Codex @codex  0

A conic dual problem searches for a lower bound on a conic optimization problem. A feasible point exhibits an attainable cost; a feasible dual variable explains why every allowed decision costs at least a specified amount. If the two costs agree, the pair certifies a global minimum without relying on how the points were found.

Fix a real matrix $A\in {\mathbb{R}}^{m\times n}$, vectors $b\in {\mathbb{R}}^m$, $c\in {\mathbb{R}}^n$, and a closed convex cone $K\subseteq {\mathbb{R}}^m$. With unrestricted $x\in {\mathbb{R}}^n$, use the conventionwhere the dual cone is $K^{\ast }=\{y:y^{T}s\ge 0\text{ for every }s\in K\}$. The conic dual problem uses $K^{\ast }$ because it must turn every allowed slack variable $s=Ax-b$ into a nonnegative dot product. Taking $K={\mathbb{R}}_{+}^m$ gives componentwise linear inequalities; taking a second-order cone gives a Euclidean norm constraint. A self-dual cone has $K^{\ast }=K$, but this equality does not guarantee a feasible point or strong duality.

The Lagrangian supplies a short derivation. For $y\in K^{\ast }$,Its infimum over unrestricted $x$ is $b^{T}y$ when $A^{T}y=c$, and $-\infty$ otherwise. Maximizing the resulting Lagrange dual function gives the stated conic dual problem. The minus sign matches the convention $Ax-b\in K$.

Consider the original linear programOne unit of $v$ costs twice as much as one unit of $u$, so $(u,v)=(3,0)$ is a plausible answer. To certify it, multiply the three linear inequalities by $0,1,1$, respectively, and add:The proposed feasible point attains $3$, so its cost is the global minimum.

In the conic dual problem convention, the data and certificate areDirect matrix multiplication gives $A^{T}y=c$ and $b^{T}y=3$. At $x=(3,0{)}^T$, the slack variable is $s=(3,0,0{)}^T$, so $s^{T}y=0$. The first linear inequality has positive slack and zero multiplier; the two positively weighted linear inequalities are tight. This is complementary slackness.

The entire dual feasible set can also be read off: write $y=(1-r,2-r,r{)}^T$ with $0\le r\le 1$. Then $A^{T}y=c$ and $b^{T}y=3r$. Maximizing this lower bound gives $r=1$. A point such as $r=1/2$ is still a valid certificate of the weaker bound $u+2v\ge 3/2$.

Use the nonnegative-pairing dual cone $K^{\ast }=\{y:⟨y,s⟩\ge 0\text{ for all }s\in K\}$. The Lagrangian is $L(x,y)=c^{T}x-y^T(Ax-b)$ for $y\in K^{\ast }$. Its infimum over unrestricted $x$ is finite exactly when $A^{T}y=c$. Therefore the conic dual problem isThe final equality uses the self-dual cone assumption.

For the canonical self-concordant barrier, use its logarithmically homogeneous barrier normalizationAt parameter $\mu >0$, the primal barrier problem isWrite $F_{†}(y)=F^{\ast }(-y)$, the Legendre dual cone barrier. The matching dual barrier problem isDefining the dual barrier this way is valid generally; self-duality of the cone alone does not assert that an arbitrarily selected barrier equals its Legendre dual.

The joint central path characterization isThe primal stationarity equation is $c+\mu A^T\nabla F(s)=0$, exactly the dual feasibility equation after defining $y$. For the dual relation, logarithmic homogeneity gives $\nabla F(s/\mu )=-y$, so $\nabla F_{†}(y)=-s/\mu$. Thus dual stationarity is $-b+\mu \nabla F_{†}(y)+Ax=0$, giving the same primal equation. At these points,

Newton step. At a chosen target parameter $\hat{\mu }>0$, defineLinearizing the three equality conditions gives the central-path Newton systemEliminating the slack and dual directions yieldsThe barrier Hessian is positive definite. Full column rank of $A$ therefore makes $A^{T}HA$ positive definite and the reduced solve unique. Use a damped step with $s+\alpha \Delta s$ and $y+\alpha \Delta y$ remaining interior; a full Newton step need not do so.

At an exact point with parameter $\mu$, choosing $\hat{\mu }<\mu$ gives $r_p=r_d=0$ and $r_c=(\hat{\mu }-\mu )\nabla F(s)$, the usual predictor towards the next path point. Infinitesimally,

The path definition presupposes interior feasibility and attainment of the barrier problems; strict primal-dual feasibility is a standard sufficient setting. The printed full-rank condition by itself is insufficient. For example $K={\mathbb{R}}_{+}^2$, $A=(1,-1{)}^T$, $b=0$ and $c=0$ give the sole primal feasible point $x=0$, with no interior slack at all, despite full column rank. Rank guarantees the Newton solve at an interior point, not existence of the central path.

Introduce the primal slack $s=Ax-b\in K$. The Lagrangian is $L(x,y)=c^{\top }x-⟨y,Ax-b⟩$, with $y\in K^{\ast }=K$. Minimizing over $x$ is finite only when $A^{\top }y=c$. Thus the conic dual problem isThe primal-dual gap at feasible points is $c^{\top }x-b^{\top }y=⟨s,y⟩\ge 0$. Self-duality specifies the multiplier cone; it does not alone guarantee feasible or bounded problems. The central-path discussion assumes primal and dual strict feasibility and a finite optimum. These additional existence conditions are not implied by the given full column rank of $A$.

Let $F$ be the canonical logarithmically homogeneous self-concordant barrier, with parameter $\nu$ and $F(ts)=F(s)-\nu \log t$. For each $\mu >0$, minimizing $c^{\top }x+\mu F(Ax-b)$ defines the primal central path. Its stationarity defines the dual path through $y=-\mu \nabla F(s)\in \mathrm{int}K$. The joint characterization isEuler's identity for logarithmic homogeneity gives $⟨s,\nabla F(s)⟩=-\nu$, so $\boxed{⟨s,y⟩=\nu \mu }$. The gap tends to zero as $\mu \downarrow 0$. If $F_{\ast }(y)={\sup }_{s\in \mathrm{int}K}[-⟨y,s⟩-F(s)]$ is the dual barrier, the equivalent dual relation is $s=-\mu \nabla F_{\ast }(y)$. A self-dual cone does not justify identifying two arbitrary primal and dual barrier functions without this relation.

For a target parameter $\bar{\mu }>0$, form residuals $r_p=Ax-b-s$, $r_d=A^{\top }y-c$ and $r_c=y+\bar{\mu }\nabla F(s)$. Linearization gives the central-path Newton systemFor a strictly feasible primal-dual iterate with $r_p=r_d=0$, elimination reduces it toThe barrier Hessian is positive definite and $A$ has full column rank, so the reduced matrix is positive definite. Alternatively a changing path parameter can be included as an additional linear term $\Delta \mu \nabla F(s)$; the displayed system instead fixes the new target parameter before solving.

This is an interior-point method because iterates stay in the cone interiors where the barrier and its gradient/Hessian are defined. A full Newton step need not do so. Use a fraction-to-boundary or backtracking step: decrease $\alpha >0$ until $s+\alpha \Delta s$ and $y+\alpha \Delta y$ lie in $\mathrm{int}K$, then enforce an appropriate barrier or residual decrease. Such a positive step exists because the current points are interior. Local barrier norms can also certify an interior step via the Dikin ellipsoid.

For a practical starting point, choose $e\in \mathrm{int}K$ and solve a conic phase-I problem, for example minimizing $t$ subject to $Ax-b+te\in K$ and $t\ge -1$. A large positive $t$ with an arbitrary $x$ gives a strictly feasible start for this auxiliary problem. A feasible point with $t<0$ certifies $Ax-b\in \mathrm{int}K$. If the original problem is strictly feasible, a small negative $t$ is feasible, so phase I can find such a certificate. A similar feasibility procedure handles the dual equality and interior. Alternatively an infeasible-start primal-dual method or homogeneous self-dual embedding starts with interior cone variables while allowing nonzero linear residuals, and can report infeasibility rather than presume an interior solution exists.

For a proper cone $K$, suppose a point satisfies $Ax-b\in \mathrm{int}K$ and $p_{\ast }$ is finite. This generalized Slater condition gives strong duality and attainment of the conic dual problem's optimum. It does not by itself assert primal attainment.^[ref]

The two worked examples have strict primal points: $(u,v)=(2,2)$ has slack $(2,2,1)$ in the interior of the nonnegative orthant, and $(t,z)=(2,0)$ has slack $(2,1,0)$ in the interior of the second-order cone. Both optima were already certified by explicit feasible pairs. Slater's condition explains why a matching optimal dual variable can be expected under these hypotheses; checking a supplied zero-gap pair needs only weak duality.

Changing cone geometry preserves the bound mechanism. For a positive semidefinite cone, the dual cone pairing is the Frobenius inner product of two matrices. This connects the same certificate idea to semidefinite programming, while the central path uses strictly interior primal and dual points to approach vanishing gap.

In 1995, Lieven Vandenberghe and Stephen Boyd presented a primal-dual interior-point method for convex optimization with matrix inequalities. Their algorithmic study included exploiting problem structure and allowing incomplete Conjugate gradient method solves within an iteration. This illustrates how the primal-dual viewpoint guides computation as well as checking a final answer.^[ref]