We have the function $f(x_1, x_2, x_3)=9x_1\cdot x_2\cdot x_3$ and we want to find possible extremas under the constraint $2x_1+x_2+x_3=m, m>0$ and $x_1, x_2, x_3>0$.

I have done the following:

\begin{equation*}2x_1+x_2+x_3=m \Rightarrow x_3=m-2x_1-x_2\end{equation*}

\begin{equation*}\tilde{f}(x_1, x_2)=9x_1\cdot x_2\cdot (m-2x_1-x_2)=9mx_1\cdot x_2-18x_1^2\cdot x_2-9x_1\cdot x_2^2\end{equation*}

\begin{align*}\tilde{f}_{x_1}=9m x_2-36x_1\cdot x_2-9 x_2^2 \\ \tilde{f}_{x_1x_1}=-36x_1\cdot x_2 \\ \tilde{f}_{x_2}=9mx_1-18x_1^2-18x_1\cdot x_2 \\ \tilde{f}_{x_2x_2}=-18x_1 \\ \tilde{f}_{x_1x_2}=9m -36x_1-18 x_2\end{align*}

\begin{equation*}\tilde{f}_{x_1}=0 \Rightarrow 9m x_2-36x_1\cdot x_2-9 x_2^2=0\Rightarrow x_2=0 \text{ or } x_2=m-4x_1\end{equation*}

\begin{equation*}\tilde{f}_{x_1}=0 \Rightarrow 9m x_2-36x_1\cdot x_2-9 x_2^2=0\Rightarrow x_2=0 \text{ or } x_2=m-4x\end{equation*}

So we get the following: \begin{equation*} \tilde{f}_{x_1x_1}(x_1, m-4x_1)=-36x_1\cdot (m-4x_1), \tilde{f}_{x_2x_2}(x_1,m-4x_1)=-18x_1, \tilde{f}_{x_1x_2}(x_1,m-4x_1)=9m -36x_1-18 (m-4x_1)\end{equation*} So, it holds that \begin{equation*}\tilde{f}_{x_1x_1}(x_1, m-4x_1)\tilde{f}_{x_2x_2}(x_1, m-4x_1) - \tilde{f}^2_{x_1x_2}(x_1, m-4x_1)=18\cdot 36x_1^2(m-4x_1)-(9m -36x_1-18 (m-4x_1))^2\end{equation*} For some specific $m$ it is $>0$, then the function has extrema, right?


Then we have to calculate $x_1^{\star}(m), x_2^{\star}(m), \lambda^{\star}(m)$.

What is $\lambda$ ?

  • $\begingroup$ There is no $\lambda$ since the problem with $x_1$ and $x_2$ does not have the constraint anymore. $\endgroup$ – LinAlg Jan 19 '17 at 9:45

The fact that your problem mentions $\lambda$ says to me that Lagrange multipliers are the preferred solution method. Let $g(x_1,x_2,x_3) = 2x_1 + x_2 + x_3$. You are asked to find the maximum of $f$ on the set constrained by $g=m$, $x_1>0$, $x_2>0$, $x_3>0$. The Lagrange multiplier equations are $\nabla f = \lambda \nabla g$, or \begin{align} 9x_2 x_3 &= 2\lambda \tag{1}\label{1} \\ 9x_1 x_3 &= \lambda \tag{2}\label{2} \\ 9x_1 x_2 &= \lambda \tag{3}\label{3} \\ \end{align} along with the constraint equation $$ 2x_1 + x_2 + x_3 = m \tag{4}\label{4} $$ Comparing the left-hand sides of \eqref{2} and \eqref{3}, we get $9x_1x_3 = 9x_1 x_2$. Since $x_1 > 0$, we can cancel it and get $x_2 = x_3$. Similarly, comparing the left-hand sides of \eqref{1} and \eqref{2}, we get $9x_2 x_3 = 2(9x_1 x_3)$, so $x_2 = 2x_1$. Hence $x_3 = 2x_1$ as well. Substituting these into \eqref{4} gives $$ 2x_2 + 2x_1 + 2x_1 = m \implies x_1 = \frac{m}{6} $$ and therefore $x_2 = x_3 = \frac{m}{3}$. In the notation of your problem: \begin{align*} x_1^\star(m) &= \frac{m}{6} \\ x_2^\star(m) &= \frac{m}{3} \\ x_3^\star(m) &= \frac{m}{3} \\ \lambda^\star(m) &= 9 x_1^\star(m) x_2^\star(m) = 9\cdot \frac{m}{6} \cdot\frac{m}{3} = \frac{m^2}{2} \end{align*}

You asked:

What is $\lambda$?

and I think you meant, what is $\lambda$ in terms of $m$ in this problem? You have your answer to that. But the deeper question is whether this seemingly arbitrary variable inserted into the solution method has any meaning. And it does.

Let $f^\star(m)$ be the constrained maximum value of $f$, as a function of $m$. We know $$ f^\star(m) = f(x_1^\star(m),x_2^\star(m),x_3^\star(m)) = 9 \cdot \frac{m}{6}\cdot \frac{m}{3} \cdot \frac{m}{3} = \frac{m^3}{6} $$ Notice that $$ \frac{df^\star}{dm} = \frac{m^2}{2} = \lambda $$ This is true in general. In words, the Lagrange multiplier is the change in the constrained maximum as the constraint level changes. In economics, a lot of times $f$ is a utility function and $g$ is a cost function. Then $\lambda$ is the marginal utility of money.

  • $\begingroup$ I understand!! Thank you so much!! :-) $\endgroup$ – Mary Star Jan 26 '17 at 9:59

Firstly, observe that the function has no minimum. It can go as close to $0$ as you want but never reaches $0$.

Secondly, see that $x_2$ and $x_3$ are symmetric. So the AMGM inequality says, fixing any $x_1$, the maximum is given by $x_2=x_3$.

Therefore, you are left with the following problem: maximize $9x_1 \times y^2$ under the constraint $2x_1+2 y=m$ (for we have set $x_2=x_3=y$). At this stage, the problem can be solved with single-variable calculus by substituting the constraint to the objective function.

  • $\begingroup$ So that $f$ has a minimum, it must reached $0$ ? Why are $x_2$ and $x_3$ symmetric? $\endgroup$ – Mary Star Jan 18 '17 at 22:55
  • $\begingroup$ It doesn't have a minimum. If any, it has infimum of $0$, but it cannot be reached so it has no minimum. $x_2$ and $x_3$ are symmetric because, if you interchange the two variables in the question, it is the same question. $\endgroup$ – jim h Jan 18 '17 at 22:57
  • $\begingroup$ AMGM inequality is $\frac{x+y}{2}\geq \sqrt{xy}$, right? How do we use it? I got stuck right now... $\endgroup$ – Mary Star Jan 18 '17 at 23:01
  • $\begingroup$ AMGM the equality holds iff $x=y$. When is $x_2\times x_3$ maximized? $\endgroup$ – jim h Jan 18 '17 at 23:38
  • $\begingroup$ Ah ok. When it is a square? $\endgroup$ – Mary Star Jan 18 '17 at 23:49

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.