EDP Sciences logo
Subscriber Authentication Point
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 27 (2021) ESAIM: COCV, 27 (2021) 45 References
Free Access
Issue
ESAIM: COCV
Volume 27, 2021
Article Number 45
Number of page(s) 31
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/cocv/2021022
Published online 11 May 2021
  1. R.A. Adams and J.J.F. Fournier, Sobolev Spaces. Elsevier Science (2003). [Google Scholar]
  2. J.T. Betts and S.L. Campbell, Discretize then Optimize. Mathematics in Industry: Challenges and Frontiers A Process View: Practice and Theory. Edited by D.R. Ferguson and T.J. Peters. SIAM Publications, Philadelphia (2005). [Google Scholar]
  3. J.F. Bonnans and A. Shapiro, Perturbation Analysis of Optimization Problems. Springer (2000). [Google Scholar]
  4. A. Borzi, Multigrid methods for parabolic distributed optimal control problems. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 157 (2003) 365–382. [Google Scholar]
  5. J.C. Butcher, Numerical Methods for Ordinary Differential Equations. Wiley & Sons, Chichester (2016). [Google Scholar]
  6. E. Casas, Second order analysis for bang-bang control problems of PDEs. SIAM J. Control Optim. 50 (2012) 2355–2372. [Google Scholar]
  7. E. Casas and M. Mateos, Critical cones for sufficient second order conditions in PDE constrained optimization. SIAM J. Optim. 30 (2020) 585–603. [Google Scholar]
  8. C. Christof and G. Wachsmuth, On second-order optimality conditions for optimal control problems governed by the obstacle problem. Optimization 2020 (2020) 1–41. [Google Scholar]
  9. F.H. Clarke, Optimization and Nonsmooth Analysis. Wiley (1983). [Google Scholar]
  10. C. Clason, Y. Deng, P. Mehlitz and U. Prüfert, Optimal control problems with control complementarity constraints: existence results, optimality conditions, and a penalty method. Optim. Methods Softw. 35 (2020) 142–170. [Google Scholar]
  11. C. Clason, K. Ito and K. Kunisch, A convex analysis approach to optimal controls with switching structure for partial differential equations. ESAIM: COCV 22 (2016) 581–609. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  12. C. Clason, A. Rund and K. Kunisch, Nonconvex penalization of switching control of partial differential equations. Syst. Control Lett. 106 (2017) 1–8. [Google Scholar]
  13. C. Clason, A. Rund, K. Kunisch and R.C. Barnard, A convex penalty for switching control of partial differential equations. Syst. Control Lett. 89 (2016) 66–73. [Google Scholar]
  14. Y. Deng, P. Mehlitz and U. Prüfert, Optimal control in first-order Sobolev spaces with inequality constraints. Comput. Optim. Appl. 72 (2019) 797–826. [Google Scholar]
  15. E.D. Dolan and J.J. Moré, Benchmarking optimization software with performance profiles. Math. Program. 91 (2002) 201–213. [Google Scholar]
  16. J.C. Dunn, On Second order sufficient conditions for structured nonlinear programs in infinite-dimensional function spaces. In Math. Program. with Data Perturbations. Edited by A.V. Fiacco. Marcel Dekker Inc., New York (1998) 83–108. [Google Scholar]
  17. A. Fischer, A special Newton-type optimization method. Optimization 24 (1992) 269–284. [Google Scholar]
  18. A. Galántai, Properties and construction of NCP functions. Comput. Optim. Appl. 52 (2012) 805–824. [Google Scholar]
  19. C. Geiger and C. Kanzow, Theorie und Numerik restringierter Optimierungsaufgaben. Springer, Berlin (2002). [Google Scholar]
  20. L. Guo and J.J. Ye, Necessary optimality conditions for optimal control problems with equilibrium constraints. SIAM J. Control Optim. 54 (2016) 2710–2733. [Google Scholar]
  21. F. Harder and G. Wachsmuth, Comparison of optimality systems for the optimal control of the obstacle problem. GAMM-Mitteilungen 40 (2018) 312–338. [Google Scholar]
  22. F. Harder and G. Wachsmuth, The limiting normal cone of a complementarity set in Sobolev spaces. Optimization 67 (2018) 1579–1603. [Google Scholar]
  23. M. Hintermüller, B.S. Mordukhovich and T.M. Surowiec, Several approaches for the derivation of stationarity conditions for elliptic MPECs with upper-level control constraints. Math. Program. 146 (2014) 555–582. [Google Scholar]
  24. M. Hintermüller and T.M. Surowiec, First-order optimality conditions for elliptic mathematical programs with equilibrium constraints via variational analysis. SIAM J. Optim. 21 (2011) 1561–1593. [Google Scholar]
  25. M. Hintermüller and T.M. Surowiec, On the directional differentiability of the solution mapping for a class of variational inequalities of the second kind. Set-Valued Variat. Anal. 26 (2017) 631–642. [Google Scholar]
  26. M. Hintermüller and M. Ulbrich, A mesh-independence result for semismooth Newton methods. Math. Program. 101 (2004) 151–184. [Google Scholar]
  27. T. Hoheisel, C. Kanzow and A. Schwartz, Theoretical and numerical comparison of relaxation methods for mathematical programs with complementarity constraints. Math. Program. 137 (2013) 257–288. [Google Scholar]
  28. X.M. Hu and D. Ralph, Convergence of a penalty method for mathematical programs with complementarity constraints. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 123 (2004) 365–390. [Google Scholar]
  29. X.X. Huang, X.Q. Yang and D.L. Zhu, A sequential smooth penalization approach to mathematical programs with complementarity constraints. Numer. Funct. Anal. Optim. 27 (2006) 71–98. [Google Scholar]
  30. C. Kanzow and A. Schwartz, Mathematical programs with equilibrium constraints: enhanced Fritz–John-conditions, new constraint qualifications, and improved exact penalty results. SIAM J. Optim. 20 (2010) 2730–2753. [Google Scholar]
  31. C. Kanzow, N. Yamashita and M. Fukushima, New NCP-functions and their properties. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 94 (1997) 115–135. [Google Scholar]
  32. K. Kunisch and D. Wachsmuth, Sufficient optimality conditions and semi-smooth Newton methods for optimal control of stationary variational inequalities. ESAIM: COCV 18 (2012) 520–547. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  33. S. Leyffer, G. López-Calva and J. Nocedal, Interior methods for mathematical programs with complementarity constraints. SIAM J. Optim. 17 (2006) 52–77. [Google Scholar]
  34. G. Liu, J. Ye and J. Zhu, Partial exact penalty for mathematical programs with equilibrium constraints. Set-Valued Anal. 16 (2008) 785. [Google Scholar]
  35. Z.-Q. Luo, J.-S. Pang and D. Ralph, Mathematical Programs with Equilibrium Constraints. Cambridge University Press (1996). [Google Scholar]
  36. Z.-Q. Luo, J.-S. Pang, D. Ralph and S.-Q. Wu, Exact penalization and stationarity conditions of mathematical programs with equilibrium constraints. Math. Program. 75 (1996) 19–76. [Google Scholar]
  37. H. Maurer and J. Zowe, First and second-order necessary and sufficient optimality conditions for infinite-dimensional programming problems. Math. Program. 16 (1979) 98–110. [Google Scholar]
  38. P. Mehlitz and G. Wachsmuth, The limiting normal cone to pointwise defined sets in Lebesgue spaces. Set-Valued Variat. Anal. 26 (2018) 449–467. [Google Scholar]
  39. B.S. Mordukhovich, Variational Analysis and Generalized Differentiation. Springer-Verlag (2006). [Google Scholar]
  40. I. Neitzel, U. Prüfert and T. Slawig, Strategies for time-dependent PDE control with inequality constraints using an integrated modeling and simulation environment. Numerical Algor. 50 (2009) 241–269. [Google Scholar]
  41. J.-S. Pang and D.E. Stewart, Differential variational inequalities. Math. Program. A 113 (2008) 345–424. [Google Scholar]
  42. L. Petzold, J.B. Rosen, P.E. Gill, L.O. Jay and K. Park, Numerical optimal control of parabolic PDEs using DASOPT. In Large-Scale Optimization with Applications. Edited by L.T. Biegler, T.F. Coleman, A.R. Conn, and F.N. Santosa. Vol. 93 of The IMA Volumes in Mathematics and its Applications. Springer, New York (1997). [Google Scholar]
  43. U. Prüfert, OOPDE: An object oriented toolbox for finite elements in Matlab. TU Bergakademie Freiberg (2015). [Google Scholar]
  44. U. Prüfert, Solving optimal PDE control problems. Optimality conditions, algorithms and model reduction. Habilitation thesis, TU Bergakademie Freiberg (2016). [Google Scholar]
  45. D. Ralph and S.J. Wright, Some properties of regularization and penalization schemes for MPECs. Optim. Methods Softw. 19 (2004) 527–556. [Google Scholar]
  46. S. Scheeland S. Scholtes, Mathematical programs with complementarity constraints: stationarity, optimality, and sensitivity. Math. Oper. Res. 25 (2000) 1–22. [Google Scholar]
  47. A. Schiela and D. Wachsmuth, Convergence analysis of smoothing methods for optimal control of stationary variational inequalities with control constraints. ESAIM: M2AN 47 (2013) 771–787. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  48. S. Scholtes and M. Stöhr, Exact penalization of mathematical programs with equilibrium constraints. SIAM J. Control Optim. 37 (1999) 617–652. [Google Scholar]
  49. D. Sun and L. Qi, On NCP-functions. Comput. Optim. Appl. 13 (1999) 201–220. [Google Scholar]
  50. F. Tröltzsch, Optimal Control of Partial Differential Equations: Theory, Methods and Applications. American Mathematical Society (2010). [Google Scholar]
  51. M. Ulbrich, Semismooth Newton methods for operator equations in function spaces. SIAM J. Optim. 13 (2002) 805–841. [Google Scholar]
  52. M. Ulbrich, Semismooth Newton Methods for Variational Inequalities and Constrained Optimization Problems in Function Spaces. MOS-SIAM (2011). [Google Scholar]
  53. G. Wachsmuth, Mathematical programs with complementarity constraints in Banach spaces. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 166 (2015) 480–507. [Google Scholar]
  54. G. Wachsmuth, Towards M-stationarity for optimal control of the obstacle problem with control constraints. SIAM J. Control Optim. 54 (2016) 964–986. [Google Scholar]
  55. G. Wachsmuth, Elliptic quasi-variational inequalities under a smallness assumption: uniqueness, differential stability and optimal control. Calc. Variat. Partial Differ. Equ. 59 (2020). [Google Scholar]
  56. J. Wloka, Partielle Differentialgleichungen: Sobolevräume und Randwertaufgaben. Teubner (1982). [Google Scholar]
  57. J.J. Ye, Necessary and sufficient optimality conditions for mathematical programs with equilibrium constraints. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 307 (2005) 350–369. [Google Scholar]
  58. F. Yılmaz and B. Karasözen, An all-at-once approach for the optimal control of the unsteady Burgers equation. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 259 (2014) 771–779. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.