2011
DOI: 10.1007/s10589-011-9401-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

On the effectiveness of projection methods for convex feasibility problems with linear inequality constraints

Abstract: International audienceThe effectiveness of projection methods for solving systems of linear inequalities is investigated. It is shown that they often have a computational advantage over alternatives that have been proposed for solving the same problem and that this makes them successful in many real-world applications. This is supported by experimental evidence provided in this paper on problems of various sizes (up to tens of thousands of unknowns satisfying up to hundreds of thousands of constraints) and by … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
154
0
1

Year Published

2011
2011
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
2

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 142 publications
(158 citation statements)
references
References 74 publications
3
154
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Moreover, these algorithms were designed to efficiently solve inconsistent feasibility problems (when the intersection of the convex set is empty). Thorough comparisons between projection methods have been performed in [50,51].…”
Section: From Gradient Descent To Proximal Algorithmsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, these algorithms were designed to efficiently solve inconsistent feasibility problems (when the intersection of the convex set is empty). Thorough comparisons between projection methods have been performed in [50,51].…”
Section: From Gradient Descent To Proximal Algorithmsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Figure 5 (part a) shows the relative errors of different strategies with 5% noise level. The strategy (6) with γ k = γ I k gives an acceptable result compared with other strategies. Using the results shown in Figure 5 (part b), adding more noise to the right-hand side of (1) gives fast semiconvergence for constant relaxation parameter λ = 30 and the CGLS method, whereas our strategies show stable behavior.…”
Section: Numerical Resultsmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…We take x 0 = 0 in all numerical tests. We also compare different strategies, (5), (6), and λ = 1 (without relaxation parameter), where Algorithm 1 is used. Furthermore, the results of the CGLS method and error minimizing relaxation strategy (EMR) [31, (3.16) We next give some notes on the fast semiconvergence phenomenon and implementation of Algorithm 1.…”
Section: Experimental Issuesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the proposed method, the regularization term is the square of the FV function as shown in (6). The first term in (6) consists of components |v i − w i | which are comparable to |w i − w i−1 | forming the FV function.…”
Section: Epigraph Set Of Filtered Variation Functionmentioning
confidence: 99%