Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
GDP => MINLP Transformation #3082
GDP => MINLP Transformation #3082
Changes from 11 commits
f4ce9b9
d093e2e
e1d1d60
55b77d8
fdeef16
e16fa15
94c2200
bf64515
71c4f1f
da82da7
0f2d643
1b1875c
15c5217
539baf2
b27dff5
bf26e5b
5aa9670
2c8a0a9
4206794
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Unfortunately (and this is my fault too), this isn't actually correct... It assumes that nested indicator variables are local, which is not necessarily true. The safest thing for now is to always set the rhs to 1 and to put the exactly-one constraint on the parent block (and transform from leaf to root, which I think you're already doing).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Your point with putting the exactly-one constraint on the parent block (instead of the root disjunct's parent block) is that the exactly-one constraint needs to be transformed again if it is for a nested disjunction?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding what the "root disjunct" is...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is putting the exactly-one constraint on the parent disjunct equivalent?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Correct. It should be on the parent disjunct so that it does get transformed again.
Check warning on line 127 in pyomo/gdp/plugins/binary_multiplication.py
Codecov / codecov/patch
pyomo/gdp/plugins/binary_multiplication.py#L127