Student Suite Cd-rom For Winston's Operations Research: Applications And Algorithms
4th Edition
ISBN: 9780534423551
Author: Wayne L. Winston
Publisher: Cengage Learning
expand_more
expand_more
format_list_bulleted
Expert Solution & Answer
Chapter 4.4, Problem 6P
Explanation of Solution
Linear
- It is given that Ad = 0 and d>=0 and x is feasible and c>=0, x+cd>=0. Also A(x+cd)=Ax=b. Therefore for all c>=0, x+cd is feasible.
- If Ad =0 and d>=0 are not both true, then d is not a direction of unboundedness.
- This is equivalent to showing that if d is a direction of unboundedness then both Ad =0 and d>=0 must be true...
Expert Solution & Answer
Trending nowThis is a popular solution!
Students have asked these similar questions
Find an instance or a family of instances of the Capacitated Facility Location problem in which the redundant constraints
i = 1,..., m, j= 1,...,n
are improving the linear programming relaxation of the problem.
minimum and maximum acceleration of the parameter s for the time-optimal path-constraint trajectory planning -(lagrangian mechanics-Ordinary differantial equations-ode45) lagrangian formulation of dynamics
ode45 matrix
fill in the blanks where it says "Fill" in the first pitcure
8)
Determine whether the rule describes a function with the given domain and codomain.
f: N→ N, where f(n) = √n
h: R → R, where h(x)=√x
Chapter 4 Solutions
Student Suite Cd-rom For Winston's Operations Research: Applications And Algorithms
Ch. 4.1 - Prob. 1PCh. 4.1 - Prob. 2PCh. 4.1 - Prob. 3PCh. 4.4 - Prob. 1PCh. 4.4 - Prob. 2PCh. 4.4 - Prob. 3PCh. 4.4 - Prob. 4PCh. 4.4 - Prob. 5PCh. 4.4 - Prob. 6PCh. 4.4 - Prob. 7P
Ch. 4.5 - Prob. 1PCh. 4.5 - Prob. 2PCh. 4.5 - Prob. 3PCh. 4.5 - Prob. 4PCh. 4.5 - Prob. 5PCh. 4.5 - Prob. 6PCh. 4.5 - Prob. 7PCh. 4.6 - Prob. 1PCh. 4.6 - Prob. 2PCh. 4.6 - Prob. 3PCh. 4.6 - Prob. 4PCh. 4.7 - Prob. 1PCh. 4.7 - Prob. 2PCh. 4.7 - Prob. 3PCh. 4.7 - Prob. 4PCh. 4.7 - Prob. 5PCh. 4.7 - Prob. 6PCh. 4.7 - Prob. 7PCh. 4.7 - Prob. 8PCh. 4.7 - Prob. 9PCh. 4.8 - Prob. 1PCh. 4.8 - Prob. 2PCh. 4.8 - Prob. 3PCh. 4.8 - Prob. 4PCh. 4.8 - Prob. 5PCh. 4.8 - Prob. 6PCh. 4.10 - Prob. 1PCh. 4.10 - Prob. 2PCh. 4.10 - Prob. 3PCh. 4.10 - Prob. 4PCh. 4.10 - Prob. 5PCh. 4.11 - Prob. 1PCh. 4.11 - Prob. 2PCh. 4.11 - Prob. 3PCh. 4.11 - Prob. 4PCh. 4.11 - Prob. 5PCh. 4.11 - Prob. 6PCh. 4.12 - Prob. 1PCh. 4.12 - Prob. 2PCh. 4.12 - Prob. 3PCh. 4.12 - Prob. 4PCh. 4.12 - Prob. 5PCh. 4.12 - Prob. 6PCh. 4.13 - Prob. 2PCh. 4.14 - Prob. 1PCh. 4.14 - Prob. 2PCh. 4.14 - Prob. 3PCh. 4.14 - Prob. 4PCh. 4.14 - Prob. 5PCh. 4.14 - Prob. 6PCh. 4.14 - Prob. 7PCh. 4.16 - Prob. 1PCh. 4.16 - Prob. 2PCh. 4.16 - Prob. 3PCh. 4.16 - Prob. 5PCh. 4.16 - Prob. 7PCh. 4.16 - Prob. 8PCh. 4.16 - Prob. 9PCh. 4.16 - Prob. 10PCh. 4.16 - Prob. 11PCh. 4.16 - Prob. 12PCh. 4.16 - Prob. 13PCh. 4.16 - Prob. 14PCh. 4.17 - Prob. 1PCh. 4.17 - Prob. 2PCh. 4.17 - Prob. 3PCh. 4.17 - Prob. 4PCh. 4.17 - Prob. 5PCh. 4.17 - Prob. 7PCh. 4.17 - Prob. 8PCh. 4 - Prob. 1RPCh. 4 - Prob. 2RPCh. 4 - Prob. 3RPCh. 4 - Prob. 4RPCh. 4 - Prob. 5RPCh. 4 - Prob. 6RPCh. 4 - Prob. 7RPCh. 4 - Prob. 8RPCh. 4 - Prob. 9RPCh. 4 - Prob. 10RPCh. 4 - Prob. 12RPCh. 4 - Prob. 13RPCh. 4 - Prob. 14RPCh. 4 - Prob. 16RPCh. 4 - Prob. 17RPCh. 4 - Prob. 18RPCh. 4 - Prob. 19RPCh. 4 - Prob. 20RPCh. 4 - Prob. 21RPCh. 4 - Prob. 22RPCh. 4 - Prob. 23RPCh. 4 - Prob. 24RPCh. 4 - Prob. 26RPCh. 4 - Prob. 27RPCh. 4 - Prob. 28RP
Knowledge Booster
Similar questions
- Write algorithm for the continually growing set of linear approximations of the constraints simply makes a better and better outer approximation of the original nonlinear constraints.arrow_forwardDetecting Type-B Arbitrage with (ADLP) - Practice For type-B arbitrage the following conditions neèd to be satisfied: Po(y) = E söx; s0, (i) i=0 ES{(w; )x; > 0, j = 1, 2, ..., m, (ii) i=0 in Es{(w;)x; > 0 for at least one index j (ii) i=0 We can find such an investment x (if one exists) by solving ОРТ min - j=1 i=0 subject to S;(w;)x; > 0, j = 1, 2, . . . , m. (ADLP) i=0 in Sóx; <0 i=0 Define OPT = -o if the problem is unboundedarrow_forwardArc consistency in constrained satisfaction problems Suppose that we have three variables X1, X2 and X3, which are defined on the same domain of {1, 2, 3}. Two binary constraints for these three variables are defined according to the following: 1. Is X1 arc-consistent with respect to X2? And is X1 arc-consistent with respect to X3? and why? In addition, is X3 arc-consistent with respect X1 if the constraints between R1 and R3 are undirected (i.e., R31 is defined as {(X3, X1), [(2, 1),(1, 2),(1, 3),(3, 3)]} that switches the element order of every two-tuple of R13)? and why? 2. Suppose that, after some inference, the domain of X1 is reduced as {2, 3} and the constrains in R12 and R13 for X1 = 1 are removed accordingly. To be more specific, (1, 2) is removed from R13 due to reducing the domain of X1. Now is X1 still arc-consistent with respect to X2? And is X1 arc-consistent with respect to X3? and why? In addition, is X3 still arc-consistent with respect X1 if the constraints between…arrow_forward
- (a) (i) Draw a set of 2-dimensional linearly separable data points with binary labels, and clearly indicate the decision boundary found by a maximum-margin classifier, and at least one decision boundary that does not obtain a maximum margin but still represents a perfect classifier. (ii) Explain how it's possible to obtain such a non-maximum margin solution, using the concept of a loss function.arrow_forwardSolver is guaranteed to find the global minimum (if it exists) if the objective function is concave and the Constraints are linear. True or Falsearrow_forwardA seller has an indivisible asset to sell. Her reservation value for the asset is s, which she knows privately. A potential buyer thinks that the assetís value to him is b, which he privately knows. Assume that s and b are independently and uniformly drawn from [0, 1]. If the seller sells the asset to the buyer for a price of p, the seller's payoff is p-s and the buyer's payoffis b-p. Suppose simultaneously the buyer makes an offer p1 and the seller makes an offer p2. A transaction occurs if p1>=p2, and the transaction price is 1/2 (p1 + p2). Suppose the buyer uses a strategy p1(b) = 1/12 + (2/3)b and the seller uses a strategy p2(s) = 1/4 + (2/3)s. Suppose the buyer's value is 3/4 and the seller's valuation is 1/4. Will there be a transaction? Explain. Is this strategy profile a Bayesian Nash equilibrium? Explain.arrow_forward
- Construct a PYTHON program code for an inequality constraint minimization via logarithm barrier method.(OPTIMIZATION) For this problem minimize –x + /y subject to (x – 5)² + (y – 3)² < 3/2 x < 5 -arrow_forwardin the solution it says "Now, consider the model that satisfies all axioms in {A1, A2, ..., Ak} (since it's finite, it can be satisfied by a model), but also satisfies Fm because Fm implies Fm+1" but it is given that Fm doesnot imply fm+1arrow_forwardUsing the pumping lemma for regular languages show that the following language is not regular: L3 = {a"bm+2 | m > 0}arrow_forward
- Correct and detailed answer will be Upvoted else downvoted. Thank you!arrow_forwardUse a graphing utility or computer software program with matrix capabilities to write v as a linear combination of u1, u2, u3, u4, u5 and u6. Then verify your solution.arrow_forwardLinear Dynamical system help, PLS more detals and clearly to see.arrow_forward
arrow_back_ios
SEE MORE QUESTIONS
arrow_forward_ios
Recommended textbooks for you
- Operations Research : Applications and AlgorithmsComputer ScienceISBN:9780534380588Author:Wayne L. WinstonPublisher:Brooks Cole
Operations Research : Applications and Algorithms
Computer Science
ISBN:9780534380588
Author:Wayne L. Winston
Publisher:Brooks Cole