[SciPy-Dev] improvements of optimize package

Christopher Jordan-Squire cjordan1@uw....
Fri Sep 16 16:12:48 CDT 2011


On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 2:02 PM, Denis Laxalde <denis.laxalde@mcgill.ca> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As discussed recently on the -user list [1], I've started thinking
> about possible improvements of the optimize package, in particular
> concerning the consistency of functions signature, parameters/returns
> names, etc. I've posted a proposal on the wiki of my gihub account [2].
> In brief, the proposal is two-fold:
>
>  - First, concerning the standardization of functions signature, I
>   would propose in particular to gather solver settings in a
>   dictionary (named `options`) and to generalized the use of the
>   `infodict`, `ier`, `mesg` outputs which respectively correspond
>   solver statistics, exit flag and information message. I've tried
>   also to choose simple yet informative variables names.
>
>  - Then, as discussed in the aforementioned thread, the implementation
>   of unified interfaces (or wrappers) to several algorithms with
>   similar purpose is proposed. There definition is basically taken
>   from the classification of the optimize package documentation [3].
>
> I've also try to list the impact of the proposed changes on the
> existing functions as well. Also, having started working on the code, I
> would say that most of this is feasible. Yet, many choices are somehow
> arbitrary and are thus subject to discussions so: comments welcome!
>
> --
> Denis Laxalde
>
>  1: http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/scipy-user/2011-September/030444.html
>  2: https://github.com/dlaxalde/scipy/wiki/Improvements-to-optimize-package
>  3: http://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/optimize.html
>
>

Looks well thought-out. A few comments:

Is there a reason to give two interfaces for constrained and
unconstrained optimization instead of combining them somehow?
Why not include leastsq with the unconstrained optimization methods
for the unconstrained optimization interface?
Why not put anneal in with the unconstrained optimization interface?
You could include in the interface the possibility of returning a
dictionary of solver specific outputs.

Bound constrained optimization should be associated with constrained
optimization, not unconstrained. Also, I think there's a typo in the
multivariate solvers: 'newton\_krylov' should be 'newton_krylov'.

-Chris JS





> _______________________________________________
> SciPy-Dev mailing list
> SciPy-Dev@scipy.org
> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-dev
>


More information about the SciPy-Dev mailing list