<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic nlsq solver with linear (bound) constraints generates out of boundary guesses in Intel® oneAPI Math Kernel Library</title>
    <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/nlsq-solver-with-linear-bound-constraints-generates-out-of/m-p/935302#M14047</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 1em; line-height: 1.5;"&gt;Hello everybody,&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;This is my second post with a set of questions about using the nonlinear least square solver from mkl (the first one is about the OMP parallelization is here &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="http://software.intel.com/en-us/forums/topic/495859"&gt;http://software.intel.com/en-us/forums/topic/495859&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;)&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;I implemented this algorithm following&amp;nbsp;the example in the mkl&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;unfortunately the solver keeps escaping the region set by&lt;STRONG&gt; UP and LW&lt;/STRONG&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="http://software.intel.com/sites/products/documentation/hpc/mkl/mklman/GUID-B6BADF1C-F90C-4D30-8B84-CF9A5F970E08.htm#GUID-B6BADF1C-F90C-4D30-8B84-CF9A5F970E08"&gt;http://software.intel.com/sites/products/documentation/hpc/mkl/mklman/GUID-B6BADF1C-F90C-4D30-8B84-CF9A5F970E08.htm#GUID-B6BADF1C-F90C-4D30-8B84-CF9A5F970E08&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;where I really don't want it to go (because my function misbehaves there)&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;I first thought it is&amp;nbsp;the rs parameter (which I assume to be the max s in s*J, but I'm not sure from the given explanation) and in the example provided by intel it is misleadingly initialized to 0.0 while it has to be between 0.1 and 100(default). Anyway, I had it default 100, then put it to 10.0; 1.0 and 0.1, changed iter2 from 100 to 10 and to 1 (to prevent it from extrapolating too far with the first step derivatives) but&amp;nbsp;it runs away again at the second step to the same numbers no matter what I do!&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;sending to the solver at initialization:&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;x0(1) -47.270320 &lt;STRONG&gt;LW(1) -56.724384&lt;/STRONG&gt; UP(1) -37.816256&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;x0(2) -36.266918 LW(2) -43.520302&lt;STRONG&gt; UP(2) -29.013534&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;guess solutions sent by the solver to my function (from the function)&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;thread 0&lt;BR /&gt;
	x0(1) &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;-47.270320 &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;x_step2(1) &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;STRONG&gt;-70.905480&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;
	x0(2) &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;-36.266918 &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;x_step2(2)&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;-36.266918&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;thread 1&lt;BR /&gt;
	x0(1)&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; -47.270320 &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;x_step2(1)&amp;nbsp;-47.270320&lt;BR /&gt;
	x0(2) &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;-36.266918 &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;x_step2(2)&amp;nbsp;&lt;STRONG&gt;-18.133459&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;This is what I am sending to the solver at initialization (which reports success)&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;initialize solver (allocate mamory, set initial values)&lt;BR /&gt;
	&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;n1 &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;in: &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; number of refined parameters 15&lt;BR /&gt;
	&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;m1 &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;in: &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; 1D function value F 16800&lt;BR /&gt;
	&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;iter1 &amp;nbsp; in: &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;maximum number of iterations 100&lt;BR /&gt;
	&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;iter2 &amp;nbsp; in: &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; maximum number &amp;nbsp;of trial-steps 1&lt;BR /&gt;
	&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;rs &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;in: &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; initial step bound 0.100000&lt;BR /&gt;
	&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;SUCCESS&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;Did anybody have the same troubles? Anybody can give me any pointers?&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Dec 2013 07:48:41 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Nikolay_P_1</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2013-12-11T07:48:41Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>nlsq solver with linear (bound) constraints generates out of boundary guesses</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/nlsq-solver-with-linear-bound-constraints-generates-out-of/m-p/935302#M14047</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 1em; line-height: 1.5;"&gt;Hello everybody,&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;This is my second post with a set of questions about using the nonlinear least square solver from mkl (the first one is about the OMP parallelization is here &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="http://software.intel.com/en-us/forums/topic/495859"&gt;http://software.intel.com/en-us/forums/topic/495859&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;)&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;I implemented this algorithm following&amp;nbsp;the example in the mkl&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;unfortunately the solver keeps escaping the region set by&lt;STRONG&gt; UP and LW&lt;/STRONG&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="http://software.intel.com/sites/products/documentation/hpc/mkl/mklman/GUID-B6BADF1C-F90C-4D30-8B84-CF9A5F970E08.htm#GUID-B6BADF1C-F90C-4D30-8B84-CF9A5F970E08"&gt;http://software.intel.com/sites/products/documentation/hpc/mkl/mklman/GUID-B6BADF1C-F90C-4D30-8B84-CF9A5F970E08.htm#GUID-B6BADF1C-F90C-4D30-8B84-CF9A5F970E08&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;where I really don't want it to go (because my function misbehaves there)&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;I first thought it is&amp;nbsp;the rs parameter (which I assume to be the max s in s*J, but I'm not sure from the given explanation) and in the example provided by intel it is misleadingly initialized to 0.0 while it has to be between 0.1 and 100(default). Anyway, I had it default 100, then put it to 10.0; 1.0 and 0.1, changed iter2 from 100 to 10 and to 1 (to prevent it from extrapolating too far with the first step derivatives) but&amp;nbsp;it runs away again at the second step to the same numbers no matter what I do!&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;sending to the solver at initialization:&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;x0(1) -47.270320 &lt;STRONG&gt;LW(1) -56.724384&lt;/STRONG&gt; UP(1) -37.816256&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;x0(2) -36.266918 LW(2) -43.520302&lt;STRONG&gt; UP(2) -29.013534&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;guess solutions sent by the solver to my function (from the function)&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;thread 0&lt;BR /&gt;
	x0(1) &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;-47.270320 &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;x_step2(1) &amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;STRONG&gt;-70.905480&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;
	x0(2) &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;-36.266918 &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;x_step2(2)&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;-36.266918&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;thread 1&lt;BR /&gt;
	x0(1)&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; -47.270320 &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;x_step2(1)&amp;nbsp;-47.270320&lt;BR /&gt;
	x0(2) &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;-36.266918 &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;x_step2(2)&amp;nbsp;&lt;STRONG&gt;-18.133459&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;This is what I am sending to the solver at initialization (which reports success)&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;initialize solver (allocate mamory, set initial values)&lt;BR /&gt;
	&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;n1 &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;in: &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; number of refined parameters 15&lt;BR /&gt;
	&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;m1 &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;in: &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; 1D function value F 16800&lt;BR /&gt;
	&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;iter1 &amp;nbsp; in: &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;maximum number of iterations 100&lt;BR /&gt;
	&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;iter2 &amp;nbsp; in: &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; maximum number &amp;nbsp;of trial-steps 1&lt;BR /&gt;
	&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;rs &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;in: &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; initial step bound 0.100000&lt;BR /&gt;
	&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;SUCCESS&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;Did anybody have the same troubles? Anybody can give me any pointers?&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Dec 2013 07:48:41 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/nlsq-solver-with-linear-bound-constraints-generates-out-of/m-p/935302#M14047</guid>
      <dc:creator>Nikolay_P_1</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2013-12-11T07:48:41Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Many algorithms for nonlinear</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/nlsq-solver-with-linear-bound-constraints-generates-out-of/m-p/935303#M14048</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Many algorithms for nonlinear constrained optimization do not restrict requests for&amp;nbsp;function and constraint evaluations to points&amp;nbsp;only within the feasible region. In fact, the initial step in some algorithms is to find a feasible point, from whence a path can be followed along which the objective function decreases.&lt;/P&gt;

&lt;P&gt;Search the Web for FSQP and CFSQP -- these were software packages which searched for an optimum while&amp;nbsp;staying&amp;nbsp;within the feasible region.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Dec 2013 15:30:36 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/nlsq-solver-with-linear-bound-constraints-generates-out-of/m-p/935303#M14048</guid>
      <dc:creator>mecej4</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2013-12-12T15:30:36Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

