[SciPy-dev] one more scipy.optimize.line_search question

[dmitrey]

Alan G Isaac wrote:
> On Mon, 06 Aug 2007, dmitrey apparently wrote:
>   
>> I wonder what does the parameter amax=50 mean (in 
>> optimize.line_search func)?  Seems like this parameter is 
>> never used in the func
>>     
>
> Is there something wrong with the minpack2 documentation?
>
> c       stpmax is a double precision variable.
> c         On entry stpmax is a nonnegative upper bound for the step.
> c         On exit stpmax is unchanged.
>   
the line_search func from scipy.optimize has no any relation to the 
fortran routine you have mentioned.
Maybe you mean line_search func from scipy.optimize.linesearch, but as I 
mentioned, scipy has 2 funcs line_search, one python-written (from 
optimize.py), other from /optimize/linesearch.py.
So, as I have mentioned, amax is unused in scipy.optimize.linesearch
>
>   
>> moreover, amax is defined in scipy.optimize module as 
>> a func
>>     
>
> I think you are confusing this with the numpy array method?
>
>
>   
>> Also, in the middle of the func it has line 
>> (optimize.py)
>> maxiter = 10 
>> this one seems to be very small to me. 
>> don't you think it's better to handle the param in input args? 
>>     
>
> That is just for the bracketing phase.
> Are any troubles resulting from this value?
>   
I have troubles all over the func. Seems like sometimes Matthieu's func 
that declines same goal (finding x that satisfies strong Wolfe 
conditions) works much more better (in 1st iteration, but makes my CPU 
hanging on in 2nd iter), but in other cases scipy.optimize provides at 
least some decrease, while Matthieu's - not (as i mentioned above, also, 
sometimes Matthieu's func return same x0 after 2nd iter and makes my alg 
stop very far from x_optim).

1) this test, Matthieu:
itn 0: Fk= 8596.39550577 maxResidual= 804.031293334
11
(between these lines I call Matthieu's optimizer)
22
------------------
xnew:
objfun: 227.538805239
max residual: 2.17603712827e-12 (because now I use test where only 
linear inequalities are present)
11
(CPU hanging on)

2) Same test, scipy.optimize:
itn 0: Fk= 8596.39550577 maxResidual= 804.031293334
itn 100 : Fk= 8141.04226717 maxResidual= 784.640128722
itn 200 : Fk= 7708.62739973 maxResidual= 765.716680829
...

as you see, objFun decrease, as well as max constraint decrease, is very 
slow:

If I provide gradient of my func numerically obtaining, nothing changes 
except of some calculation speed decrease.

I tried to modify sigma (Matthieu notation) = c2 (scipy notation) = 
0.1...0.9, almost nothing changes
(Matthieu's default val = 0.4, scipy - 0.9, as it is in 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfe_conditions)
afaik c1 is default 0.0001 in both mentioned.

So now I'm trying to learn where's the problem.

Regards, D.

>
>   
>> Also, don't you think that having 2 line_search funcs is ambiguous? 
>> (I mean one in scipy.optimize, python-written, and one in 
>> scipy.optimize.linesearch, binding to minpack2)
>>     
>
> It would be nice to have some history on this.
> I expect we'll have to wait until Travis has time to look
> this discussion over, which may not be soon.
>
> Cheers,
> Alan Isaac
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Scipy-dev mailing list
> Scipy-dev at scipy.org
> http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-dev
>
>
>
>