To make it more clear, let’s consider an optimization problem of the following standard form: \begin{equation} \begin{array}{cl} {\min} & {f_0(x)}\\ {\mathrm{s.t.}} & {f_i(x)\leqslant 0,\quad i=1,\cdots,m}\\ {} & {h_i(x)=0,\quad i=1,\cdots,p}\\ \end{array} \end{equ…

You’re right that that can be a confusing topic. We should probably add more explanation to the JuMP docs. A key realization is that: The sign convention is arbitrary. I could assume that \lambda was non-positive if I put a - sign in front of the summation JuMP uses the duality conventions from c…

To confirm: The sign of the dual variable on a constraint of `JuMP` model

Specific Domains Optimization (Mathematical)

WuSiren May 15, 2024, 11:08am 3

Thank you very much @odow for your very detailed explanation and valuable experience!!!

1 Like

Topic		Replies	Views
Result_dual vs getdual. signs are the opposite Optimization (Mathematical)	13	2848	October 15, 2020
Lagrange multipliers (duals) in JuMP 0.19 Optimization (Mathematical) question	15	3204	September 9, 2019
Dual vs shadow price: Which one to use? Optimization (Mathematical) question , jump	8	1749	May 23, 2023
Costates and Hamiltonian in JuMP and MathProgbase Optimization (Mathematical)	4	1905	October 1, 2017
Dual: "getdual()" is not working for Conic/Quadratic constraints Optimization (Mathematical) question	6	2459	June 30, 2018

To confirm: The sign of the dual variable on a constraint of `JuMP` model

Related topics