Table of Contents
Fetching ...

A Time-certified Predictor-corrector IPM Algorithm for Box-QP

Liang Wu, Yunhong Che, Richard D. Braatz, Jan Drgona

TL;DR

The paper tackles time-certified optimization for Box-QP in real-time MPC by introducing a feasible predictor-corrector interior-point method that preserves an $O(\sqrt{n})$ worst-case iteration bound while delivering strong practical performance. It leverages a cost-free initialization and a reduced Newton system to compute predictor and corrector directions, ensuring iterates remain within a central neighborhood. The method achieves a 5x speedup over the authors' previous time-certified IPM and exhibits practical iteration counts of $O(\log n)$ or $O(n^{0.25})$ in experiments, including a nonlinear PDE-MPC case. This work enhances real-time applicability of IPM-based QP solvers by providing data-independent guarantees and accessible code, though per-iteration cost is higher due to solving two linear systems.

Abstract

Minimizing both the worst-case and average execution times of optimization algorithms is equally critical in real-time optimization-based control applications such as model predictive control (MPC). Most MPC solvers have to trade off between certified worst-case and practical average execution times. For example, our previous work [1] proposed a full-Newton path-following interior-point method (IPM) with data-independent, simple-calculated, and exact $O(\sqrt{n})$ iteration complexity, but not as efficient as the heuristic Mehrotra predictor-corrector IPM algorithm (which sacrifices global convergence). This letter proposes a new predictor-corrector IPM algorithm that preserves the same certified $O(\sqrt{n})$ iteration complexity while achieving a $5\times$ speedup over [1]. Numerical experiments and codes that validate these results are provided.

A Time-certified Predictor-corrector IPM Algorithm for Box-QP

TL;DR

The paper tackles time-certified optimization for Box-QP in real-time MPC by introducing a feasible predictor-corrector interior-point method that preserves an worst-case iteration bound while delivering strong practical performance. It leverages a cost-free initialization and a reduced Newton system to compute predictor and corrector directions, ensuring iterates remain within a central neighborhood. The method achieves a 5x speedup over the authors' previous time-certified IPM and exhibits practical iteration counts of or in experiments, including a nonlinear PDE-MPC case. This work enhances real-time applicability of IPM-based QP solvers by providing data-independent guarantees and accessible code, though per-iteration cost is higher due to solving two linear systems.

Abstract

Minimizing both the worst-case and average execution times of optimization algorithms is equally critical in real-time optimization-based control applications such as model predictive control (MPC). Most MPC solvers have to trade off between certified worst-case and practical average execution times. For example, our previous work [1] proposed a full-Newton path-following interior-point method (IPM) with data-independent, simple-calculated, and exact iteration complexity, but not as efficient as the heuristic Mehrotra predictor-corrector IPM algorithm (which sacrifices global convergence). This letter proposes a new predictor-corrector IPM algorithm that preserves the same certified iteration complexity while achieving a speedup over [1]. Numerical experiments and codes that validate these results are provided.

Paper Structure

This paper contains 10 sections, 5 theorems, 60 equations, 2 figures, 1 table, 1 algorithm.

Key Result

Lemma 1

Let $(z,v,s)\in\mathcal{F}^+$ and let $(\Delta z, \Delta v,\Delta s)$ be the solution of Eqn. eqn_Newton. Then, where

Figures (2)

  • Figure 1: Practical and theoretical iteration counts of Algorithm \ref{['alg_PC_IPM']} compared with the exact (practical = theoretical) iteration counts from Ref. wu2025direct.
  • Figure 2: Closed-loop simulation of the nonlinear KdV system with Box-QP based MPC controller -- Tracking a piecewise constant spatial profile reference. Left: time evolution of the spatial profile $y(t,x)$. Middle: spatial mean of the $y(t,x)$. Right: the four control inputs.

Theorems & Definitions (13)

  • Remark 1
  • Remark 2
  • Lemma 1
  • proof
  • Lemma 2
  • proof
  • Lemma 3
  • proof
  • Lemma 4
  • proof
  • ...and 3 more