IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v18y1972i12pb734-b743.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Comparison between Two Kinds of Decentralized Optimality Conditions in Nonconvex Programming

Author

Listed:
  • A. Ten Kate

    (Centre for Development Planning, Netherlands School of Economics)

Abstract

Decomposable mathematical programming problems sometimes admit a certain degree of decentralization in the decision process. By an informative interplay between a central authority and a number of subdivisions one hopes to establish the overall best solution. This interplay can be organized in either of two ways: direct or indirect distribution. However, an absolute prerequisite for such procedures to be successful is the availability of an optimality criterion to the centre so as to know when to stop the iterative process. It is well known that for either of two cases the optimality conditions as derived from the Kuhn-Tucker conditions for the overall problem are not satisfactory. The present paper makes a comparison between the shortcomings of the two kinds of conditions. In the case of direct distribution this condition turns out to be necessary but unfortunately not sufficient and for indirect distribution the condition is sufficient but not necessary. The insufficiency in the direct and the absence of necessity in the indirect case, which are caused by eventual nonconvexities of the problem, are explored a bit further. A simple example is presented.

Suggested Citation

  • A. Ten Kate, 1972. "A Comparison between Two Kinds of Decentralized Optimality Conditions in Nonconvex Programming," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(12), pages 734-743, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:18:y:1972:i:12:p:b734-b743
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.18.12.B734
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.18.12.B734
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.18.12.B734?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:18:y:1972:i:12:p:b734-b743. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.