As referred in pyomo documentation, BuildAction() is an advance topic and additionally according to the documentation, it is somewhat more efficient to build/solve? constraints with BuildAction().
An example constraint generated with BuildAction():
m.const1 = Constraint([(t, a) for t in m.TIME for a in m.AREA],
noruleinit=True)
def const1_rule(m):
for t in m.TIME:
for a in m.AREA:
lhs = (some_vars_1[t,a])
rhs = (some_vars_2[t,a])
m.const1.add((t,a), (lhs == rhs))
m.const1_build = BuildAction(rule=const1_rule)
So m.const1 = Constraint() builds the pyomo constraint without any rule via noruleinit=True.
Then m.const1_build = BuildAction() runs the function const1_rule, and in this function the constraints are added to m.const1 via .add().
An example constraint generated with normal way:
def const1_rule(m, t, a):
lhs = (some_vars_1[t,a])
rhs = (some_vars_2[t,a])
return lhs == rhs
m.const1 = Constraint(m.TIME, m.AREA, rule=const1_rule)
QUESTIONS:
Another application of BuildAction can be intialization of Pyomo model data from Python data structures, or efficient initialization of Pyomo model data from other Pyomo model data.
1) In what way it is more efficient?
2) What is the difference building the constraints with BuildAction()?
3) Should I use it, yes-no-why?
4) If BuildAction() is better, how would I take advantage of it? (for example; assume there is a different working principle of BuildAction(), and maybe because of that I don't need to create some pyomo Sets or Params.)
Related
I would like to use pyomo to solve a multiple linear regression under constraint in pyomo.
to do so I have 3 matrices :
X (noted tour1 in the following code) My inputs (600x13)(bureaux*t1 in pyomo)
Y (noted tour2 in the following code) the matrix I want to predict (6003)(bureauxt2 inpyomo)
T (noted transfer In the code) (13x3)(t1*t2 in pyomo)
I would like to do the following
ypred = XT
minimize (ypred-y)**2
subject to
0<T<1
and Sum_i(Tij)=1
To that effect, I started the following code
from pyomo.environ import *
tour1=pd.DataFrame(np.random.random(size=(60,13)),columns=["X"+str(i) for i in range(13)],index=["B"+str(i) for i in range(60)])
tour2=pd.DataFrame(np.random.random(size=(60,3)),columns=["Y"+str(i) for i in range(3)],index=["B"+str(i) for i in range(60)])
def gettour1(model,i,j):
return tour1.loc[i,j]
def gettour2(model,i,j):
return tour2.loc[i,j]
def cost(model):
return sum((sum(model.tour1[i,k] * model.transfer[k,j] for k in model.t1) - model.tour2[i,j] )**2 for i in model.bureaux for j in model.tour2)
model = ConcreteModel()
model.bureaux = Set(initialize=tour1.index.tolist())
model.t1 = Set(initialize=tour1.columns)
model.t2 = Set(initialize=tour2.columns)
model.tour1 = Param(model.bureaux, model.t1,initialize=gettour1)
model.tour2 = Param(model.bureaux, model.t2,initialize=gettour2)
model.transfer = Var(model.t1,model.t2,bounds=[0,1])
model.obj=Objective(rule=cost, sense=minimize)
I unfortunately get an error at this stage :
KeyError: "Index '('X0', 'B0', 'Y0')' is not valid for indexed component 'transfer'"
anyone knows how I can calculate the objective ?
furthermore any help for the constrains would be appreciated :-)
A couple things...
First, the error you are getting. There is information in that error statement that should help identify the problem. The construction appears to be trying to index transfer with a 3-part index (x, b, y). That clearly is outside of t1 x t2. If you look at the sum equation you have, you are mistakenly using model.tour2 instead of model.t2.
Also, your bounds parameter needs to be a tuple.
While building the model, you should be pprint()-ing the model very frequently to look for these types of issues. That only works well if you have "small" data. 60 x 13 may be the normal problem size, but it is a total pain to troubleshoot. So, start with something tiny, maybe 3 x 4. Make a Set, pprint(). Make a Constraint, pprint()... Once the model computes/solves with "tiny" data, just pop in the real stuff.
I am trying to use pymo for a single objective nonlinear optimization problem.
The objective function is to minimize the variance (or standard deviation) of the input variables following certain constraints (which I was able to do in Excel).
Following is a code example of what I am trying to do
model = pyo.ConcreteModel()
# declare decision variables
model.x1 = pyo.Var(domain=pyo.NonNegativeReals)
model.x2 = pyo.Var(domain=pyo.NonNegativeReals)
model.x3 = pyo.Var(domain=pyo.NonNegativeReals)
model.x4 = pyo.Var(domain=pyo.NonNegativeReals)
# declare objective
from statistics import stdev
model.variance = pyo.Objective(
expr = stdev([model.x1, model.x2, model.x3, model.x4]),
sense = pyo.minimize)
# declare constraints
model.max_charging = pyo.Constraint(expr = model.x1 + model.x2 + model.x3 + model.x4 >= 500)
model.max_x1 = pyo.Constraint(expr = model.x1 <= 300)
model.max_x2 = pyo.Constraint(expr = model.x2 <= 200)
model.max_x3 = pyo.Constraint(expr = model.x3 <= 100)
model.max_x4 = pyo.Constraint(expr = model.x4 <= 200)
# solve
pyo.SolverFactory('glpk').solve(model).write()
#print
print("energy_price = ", model.variance())
print(f'Variables = [{model.x1()},{model.x2()},{model.x3()},{model.x4()}]')
The error I get is TypeError: can't convert type 'ScalarVar' to numerator/denominator
The problem seems to be caused by using the stdev function from statistics.
My assumption is that the models variables x1-x4 are yet to have been assigned a value and that is the main issue. However, I am not sure how to approach this?
First: stdev is nonlinear. So why even try to solve this with a linear solver?
Pyomo does not know about the statistics package. You'll have to program the standard deviation using elementary operations, use an external function approach, or use an approximation (like minimizing the range).
So I managed to solve this issue and I am including the solution below. But first, there are a couple of points I would like to highlight
As #Erwin Kalvelagen mentioned, 'stdev' is nonlinear so a linear solver like 'glpk' would always result in an error. For my problem, 'ipopt' worked fine but be careful as it can perform poorly in some cases.
Also, as #Erwin Kalvelagen mentioned, Pyomo does not know about the statistics package. So When you try to use a function from that package (e.g., 'stdev', 'variance', etc.), it will try to evaluate the model variables before the solver assigns them any value and that will cause an error.
A pyomo objective function needs an expression. The code sample below shows how to dynamically generate an expression for the variance without using an external package. The code is also agnostic to the number of model variables you have.
Using either the variance or the standard deviation will serve the same purpose for my project. I opted for using the variance to avoid calculating its square root (as the standard deviation is the square root of the variance).
Variability Objective Function
import pyomo.environ as pyo
def variabilityRule(model):
#Calculate mean of all model variables
for index in model.x:
mean += model.x[index]
mean = mean/len(model.x)
#Calculate the difference between each model variable and the mean
obj_exp = ((model.x[1])-mean) * ((model.x[1])-mean)
for i in range(2, len(model.x)+1): #note that pyomo variables start from 1 not zero
obj_exp += ((model.x[i])-mean) * ((model.x[i])-mean)
#Divide by number of items
obj_exp = (obj_exp/(len(model.x)))
return obj_exp
model = pyo.ConcreteModel()
model.objective = pyo.Objective(
rule = variabilityRule,
sense = pyo.maximize)
EDIT: Standard Deviation Calculation
You can use the same approach to calculate the standard deviation as I found out. Just multiply the final expression (`obj_exp`) by power 0.5
obj_exp = obj_exp ** 0.5
...
P.S. If you are interested, this is how I dynamically generated my model variables based on an input array
model.x = pyo.VarList(domain=pyo.NonNegativeReals)
for i in range(0, len(input_array)):
model.x.add()
I want to solve an MINLP problem with SCIP in Python and therefore use PySCIPOpt.
I already introduced the variables, the objective function, and set the constraints (as far as it was possible, given my issue).
Within one constraint, there is a variable in the exponent of another pair of variables. Currently, it looks like this (x_1, x_2, y_1, y_2, z, v all are variables):
model.addCons( x_1 * x_2 * ( (y_1/y_2)**((z-1)/z) -1 ) - v == 0 )
This gives back the following error:
NotImplementedError: exponents must be numbers
I was reading about a builtin exp() method, but did not find a good example of how to use it in my specific code.
The only alternative I could imagine would be using the constraint handler, which of course is more work than just putting in exp().
Does anyone has an idea on how to implement the respective constraint in PySCIPOpt?
Thanks for your help in advance!
I believe you can model this with PySCIPOpt, by taking into account that
Which for your exponential yields
So I think your constraint can then be modeled like this:
model.addCons( x_1 * x_2 * (exp(((z-1)/z)*log(y_1/y_2))-1) - v == 0 )
At least the code runs, and if I'm not mistaken, it's mathematically equivalent to what you wanted.
I have used CVXPY and some of its LP solvers to determine whether a solution to an A*x <= b problem is feasible, and now I would like to try PySCIPOpt. I could not find an example of this in the docs, and I'm having trouble figuring out the right syntax. With CVXPY the code is simply:
def do_cvxpy(A, b, solver):
x = cvxpy.Variable(A.shape[1])
constraints = [A#x <= b] #The # denotes matrix multiplication in CVXPY
obj = cvxpy.Minimize(0)
prob = cvxpy.Problem(obj, constraints)
prob.solve(solver=solver)
return prob.status
I think with PySCIPOpt one cannot use matrix notation as above, but must treat vectors and matrices as collections of scalar variables, each of which has to be added individually, so I tried this:
def do_scip(A, b):
model = Model("XYZ")
x = {}
for i in range(A.shape[1]):
x[i] = model.addVar(vtype="C", name="x(%s)" % i)
model.setObjective(0) #Is this right for a feasibility-only problem?
model.addCons(A*x <= b) #This is certainly the wrong syntax
model.optimize()
return model.getStatus()
Could anyone please help me out with the correct form for the constraint in addCons() for this kind of problem, and confirm that an acceptable way to ask whether a solution is feasible is to simply pass 0 as the objective?
I'm still not positive about the setObjective(0), but at least I can get the code to run without errors by "unpacking" the A matrix and the b vector and adding each element as a constraint:
for i in range(ncols):
for j in range(nrows):
model.addCons(A[j,i]*x[i] <= b[i])
I also discovered that CVXPY actually has an interface to SCIP, but it gives me an error when I try to use it:
getSolObjVal cannot only be called in stage SOLVING without a valid solution
which seems to suggest that the interface cannot be used for feasibility-only problems.
This question and answer demonstrate that when feature selection is performed using one of scikit-learn's dedicated feature selection routines, then the names of the selected features can be retrieved as follows:
np.asarray(vectorizer.get_feature_names())[featureSelector.get_support()]
For example, in the above code, featureSelector might be an instance of sklearn.feature_selection.SelectKBest or sklearn.feature_selection.SelectPercentile, since these classes implement the get_support method which returns a boolean mask or integer indices of the selected features.
When one performs feature selection via linear models penalized with the L1 norm, it's unclear how to accomplish this. sklearn.svm.LinearSVC has no get_support method and the documentation doesn't make clear how to retrieve the feature indices after using its transform method to eliminate features from a collection of samples. Am I missing something here?
For sparse estimators you can generally find the support by checking where the non-zero entries are in the coefficients vector (provided the coefficients vector exists, which is the case for e.g. linear models)
support = np.flatnonzero(estimator.coef_)
For your LinearSVC with l1 penalty it would accordingly be
from sklearn.svm import LinearSVC
svc = LinearSVC(C=1., penalty='l1', dual=False)
svc.fit(X, y)
selected_feature_names = np.asarray(vectorizer.get_feature_names())[np.flatnonzero(svc.coef_)]
I've been using sklearn 15.2, and according to LinearSVC documentation , coef_ is an array, shape = [n_features] if n_classes == 2 else [n_classes, n_features].
So first, np.flatnonzero doesn't work for multi-class. You'll have index out of range error. Second, it should be np.where(svc.coef_ != 0)[1] instead of np.where(svc.coef_ != 0)[0] . 0 is index of classes, not features. I ended up with using np.asarray(vectorizer.get_feature_names())[list(set(np.where(svc.coef_ != 0)[1]))]