3
$\begingroup$

For $n$ real variables $x_1, \ldots, x_n$, I have a bunch of inequalities of form $2 x_i > x_j + x_k$ or $2 x_i < x_j + x_k$, where $i,j,k$ are distinct. My goal is to determine whether this set of inequalities has a solution (the bonus question is to find a solution). It's important that inequalities are strict (otherwise, $x_1=x_2=\ldots=x_n$ is a solution).

For every instance, I can feed it to an LP-solver, and get an answer. However, I'm doing it to get an insight into a broader problem, so I'm wondering if there is a humanly-understandable way to check if a solution exists (and possibly find it). I tried to understand the simplex method for this case and didn't get any insights, but maybe it's just me.

There seems to be a relation to "non-negative vector dependence". Namely, if we write every constraint in form $c_i < 0$, and there exist $\alpha_1, \alpha_2, \ldots$ such that

  • $\alpha_i$ are non-negative and not all $\alpha_i$ are $0$, and
  • $\sum_i \alpha_i c_i \equiv 0$,

then no solution exists (since we can sum up the inequalities with coefficients $\alpha_i$ and get $0 < 0$).

Examples:

  1. $2x_2 < x_1 + x_3$ is clearly solvable.
  2. $2x_1 < x_2 + x_3$, $2x_2 < x_1 + x_3$ is solvable by taking a sufficiently large $x_3$.
  3. $2x_1 < x_2 + x_3$, $2x_2 < x_1 + x_3$, and $2x_3 < x_1 + x_2$ is not solvable: by summing these inequalities, we get $2 (x_1 + x_2 + x_3) < 2 (x_1 + x_2 + x_3)$. In this case, the inequalities are non-negatively linearly dependent.

If it somehow simplifies the problem, then a more restrictive version of the problem assumes additional constraints $x_1 < x_2 < \ldots < x_n$ (again, important that inequalities are strict). In this case, there seems to be some relation to balanced bracket sequences. Namely, assume that $+1$ corresponds to an opening bracket, and $-1$ corresponds to a closing bracket. Then there is a contradiction if we can write a balanced bracket sequence using a non-negative combination of the constraints.

Examples: consider 4 variables.

  1. Constraint $2x_2 > x_1 + x_3$ corresponds to a vector $(-1,2,-1,0)$, corresponding to a sequence ')' + '((' + ')' + '' = ')(()', which is not balanced, so no contradiction here.
  2. On the other hand, constraint $2x_1 > x_2 + x_3$ corresponds to a vector $(2,-1,-1,0)$, corresponding to a sequence '((' + ')' + ')' + ''=''(())', which is balanced, and hence there is a contradiction.
  3. Constraint $2x_2 > x_1 + x_4$ and $2x_3 < x_1 + x_4$ correspond to vectors $(-1,2,0,-1)$ and $(1, 0, -2, 1)$. Summing these vectors, we get $(0, 2, -2, 0)$ corresponding to sequence '' + '((' + '))' + '' = '(())', which is balanced, and hence there is a contradiction.
$\endgroup$
4
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Have a look at Fourier–Motzkin elimination, that could be done "by hand" $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 25, 2023 at 16:51
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks! Not sure if it'll lead anywhere (since the number of inequalities grows super-exponentially), but looks like it's worth a try. $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 25, 2023 at 17:41
  • $\begingroup$ The formulation is a bit ambiguous: are all inequalities of the same type, or you have both types mixed? $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 26, 2023 at 0:00
  • $\begingroup$ @fedja, Mixed, see the very last example $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 26, 2023 at 1:33

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.