Skip to content

121 dev return names of examodel state control variable and dynamic constraint#124

Merged
jbcaillau merged 5 commits intomainfrom
121-dev-return-names-of-examodel-state-control-variable-and-dynamic-constraint
Jul 25, 2025
Merged

121 dev return names of examodel state control variable and dynamic constraint#124
jbcaillau merged 5 commits intomainfrom
121-dev-return-names-of-examodel-state-control-variable-and-dynamic-constraint

Conversation

@jbcaillau
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@jbcaillau jbcaillau commented Jul 25, 2025 •
edited
Loading

closes #121

@jbcaillau jbcaillau linked an issue Jul 25, 2025 that may be closed by this pull request
[Dev] Return getters for exa state, control, variable and dynamic constraint multipliers #121
Closed
2 tasks
@jbcaillau jbcaillau marked this pull request as draft July 25, 2025 12:41
@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Jul 25, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Breakage test results
Date: 2025-07-25 20:10:38

Name Latest Stable
OptimalControl.jl compat: v0.5.1 compat: v0.2.5

@jbcaillau jbcaillau marked this pull request as ready for review July 25, 2025 19:48
@jbcaillau
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

jbcaillau commented Jul 25, 2025

@ocots please review

@ocots
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

ocots commented Jul 25, 2025 •
edited
Loading

@jbcaillau Ok so it misses multipliers to boundary and path constraints. The rest seems fine for me.

The signature of the method build a solution, that @PierreMartinon uses in CTDirect, is:

function build_solution(
    ocp::Model,
    T::Vector{Float64},
    X::TX,
    U::TU,
    v::Vector{Float64},
    P::TP;
    objective::Float64,
    iterations::Int,
    constraints_violation::Float64,
    message::String,
    status::Symbol,
    successful::Bool,
    path_constraints_dual::TPCD=__constraints(),
    boundary_constraints_dual::Union{Vector{Float64},Nothing}=__constraints(),
    state_constraints_lb_dual::Union{Matrix{Float64},Nothing}=__constraints(),
    state_constraints_ub_dual::Union{Matrix{Float64},Nothing}=__constraints(),
    control_constraints_lb_dual::Union{Matrix{Float64},Nothing}=__constraints(),
    control_constraints_ub_dual::Union{Matrix{Float64},Nothing}=__constraints(),
    variable_constraints_lb_dual::Union{Vector{Float64},Nothing}=__constraints(),
    variable_constraints_ub_dual::Union{Vector{Float64},Nothing}=__constraints(),
) where {
    TX<:Union{Matrix{Float64},Function},
    TU<:Union{Matrix{Float64},Function},
    TP<:Union{Matrix{Float64},Function},
    TPCD<:Union{Matrix{Float64},Function,Nothing},
}

@jbcaillau
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

jbcaillau commented Jul 25, 2025

exactly. for now seems ok. another hint that we must integrate upgrades between separate repose more seemlessly

@jbcaillau jbcaillau merged commit a73ac29 into main Jul 25, 2025
8 checks passed
@ocots
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

ocots commented Jul 25, 2025

@jbcaillau But I am afraid that the plot will bug if there should be dual variables that are missing.

@jbcaillau
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

jbcaillau commented Jul 25, 2025

be confident

@ocots
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

ocots commented Jul 25, 2025

Maybe it will ok thanks to:

https://github.com/control-toolbox/CTModels.jl/blob/b141b6b39782a3c310cce1945ee8822b9456b850/ext/plot_utils.jl#L81

@jbcaillau
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

jbcaillau commented Jul 25, 2025

@ocots

  • i can pass zeros with the proper size for the missing multipliers
  • plus the default is to not plot path and boundary multipliers, right?

@ocots
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

ocots commented Jul 25, 2025

@ocots

  • i can pass zeros with the proper size for the missing multipliers

It is better to provide anything because it won't be plotted in that case. It is better than plotting a zero value.

  • plus the default is to not plot path and boundary multipliers, right?

Path constraints are plotted by default if there exist.
Boundary multipliers are printed if any.

@jbcaillau jbcaillau mentioned this pull request Jul 25, 2025
Closed
@jbcaillau jbcaillau deleted the 121-dev-return-names-of-examodel-state-control-variable-and-dynamic-constraint branch July 25, 2025 20:42
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@ocots ocots ocots approved these changes

Assignees

@jbcaillau jbcaillau

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[Dev] Return getters for exa state, control, variable and dynamic constraint multipliers

2 participants

@jbcaillau @ocots