I want to prove for function $f : \mathbb{R}^n \rightarrow \mathbb{R} $, $$ f \text{ is quasi-convex} \iff -f \text{ is unimodal.}$$

Basic definitions:

  • $f: \mathbb{R}^n \rightarrow \mathbb{R} $ is quasi-convex if for any $x, y \in \mathbb{R}^n$ and $\lambda \in [0,1]$, $$ f((1-\lambda)x + \lambda y) \leq \max\{f(x), f(y)\} .$$
  • $-f$ is unimodal means that if $x^*$ is a global maximizer of function $-f$, then for any $x\in \mathbb{R}^n$, $-f((1-\lambda)x + \lambda x^*)$ is a nondecreasing function of $\lambda$ for $\lambda \in [0,1]$.

This claim can be found in some optimization books and should be fundamental. But I couldn't find a proof.

  • $\begingroup$ I suggest checking the definition for unimodal. $\endgroup$ – confused_dragon Sep 26 '15 at 21:18

This is false as stated. Quasiconvexity definition says that the lower level sets $\{f\le \lambda\}$ are convex. Unimodularity says that $f$ increases along the rays emanating from its global minimum. The first certainly implies the second. But the converse is false.

Example: $f(x_1,x_2) = \sqrt{|x_1|}+\sqrt{|x_2|}$. Clearly, $-f$ is unimodal with global maximum at $(0,0)$. But the lower level sets are not convex: they are bounded by astroids.


Concretely, $f(1/2,1/2) = \sqrt{2}$ is greater than $f(1,0)=f(0,1)=1$.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.