Applied Mathematics, 2011, 2, 1387-1392
doi:10.4236/am.2011.211196 Published Online November 2011 (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/am)
Copyright © 2011 SciRes. AM
Higher-Order Duality for Minimax Fractional Type
Programming Involving Symmetric Matrices
Caiyun Jin, Cao-Zong Cheng
College of Applied Sciences, Beijing University of Technol ogy, Beijing, China
E-mail: {jincaiyun, czcheng}@bjut.edu.cn
Received September 1, 2011; revised October 16, 2011; accepted Octo ber 23, 2011
Abstract
Convexity and generalized convexity play important roles in optimization theory. With the development of
programming problem, there has been a growing interest in the higher-order dual problem and a lot of related
generalized convexities are given. In this paper, we give the convexity of (,,,,,)Fdb

vector-pseudo-
quasi-Type I and formulate a higher-order duality for minimax fractional type programming involving sym-
metric matrices, and give the weak, strong and strict converse duality theorems under the condition of
higher-order (,,,,,)Fdb

vector-pseudoquasi-Type I.
Keywords: Higher-Order (,,,,,)Fdb

Vector-Pseudoquasi-Type I, Higher-Order Duality, Minimax
Fractional Type Programming, Positive Semidefinite Symmetric Matrix
1. Introduction
In this paper, we focus on the following nondifferen-
tiable minimax fractional programming problem:
1
2
1
2
(, )()
sup
min
(, )()
T
nyY
xR T
fxy xBx
hxy xCx
()P
subjectto () 0,,
n
g
xxR
where is a compact subset of ,
Yl
R,:nl
f
hR RR
and :nm
g
RR
nl
RR are continuously differentiable func-
tions on and , respectively, and
n
R
1
2
(, )()0,
T
fxy xBx
1
2
(, )()>0,(, )
T
hxyxCxxyRR
nl
, B and C are two
positive semidefinite symmetric matrices. nn
When , (P) is a differentiable minimax fra-
ctional programming problem.
==0BC
The duality of programming problem involving sym-
metric matrix has been investigated widely. Schmiten-
dorf [1] established necessary and sufficient optimality
conditions for a particular case of the following problem
under convexity conditions.
()P
1
2
min( ,)()
sup
T
yY
f
xyxBx ()
P
subject to () 0.gx
Under the optimality conditions of [1], Tanimoto [2]
defined a first-order dual problem of , which gene-
ralized the duality theorems for convex minimax pro-
gramming problems considered by Weir [3] and relaxed
the convexity assumptions in the sufficient optimality of
[1]. Mishra and Rueda [4] introduced generalized
second-order type I functions and considered the mini-
max programming problem involving those fun-
ctions and established second-order duality theorems for
problem
()P
()P
()P
. Husian, Anurag Jaysural and Ahmad [5]
established two types of second-order dual models for
problem ()P
, which extends some previously known
results on minimax programming.
With the development of programming problem, there
has been a growing interest in the higher-order dual pro-
blem. Mangasarian [6] first formulated a class of second-
and higher-order du al problems for a nonlinear program-
ming problem involving twice differentiable functions.
In [7], Zhang considered the following nondifferentiable
mathematical programming problem:
1
2
Minimize( )()T
f
xxBx ()
P
subject to () 0,gx
under higher-order invexity assumptions. Mishra and
Rueda [8] generalized the results of Zhang [7] to higher-
C. Y. JIN ET AL.
1388
order type I functions.
In [9], Ahmad, Husain and Sharma considered the
nondifferentiable minimax programming problem ()P
,
and formulated a unified higher -order dual of (P)
, and
established weak, strong and strict converse duality theo -
rems under higher-order (,,,)
F
d
-Type I assump-
tions. In [10], Jayswal and Stancu-Minasian formulated
the weak, strong and strict converse duality of (P)
un-
der generalized convexity of higher-order (,,,)
F
d
-
Type I.
For problem (P), H. C. Lai and K. Tanaka gave the
necessary and sufficient conditions under the conditions
of pseudo-conv ex, strictly pseudo-convex and qu asi-con-
vex [11].
In this paper, we will establish a higher-order dual of
(P) and give the weak, strong and strict converse duality
theorems under (,,,,,)Fdb
 
vector-pseudoquasi-
Type I assumptions. The convexity conditions in this
paper generalized the convexity in [8], and hence, pre-
sents an answer o f a question raised in [10].
2. Preliminaries
Let be the n-dimensional Euclidean space,
n
Rn
R
be
its nonegative orthant and
X
be an open subset of .
Let be the set of all feasible solutions of (P). Denote
n
R
S
=1,2, ,
M
m. For each (,)
x
ySY, we define

()=: ()=0
j
JxjM gx
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
(, )()
()= :
(, )()
(,) ()
=sup
(,)()
T
T
T
zY T
fxy xBx
Yxy Y
hxy xCx
fxz xBx
hxz xCx
12
12
=1
()=(,,):1 1,
= (,,,)with
=1,=(,,,)and (),=1,2,,
sls
s
s
s
isi
i
KxstyN RRsn
ttttR
tyyyy yYxis
 

Definition 1: A function :n
F
XXRR  is said
to be sublinear in its third argument, if ,,
x
xX
1) (subadditivity)
12
,,
n
aa R
121 2
(,;)(,;)(,;);
F
xxa aFxxaFxxa 
2) (positive homogeneous)
,,
n
RaR
 
(,;)=(,;).
F
xx aFxxa
Let :nl
f
RR R
,: \{XX R, , ,
2
12
=( ,)R

0}
n
R
12
 , ,
and
,:bd XXR
:n
eR R:RR
. Let , :nl n
wRRRR
:nn
lR R
and be three diffe-
rentiable functions. We assume that
:kR
nn
R
m
R
F
is a sublinear
functional throughout this paper.
Definition 2 : (,)
f
e is said to be higher-order
(,,,,Fd,)b
 
vector-pseudoquasi-Type I at
x
X
with respect to , if for all
n
pR
x
S and ()yYx
,
1
(, )(,)(, )(,,)
(,,)<0
(, ,(, )((,,)
<(,)
() (,)(,0
( ,,( ,)((,)))( ,).
Tp
p
Tp
p
bxxfxyxfxywxyp
pwxyp
Fxx xxwxyp
dxx
exlxpplxp
Fxx xxlxpxx
 


 


 

2
1
2
22
))
)
TT
x
d


Definition 3: (,)
f
e
) is said to be strictly higher-order
(,,,,,Fdb
 
vector-pseudoquasi-Type I at
x
X
with respect to , if for all
n
pR
x
xS and
()yYx
,
1
2
1
2
22
))
)
TT
x
d


(, )(,)(, )(,,)
(,,) 0
(, ,(, )((,,)
<(,)
() (,)(,0
( ,,( ,)((,)))( ,).
Tp
p
Tp
p
bxxfxyxfxywxyp
pwxyp
Fxx xxwxyp
dxx
exlxpplxp
Fxx xxlxpxx
 


 
 

 

Obviously, when
is subadditive function and sa-
tisfies 0(a)a0

,,,,,), higher-order
(
B
u
Fdb

v ector-pseudo quasi-Type I is th e con-
vexity condition of Theorem 3.1 in [10].
In the following section, we will use Lemma 1 and
Lemma 2 which were given in [11].
Lemma 1: (Necessary Condition) If
x
,
is an optimal
solution of problem (P) satisfying
and
>0, >0
TT
xBx xCx
 () ()
j
g
xj
Jx
are li-
near independent, then there exist (,,)()
s
ty Kx
 
R
 ,
and
,n
uv R

,
m
R

such that

=1
=1
(, )((, ))
()=0
s
ii i
B
i
m
jj
j
tfxyhxyu Cv
gx

 

 

(2.1)
11
22
(, )()(,)(

) 0,
=1,2, ,
TT
ii
fxyxBx hxyxCx
is
 
 
(2.2)
=1
()=
m
jj
i
gx

0 (2.3)
Copyright © 2011 SciRes. AM
C. Y. JIN ET AL.1389
s
=1 =1,0, =1,2,,
s
ii
j
tti

(2.4)
1
2
1
2
1, 1,
=() ,
=() .
TT
TT
TT
uBu vCv
xBu xBx
xCv xBx
 
 
 

(2.5)
Lemma 2: Let be a positive semidefinite symme-
tric matrix of order . Then for all
Bn,n
x
uR,
11
22
()()
TT T
.
x
Bux Bxu Bu
The equality holds when =Bx Bu
for some 0
.
Evidently, if 1
2
()
T
uBu 1, we have
1
2
()
TT
.
x
Bux Bx
3. Duality Model
We consider the following dual model .
(WD)
(,,) ()
(,,,,,)(,,),
sup
max

styK zzuvpH sty
where (,, )
H
sty
,,,)v p

denote the set of all satisfying
(,, nnn m
zu RRRRRR


n
=1 =1
(, ,)((,))0
sm
ipip jj
ij
twzypBuCv kzp

 

(3.11)
1, 1,
TT
uBu vCv (3.12)

=1
=1
(, )(, ),
(,,)(,, )0,
sTT
ii i
i
sT
ii pi
i
tfzyhzyzBu zCv
twzyppwzyp




(3.13)

=1 ()(, )((, ))0.
mT
jjjjp jj
j
gzkzp pkzp
 

(3.14)
If for a triplet (,, )()
s
ty Kz
, the set (,, )=Hsty
(,, ),
then we define the supremum over
H
sty
to be
.

Next, we establish the duality of type (WD).
Theorem 3.1 (Weak Duality) Let
x
and
(,,,,,,,,)zuv styp

be feasible solutions of (P) and
(WD), respectively. Assume that
1)

=1 =1
(,)(,) ,()
sm
iii jj
ij
tf yhyg






is higher-order
(,,,,,)
B
uCv
Fdb
 
() 0aa
vect or -pseu d oquasi Type I at , z
2) 0,
 (,)>0,bxz
12
12
0
(,) (,)
xz xz


.
Then
1
2
1
2
(, )().
sup
(, )()
T
yY T
fxy xBx
hxy xCx
Proof: From (3.14), we know that

=1 ()(,)((,))0,
mT
jjjjp jj
j
gzkzp pkzp
 




then follows form 1) and 2(,)>0xz
, we have
2
2
=1 2
,;((,))(,).
(,)
m
pjj
j
F
xzk zpdxz
xz




Since
F
is sublinear in its third argument, by (3.11)
we can get
=1
=1
=1
=1
=1
2
2
2
0=,;( ,,)
((,))
=,; (,,)
(,;((,))
,;(,, )
(,).
(,)
s
ip i
i
m
pjj
j
s
ip i
i
m
pjj
j
s
ip i
i
Fxztwzyp Bu
Cvkz p
)
F
xztwzy pBuCv
Fxzk zp
F
xztwzy pBuCv
dxz
xz









Furthermore, by 12
12
0
(,) (,)xz xz


 and
1(,)>0,xz
we have
1=1
2
1
,;(,)(,, )
(,),
s
ip i
i
F
xzxztwzy pBuCv
dxz









which implies that


=1
=1
=1
(,)(,)(, )
(, )(, )()
(, ,)(, ,)
0.
 












sTT
ii i
i
sTT
ii i
i
sT
ii pi
i
bxztf xyhxyxBuxCv
tfzyhzyzBu zCv
twzyppwzyp
Copyright © 2011 SciRes. AM
C. Y. JIN ET AL.
1390
From 2) and (3.13), we can get


=1
=1
=1
(, )(, )
(, )(, )()
(, ,)(, ,)
0.
sTT
ii i
i
sTT
ii i
i
sT
ii pi
i
tfxyhxyxBu xCv
tfzyhzy zBu zCv
twzyp pwzyp







Therefore, following from (3.12) and Lemma 2,

11
22
=1
=1
(, )()(, )()
(,)(,)
0.
sTT
ii i
i
sTT
iii
i
t fxyxBxhxyxCx
tfxyhxyxBu xCv



 







Since , ,
12
=( ,,,)0
s
ttt t0, =1,2,,
i
tis
i
y
Y
and 1
2
(, )()>0,(, )
Tnl
hxyxCxxyRR
s
, at least ex-
ists one , such that
{1,2,, }q
1
2
1
2
(,) (),
(,) ()
T
q
T
q
fxy xBx
hxy xCx
which implies that
1
2
1
2
(, )().
sup
(, )()
T
yY T
fxy xBx
hxy xCx
Theorem 3.2 (Strong duality) Let
x
>0,x
be an optimal
solution of (P) satisfying and
let >0
TT
xBx Cx

(), ()
j
g
xjJx

=1,2, ,is
be linear independent. Assume
that for any
(, ,0)=0,
i
wx y


(, ,0)=(, )(, ),
pi ii
wx yfx yhx y
 

and for any
()jJx
(,0)=0, (,0)=().
jpj
kxkx gx


j
Then there exist (,, )()
s
ty Kx
 
)(,, ) and
(,,, ,,
x
uv


(,,, ,,xuv


(,,, ,,xuv


p Hsty
 
,,,=0)st y p

,,,=0)st y p

such that
is a feasible solution
of (WD) and the two objectives have the same values.
Furthermore, if the assumptions of weak duality hold for
all feasible solutions of (P) and (WD), then
is an optimal solu-
tions of (WD).
Proof: Since
x
,x
is an optimal solution of (P) satisfy-
ing and
>0 >0
TT
xBx Cx
 (), ()
j
g
xjJx

 is
linearly independent, by Lemma 1, there exist
(,, )(),
s
ty Kx

and ,n
uv R

,
m
RR



such that


BuCv

=1
=1
(, ))
()=
s
ii i
i
m
jj
j
tfxyy
gx
(,
0
hx
 



 
 

(2.1)
11
22
() =0,
TT
xCx

 
(, )()(, )
=1,2, ,
ii
fxyx Bxhxy
is
 

s
(2.2)
=1 ()=0
m
jj
i
gx

(2.3)
=1
=1,0, =1,2,,
s
ii
j
tti

(2.4)
1
2
1
2
1, 1,
=() ,
=() .
TT
TT
TT
uBu vCv
xBu xBx
xCv xBx
 
 
 

(2.5)
By (2.1) (2.2) (2.3) (2.5) and the conditions of theorem
3.2, we know that (,,, ,,=0)(,, )
x
uvp Hsty

  
, ,,,,,=0)st yp

  
,,,=0)st y p
 
,
that is is an feasible
solutions of (WD). Furthermore, (3.2) implies that
is an optimal solu-
tions of (WD).
(,,xuv

,, ,,v

 
(,xu

Theorem 3.3 (Strict Converse Duality) Let
x
be a
feasible solution of (P) and be a
feasible solution of (WD). Suppose that
(,,, ,zuv


, )p
1)'
1
2
1
2
(, )()=;
sup
(, )()
T
yY T
fxyx Bx
hxyx Cx
 
 
2)'

=1 =1
(, )(, ),()
sm
iii jj
ij
tfy hyg


 

is strictly
higher-order (,,,,,)
B
uCv
Fdb
 

>0 >0,aa
vector-pseudoquasi-
Type I at and;
z
)
3)' (
(,)>bx z

0,
12
12
0
(,)(,)xz xz


 
Then
=;zx
that is z
is an optimal solution of (WD).
Proof: Suppose that the contradiction is not true, that
is zx
. Similar to the proof of Theorem 3.1 we
Copyright © 2011 SciRes. AM
C. Y. JIN ET AL.1391
obtain
1=1
2
1
,;(,)(,, )
(,),
s
ip i
i
FxzxztwzypBuCv
dxz

 











which implies that


=1
=1
=1
(,)(,)(,)
(, )(, )
()
(, , )(,,)
>0.
s
iii
i
TT
s
ii i
i
TT
sT
ii pi
i
bxztfxyhxy
xBu xCv
tfzy hzy
zBuzCv
twzyppwzyp

 



 





From 3)' and (3.13), we can get


=1
=1
=1
(, )(, )
>(,)(,)
()(, ,)(,,)
0.
sTT
ii i
i
sT
iii
i
s
TT
ii pi
i
tfxyhxyxBuxCv
tfzyhzy zBu
zCvtwzyppwzyp



  



 

Therefore, following from (3.12) and Lemma 2,

11
2
)
2
=1
=1
(, )()(, )(
(, )(,)
>0.
sTT
ii i
i
sTT
iii
i
tfxy xBxhxy xCx
tfxyhxy xBuxCv



 





s
Since , ,
12
=( ,,,)0
s
ttt t
 
0,=1,2,,
i
ti
i
y
Y
and
1
2
(, )()>0,(, )
Tnl
hxyx CxxyRR
 

s
, at least
exists one , such that
{1,2,, }q
1
2
1
2
(, )()>,
(, )()
T
q
T
q
fxyx Bx
hxyx Cx
 
 
which implies that
1
2
1
2
(,)( )>
sup
(,)( )
T
yY T
fxyxBx
hxyxCx


which contradicts with 1)'.
Remark: If we take place condition 2)' of this theo-
rem by
2)''

=1 =1
(, )(, ),()
sm
iii jj
ij
tfy hyg


 

is higher-
order (,,,,,)
B
uCv
Fdb


vector-pseudoquasi-Type
I at , and take place condition 3)' by
z
3)'' () 0>0,aa
 (,)>0,bx z

12
12
0,
(,)(,)xz xz


 
the strict converse duality
olds too. h
4. Acknowledgements
This work is supported by Youth Foundation of Beijing
University of Technology (X1006011201002).
5. References
[1] W. E. Schmitendorf, “Necessary Conditions and Suffi-
cient Conditions for Static Minimax Problems,” Journal
of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, Vol. 57, No.
3-4, 1977, pp. 683-693.
doi:10.1016/0022-247X(77)90255-4
[2] S. Tanimoto, “Duality for a Class of Nondifferentiable
Ma thematical Programming Problems,” Journal of Ma-
thematical Analysis and Applications, Vol. 79, No. 2,
1981, pp. 286-294. doi:10.1016/0022-247X(81)90025-1
[3] T. Weir, “Pseudoconvex Minimax Programming,” Utili-
tas Mathematica, Vol. 42, 1992, pp. 234-240.
[4] S. K. Mishra and N. G. Rueda, “Second-Order Duality
for Nondifferentiable Minimax Programming Involving
Generalized Type I Functions,” Journal of Optimization
Theory and Applications, Vol. 130, No. 3, 2006, pp.
477-486. doi:10.1007/s10957-006-9113-9
[5] Z. Husain, A. Jayswal and I. Ahmad, “Second-Order Du-
ality for Nondifferentiable Minimax Programming Pro-
blems with Generalized Convexity,” Journal of Glo- bal
Optimization, Vol. 44, No. 4, 2009, pp. 593-608.
doi:10.1007/s10898-008-9360-4
[6] O. L. Mangasarian, “Second- and Higher-Order Duality
in Nonlinear Programming,” Journal of Mathematical Ana-
lysis and Applications, Vol. 51, No. 3, 1975, pp. 607-620.
doi:10.1016/0022-247X(75)90111-0
[7] J. Zhang, “Generalized Convexity and Higher Order Du-
ality for Mathematical Programming Problem,” Ph.D.
Dissertation, La T ro b e University, Melbourne, 1998.
[8] S. K. Mishra and N. G. Rueda, “Higher Order General-
ized Invexity and Duality in Nondifferentiable Mathe-
Copyright © 2011 SciRes. AM
C. Y. JIN ET AL.
Copyright © 2011 SciRes. AM
1392
matical Programming,” Journal of Mathematical Analysis
and Applications, Vol. 272, No. 2, 2002, pp. 496-506.
doi:10.1016/S0022-247X(02)00170-1
[9] I. Ahmad, Z. Huasin and S. Sharma, “Higher-Order Du-
ality in Nondifferentiable Minimax Programming with
Generalized Type I Functions,” Journal of Optimization
Theory and Applications, Vol. 141, No. 1, 2009, pp. 1-12.
doi:10.1007/s10957-008-9474-3
[10] A. Jayswal and I. Stancu-Minasian, “Higher-Order Dual-
ity for Nondifferentiable Minimax Programming Problem
with Generalized Convexity,” Nonlinear Analysis: The-
ory, Methods & Applications, Vol. 74, No. 2, 2011, pp.
616-625. doi:10.1016/j.na.2010.09.016
[11] H. C. Lai and J. C. Liu, “Necessary and Sufficient Condi-
tions for Minimax Fractional Programming,” Journal of
Mathematical Analysis and Applications, Vol. 230, No. 2,
1999, pp. 311-328. doi:10.1006/jmaa.1998.6204