Constraint qualification 2026-10-14
A constraint qualification is a regularity hypothesis on optimization constraints that guarantees a specified optimality or duality conclusion. For the necessity of Karush-Kuhn-Tucker conditions, an appropriate constraint qualification ensures that a local minimum admits suitable Lagrange multipliers; linear independence of the gradients of equality optimization constraints and active constraints is one sufficient hypothesis in KKT regularity at a local minimum.[ref]
Lecture 7: Lagrange Multipliers and KKT Conditions. Lecture 7, §L7.1.3, Theorem L7.3, printed p. 4: independent active gradients
Slater's condition provides a different constraint qualification for convex optimization, yielding strong duality and dual attainment.[ref]Convex Optimization by Stephen Boyd and Lieven Vandenberghe. §5.2.3, printed pp. 226–227: Slater's condition, strong duality and dual attainment
Karush-Kuhn-Tucker conditions Created 2026-09-24 Updated 2026-10-14
The Karush-Kuhn-Tucker conditions combine membership of the feasible set with a balance of gradients and complementary slackness. For a minimization problem with differentiable functions on an open subset of , writeand use the optimization LagrangianA candidate satisfies the KKT conditions exactly when all four requirements hold:
- Primal feasibility: and , so is a feasible point.
- Dual sign feasibility: . The equality Lagrange multipliers are unrestricted real numbers.
- Stationarity: the gradient of the optimization Lagrangian in the decision variables vanishes,
- Complementary slackness: for every inequality optimization constraint.[ref]Lecture 7: Lagrange Multipliers and KKT Conditions. Lecture 7, §L7.1.1, Definition L7.1, printed p. 3: the four KKT requirements
The sign of each inequality Lagrange multiplier follows the chosen convention : on the feasible set, makes the optimization Lagrangian a lower bound on the objective function. An equality contributes zero on the feasible set for either sign of its Lagrange multiplier. Complementary slackness says an inequality with must have , while implies an active constraint. An active constraint can still have zero Lagrange multiplier; the quadratic minimization with a moving upper bound below gives an explicit example.
The name records William Karush's 1939 master's thesis and the 1951 work of Harold W. Kuhn and Albert W. Tucker.[ref]
Convex Optimization by Stephen Boyd and Lieven Vandenberghe. Chapter 5 bibliography, printed p. 272, and bibliography entries KT51 and Kuh76
KKT regularity at a local minimum 2026-10-14
At a local minimum of continuously differentiable functions, a suitable constraint qualification guarantees the existence of Lagrange multipliers satisfying the KKT conditions. One sufficient local regularity assumption is that the gradients of the equality optimization constraints and the active constraints are jointly linearly independent. This assumption concerns the description of the feasible set, not just the smoothness of the objective function.[ref]
Lecture 7: Lagrange Multipliers and KKT Conditions. Lecture 7, §L7.1.3, Theorem L7.3, printed p. 4: continuous differentiability and independent active gradients
To see why a hypothesis is needed, minimize subject to . The feasible set is the singleton , so is a global minimum. Yet for every finite Lagrange multiplier . Thus this convex optimization problem has an attained optimum without a KKT multiplier. The zero gradient of the active constraint has hidden the actual restriction from its first-order equation. Rewriting it as the equality yields the unrestricted Lagrange multiplier .
For convex optimization, Slater's condition requires strict inequalities and affine equalities at a point in the relative interior of the common domain of a function. A finite optimum value then gives strong duality and dual attainment. Primal attainment and differentiability yield KKT multipliers. Affine inequalities may be nonstrict in the refined version.[ref]
Slater's condition is sufficient, and need not hold for an optimum to exist. The singular example above also shows that mere primal attainment is not a substitute for a constraint qualification.