Redundant Inequality constraints in moment model

9 views
Skip to first unread message

Philipp Spee

unread,
Oct 27, 2025, 8:30:33 AMOct 27
to YALMIP
Dear Professor Löfberg, 

I have a question about the implementation of Laserre's Moment hierarchy in the moment solver of Yalmip: When applying the relaxation to a problem the "standard procedure" is adding moment constraints and redundant equality constraints, and representing inequality constraints via localizing matrices (if I got everything right, I am not an expert). In this paper https://arxiv.org/abs/2208.10521 the author mentions additional redundant inequality constraints which can further tighten the relaxations but are not part of the standart procedure. (Appendix A, last paragraph). I wanted to ask if these constraints are implemented in yalmips moment solver.

Thank you in advance!
Kind regards, Philipp Spee

P.S. Thank you for saving me much time!

Johan Löfberg

unread,
Oct 28, 2025, 2:46:07 AMOct 28
to YALMIP
If you have, say, the constraint x == 1, you will automatically have relaxations of the constraints such as x^2 == x in the model, if that is what you are asking. That happens when the equality constraint essentially is multiplied with the localizer matrix and then relaxed.

Philipp Spee

unread,
Oct 28, 2025, 5:03:32 AMOct 28
to YALMIP
Thanks for the quick reply! I think my question was not clear: I was asking about inequalities. Normally you multiply one inequality, say g_i, with a moment matrix (of corresponding degree) to get the localizing matrix corresponding to the inequality g_i. In the paper the author talks about additionally building localizing matrices by multiplying inequalities, say g_i*g_j and then multiplying with a moment matrix. Is this also done in the moment solver?

Johan Löfberg

unread,
Oct 28, 2025, 7:12:43 AMOct 28
to YALMIP
If you want to add redundant constraints from products of (in)equalities, you have to add those manually. 

Philipp Spee

unread,
Oct 28, 2025, 12:51:13 PMOct 28
to YALMIP
Ok, thank you!
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages