arbiter
JournalsPricingAccount

GENERALIZATIONS OF DOUBLY NONNEGATIVE CONES AND THEIR COMPARISON

Mitsuhiro Nishijima & Kazuhide Nakata

Journal of the Operations Research Society of Japan2024https://doi.org/10.15807/jorsj.67.84article
ABDC B
Weight
0.39

What the paper says

In this study, we examine the various extensions of the doubly nonnegative (DNN) cone, frequently used in completely positive programming (CPP) to achieve a tighter relaxation than the positive semidefinite cone. To provide tighter relaxation for generalized CPP (GCPP) than the positive semidefinite cone, inner-approximation hierarchies of the generalized copositive cone are exploited to obtain two generalized DNN (GDNN) cones from the DNN cone. This study conducts theoretical and numerical comparisons to assess the relaxation strengths of the two GDNN cones over the direct products of a nonnegative orthant and second-order or positive semidefinite cones. These comparisons also include an analysis of the existing GDNN cone proposed by Burer and Dong. The findings from solving several GDNN programming relaxation problems for a GCPP problem demonstrate that the three GDNN cones provide significantly tighter bounds for GCPP than the positive semidefinite cone.

1 citation

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.15807/jorsj.67.84

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{mitsuhiro2024,
  title        = {{GENERALIZATIONS OF DOUBLY NONNEGATIVE CONES AND THEIR COMPARISON}},
  author       = {Mitsuhiro Nishijima & Kazuhide Nakata},
  journal      = {Journal of the Operations Research Society of Japan},
  year         = {2024},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.15807/jorsj.67.84},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

GENERALIZATIONS OF DOUBLY NONNEGATIVE CONES AND THEIR COMPARISON

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.39

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.23 × 0.4 = 0.09
M · momentum0.53 × 0.15 = 0.08
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.