling?)
From: |
Ali Baharev |
Subject: |
Re: [Bug-glpk] numerical instability (cycling?) |
Date: |
Tue, 25 Aug 2009 14:26:15 +0200 |
Dear Andrew,
I am sure we both agree that getting into an infinite loop is not acceptable.
> and applying geometric mean scaling makes the instance badly scaled.
What is your opinion about the Curtis-Reid scaling algorithm?
> However, a much better way is to replace tiny constraint coefficients
> by exact zeros.
How can i figure out what "tiny" is?
Many thanks,
Ali
- Re: [Bug-glpk] numerical instability (cycling?), Andrew Makhorin, 2009/08/22
- Re: [Bug-glpk] numerical instability (cycling?), Ali Baharev, 2009/08/22
- Re: [Bug-glpk] numerical instability (cycling?), Andrew Makhorin, 2009/08/25
- Re: [Bug-glpk] numerical instability (cycling?), Ali Baharev, 2009/08/25
- Re: [Bug-glpk] numerical instability (cycling?), Andrew Makhorin, 2009/08/25
- Re: [Bug-glpk] numerical instability (cycling?),
Ali Baharev <=
- Re: [Bug-glpk] numerical instability (cycling?), Andrew Makhorin, 2009/08/25
- Re: [Bug-glpk] numerical instability (cycling?), Ali Baharev, 2009/08/25
- Re: [Bug-glpk] numerical instability (cycling?), Andrew Makhorin, 2009/08/28
- Re: [Bug-glpk] numerical instability (cycling?), Ali Baharev, 2009/08/28
- Re: [Bug-glpk] numerical instability (cycling?), Ali Baharev, 2009/08/29