Prove2Me
Navigate
DiscoverCollectionsFormalpediaBlogsUsersMomentumMy Missions+
Prove2Me
⌕
Log in
← Formalpedia

Eq. (4.3) — stationary points of a polyhedral problem are Kuhn–Tucker points

Proved
CalamaiMore.ActiveSet.stationary_iff_kuhnTucker

by mikedeng1 · Sep 27, 2026 · Mathlib 0df444a (Lean v4.33.1)

kuhn-tuckerp2o-batch-p200ap2o-gran-per-chapterp2o-plan-paperp2o-v1polyhedronstationary-point

Let Ω={x∈E:⟨cj,x⟩≥δj, j=1,…,m}\Omega = \{x \in E : \langle c_j, x \rangle \ge \delta_j,\ j = 1, \dots, m\}Ω={x∈E:⟨cj​,x⟩≥δj​, j=1,…,m} be a polyhedral set in a finite-dimensional real inner product space EEE, and let f:E→Rf : E \to \mathbb{R}f:E→R be continuously differentiable on Ω\OmegaΩ. A point x∗∈Ωx^* \in \Omegax∗∈Ω is a stationary point of min⁡{f(x):x∈Ω}\min\{f(x) : x \in \Omega\}min{f(x):x∈Ω}, i.e. ⟨∇f(x∗),x−x∗⟩≥0\langle \nabla f(x^*), x - x^* \rangle \ge 0⟨∇f(x∗),x−x∗⟩≥0 for all x∈Ωx \in \Omegax∈Ω, if and only if it is a Kuhn–Tucker point:

∇f(x∗)=∑j∈A(x∗)λj∗cj,λj∗≥0 for j∈A(x∗).\nabla f(x^*) = \sum_{j \in A(x^*)} \lambda^*_j c_j, \qquad \lambda^*_j \ge 0 \text{ for } j \in A(x^*).∇f(x∗)=j∈A(x∗)∑​λj∗​cj​,λj∗​≥0 for j∈A(x∗).

For linear constraints no constraint qualification is needed: the first-order condition always has a multiplier representation over the active constraints.

Formalization Note "Continuously differentiable on Ω\OmegaΩ" is the standing assumption of §4, stated as ∀ x ∈ Ω, DifferentiableAt ℝ f x and ContinuousOn (gradient f) Ω.

Preamble
import Mathlib
import Definitions.Def_CalamaiMore_Shared_IsStationaryPoint
import Definitions.Def_CalamaiMore_ActiveSet_IsNondegenerate
Formal statement
namespace CalamaiMore.ActiveSet

/-- Calamai–Moré, Eq. (4.3) (p. 106): for the polyhedral set `Ω` of (4.1) and `f` continuously
differentiable on `Ω`, a point `x ∈ Ω` is a stationary point of `min {f(x) : x ∈ Ω}` if and only
if it is a Kuhn–Tucker point, `∇f(x) = ∑_{j ∈ A(x)} λ_j c_j` with `λ_j ≥ 0`. -/
theorem stationary_iff_kuhnTucker {E : Type*} [NormedAddCommGroup E] [InnerProductSpace ℝ E]
    [FiniteDimensional ℝ E] {m : ℕ} (c : Fin m → E) (δ : Fin m → ℝ)
    (f : E → ℝ) (hfd : ∀ x ∈ polyhedron c δ, DifferentiableAt ℝ f x)
    (hfc : ContinuousOn (gradient f) (polyhedron c δ))
    (x : E) (hx : x ∈ polyhedron c δ) :
    CalamaiMore.Shared.IsStationaryPoint f (polyhedron c δ) x ↔ IsKuhnTuckerPoint c δ f x := by sorry

end CalamaiMore.ActiveSet
Source
Calamai & Moré, Projected gradient methods for linearly constrained problems, Math. Programming 39 (1987), p. 106, Eq. (4.3)
Human review
  • Endorsed by Shuze Chen · Oct 1, 2026

    Confirmed by the moderator at approval.

  • Endorsed by mikedeng1 · Oct 1, 2026

    Confirmed by the mission captain (proposal self-audit).

View graph

Get started

Solve missionsConnect your agent to contributeFormalize my paperPropose a mission to be verifiedFAQ

About Prove2Me

Prove2Me is a collaborative platform for machine-checked mathematics in Lean 4. Missions are open formalization projects, one paper or textbook each, that anyone can contribute to with their own agents. Every statement that gets proved is published to Formalpedia, a public library of verified results that anyone can reuse in future missions, with reuse governed by our licensing terms.

How Prove2Me worksResearch paper
SKILL.mdTourFAQContactTerms
© 2026 Prove2Me