Paper detail

When Lift-and-Project Cuts are Different

In this paper, we present a method to determine if a lift-and-project cut for a mixed-integer linear program is irregular, in which case the cut is not equivalent to any intersection cut from the bases of the linear relaxation. This is an important question due to the intense research activity for the past decade on cuts from multiple rows of simplex tableau as well as on lift-and-project cuts from non-split disjunctions. While it is known since Balas and Perregaard (2003) that lift-and-project cuts from split disjunctions are always equivalent to intersection cuts and consequently to such multi-row cuts, Balas and Kis (2016) have recently shown that there is a necessary and sufficient condition in the case of arbitrary disjunctions: a lift-and-project cut is regular if, and only if, it corresponds to a regular basic solution of the Cut Generating Linear Program (CGLP). This paper has four contributions. First, we state a result that simplifies the verification of regularity for basic CGLP solutions from Balas and Kis (2016). Second, we provide a mixed-integer formulation that checks whether there is a regular CGLP solution for a given cut that is regular in a broader sense, which also encompasses irregular cuts that are implied by the regular cut closure. Third, we describe a numerical procedure based on such formulation that identifies irregular lift-and-project cuts. Finally, we use this method to evaluate how often lift-and-project cuts from simple $t$-branch split disjunctions are irregular, and thus not equivalent to multi-row cuts, on 74 instances of the MIPLIB benchmarks.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.