The chosen quadratic objective function above gives more than an optimal allocation: its Lagrange multiplier predicts how much the best cost changes when the required total changes. For this example,
This is an explicit derivative of a constrained value function and an instance of the envelope theorem. At , one extra small unit of required output costs approximately units per unit of output, in the chosen normalized model. Increasing makes this equality-constrained minimization problem more expensive; it is not a gain from relaxing an upper resource limit. The sign and meaning depend on how the optimization constraint and optimization Lagrangian are written.[ref]
For an actual finite change , the cost difference is exactly
At , the linear approximation predicts , while the exact increase is . The extra comes from the squared term in this polynomial, rather than numerical error. A Lagrange multiplier gives a local sensitivity analysis; treating it as a constant price over a large change generally loses the change in the optimum itself.
Figure 1.
The multiplier is the slope of the optimal cost, with a computable finite-change correction
. Original calculations for . Left: the value function and its tangent at . Right: exact and first-order cost increases for nonnegative changes ; their gap is . The marked is a chosen example, not an observed price or a measured response. Details.
For a smooth optimizer of an equality problem , the short chain rule calculation explains the result: and imply . The differentiability and stationarity assumptions matter: an optimizer can fail to be unique or vary smoothly. The envelope theorem records when this interpretation is justified.

Articles by others on the same topic (0)

There are currently no matching articles.