Facility location and continuous approximations
Strongly convex multi-objective frameworks naturally accommodate classic spatial, physical, and logistics challenges. For instance, urban planning and supply chain optimization frequently involve determining the optimal spatial coordinates for physical facilities (e.g., warehouses, hospitals, or transit hubs) to mutually minimize the travel distances to several distributed demand points.
In such Weber-type facility location problems, when evaluating trade-offs using squared Euclidean distances, the formulation becomes a simultaneous minimization of multiple objectives:
Where \(x\) represents the facility location and \(a_k\) represents the fixed locations of the demand segments. The modulus-2 strong convexity of each distance objective, since the Hessian is identically \(2I \succ 0\), translates directly into a simplicial Pareto set topology [HHI+20]. Since the objectives are all strongly convex, the Pareto set forms a continuous simplex in the decision space.
Likewise, in engineering design optimizing for structural compliance or minimum energy, the objectives inherently manifest as positive-definite quadratic costs. The strong convexity ensures that descent methods, such as the multi-objective Newton method, achieve superlinear or even quadratic local convergence along the Pareto front [FGranaDS09].
These properties are explicitly leveraged by Adaptive Weighted Sum (AWS) methods in structural multidisciplinary optimization, where successive boundary-constrained strongly-convex QPs smoothly and uniformly map the Pareto front [dWK]. Even in complex biological systems, such as competitive Lotka-Volterra models, transformations of the quadratic interaction terms yield strongly convex models that exhibit identically stable simplicial Pareto behavior.
Approximating these Pareto fronts with a Bézier simplex yields a completely continuous, analytic structural location map. Planners and decision-makers are empowered to visually and analytically slide trade-off priorities—such as selectively favoring certain demand hubs—to determine the optimal coordinates seamlessly, without needing to re-solve the spatial optimization from scratch.
References
El Houcine Bergou, Youssef Diouane, and Vyacheslav Kungurtsev. Complexity iteration analysis for strongly convex multi-objective optimization using a newton path-following procedure. Optimization Letters, 15:1215–1227, 2021. doi:10.1007/s11590-020-01623-x.
Henri Bonnel and Corinne Schneider. Post-pareto analysis and a new algorithm for the optimal parameter tuning of the elastic net. Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, 183(3):993–1027, 2019. doi:10.1007/s10957-019-01592-x.
S Breedveld, P Storchi, M Keijzer, A Heemink, and B Heijmen. A novel approach to multi-criteria inverse planning for imrt. Physics in Medicine and Biology, 2007.
Olivier de Weck and Il Yong Kim. Adaptive weighted sum method for multiobjective optimization. Submitted to Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization for Review.
Jörg Fliege, L M Graña Drummond, and Benar Fux Svaiter. Newton's method for multiobjective optimization. SIAM Journal on Optimization, 20(2):602–626, 2009. doi:10.1137/08071692X.
Naoki Hamada. 多目的最適化の解集合のトポロジーの検定法 (statistical test for the topology of solution sets in multi-objective optimization). In 日本応用数理学会2020年度年会講演予稿集 (Proceedings of the JSIAM Annual Meeting 2020). 2020.
Naoki Hamada and Keisuke Goto. Data-driven analysis of pareto set topology. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, 657–664. 2018. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3205455.3205613.
Naoki Hamada, Kenta Hayano, Shunsuke Ichiki, Yutaro Kabata, and Hiroshi Teramoto. Topology of pareto sets of strongly convex problems. SIAM Journal on Optimization, 30(3):2659–2686, 2020. doi:10.1137/19M1264175.
Per Christian Hansen and Dianne Prost O'Leary. The use of the l-curve in the regularization of discrete ill-posed problems. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, 14(6):1487–1503, 1993. doi:10.1137/0914086.
Ken Kobayashi, Naoki Hamada, Akiyoshi Sannai, Aiko Tanaka, Kenichi Bannai, and Masashi Sugiyama. Bézier simplex fitting: describing pareto fronts of simplicial problems with small samples in multi-objective optimization. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, volume 33, 2304–2313. 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v33i01.33012304.
Suyun Liu and Luís N Vicente. The stochastic multi-gradient algorithm for multi-objective optimization and its application to supervised machine learning. Annals of Operations Research, 339(3):1119–1148, 2024. doi:10.1007/s10479-021-04033-z.
Harry Markowitz. Portfolio selection. The Journal of Finance, 7(1):77–91, 1952. doi:10.2307/2975974.
Yuto Mizota, Naoki Hamada, and Shunsuke Ichiki. All unconstrained strongly convex problems are weakly simplicial. 2021. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2106.12704, arXiv:2106.12704.
Houduo Qi. Optimal portfolio selections via l1,2-norm regularization. URL: https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/451606/1/mvpl12_for_PURE.pdf.
Robert Tibshirani, Michael Saunders, Saharon Rosset, Ji Zhu, and Keith Knight. Sparsity and smoothness via the fused lasso. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology), 67(1):91–108, 2005.
Dongxiang Yan, He Yin, Tao Li, and Chengbin Ma. A two-stage scheme for both power allocation and ev charging coordination in a grid tied pv-battery charging station. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, 2021. doi:10.1109/TII.2021.3054417.
Ming Yuan and Yi Lin. Model selection and estimation in regression with grouped variables. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology), 68(1):49–67, 2006.