# Confusion about definition of KKT conditions

In this link https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~ggordon/10725-F12/slides/16-kkt.pdf you can find this:

And in the Nonlinear programming book by Bazaraa page 207 you can find this:

My question is

Are those conditions equivalent?

Why?

What are other varieties of KKT conditions?

Notice that if the convex functions $f, h_i$ (for $i = 1,\ldots,m$) and $\ell_j$ (for $j = 1,\ldots, r$) are differentiable, then $\partial f(x) = \{ \nabla f(x) \}$, and similarly for $h_i$ and $\ell_j$, so the condition $$0 \in \partial f(x) + \sum_{i=1}^m u_i \partial h_i(x) + \sum_{j=1}^r v_j \partial \ell_j(x)$$ reduces to $$0 = \nabla f(x) + \sum_{i=1}^m u_i \nabla h_i(x) + \sum_{j=1}^r v_j \nabla \ell_j(x).$$
The first version of the KKT conditions is very nice because it does not require the functions $f, h_i$, and $\ell_j$ to be differentiable. However, the first version is only useful (I believe) in the case where these functions are convex. (For a convex function $f$, the subdifferential $\partial f(x)$ is often a useful substitute for $\nabla f(x)$.)
• A big difference that I notice is the feasible point $\overline x$ mentioned in the second version and not if the first version of the KKT conditions. Could we say that $0 = \nabla f(\overline x) + \sum_{i=1}^m u_i \nabla h_i(\overline x) + \sum_{j=1}^r v_j \nabla \ell_j(\overline x)\iff 0 \in \partial f(x) + \sum_{i=1}^m u_i \partial h_i(x) + \sum_{j=1}^r v_j \partial \ell_j(x)$ – user441848 Jul 1 '18 at 1:28
• Or why the fesible point $\overline x$ is not mentioned in the first version? – user441848 Jul 1 '18 at 1:31
• I think that $x$ vs. $\bar{x}$ is just a different choice of notation. The first version of the KKT conditions explicitly states that $h_i(x) \leq 0$ and $\ell_i(x) = 0$, which is just an explicit way to say that $x$ is feasible. – littleO Jul 1 '18 at 1:39
• hmm I think both explicitly states the constraints conditions $h_i(x)\le0,\ell_i(x)=0$ and $g_i(x)\le0,h_i(x)=0$, but only second version of KKT conditions mention feasibility of point $\overline x.$ – user441848 Jul 1 '18 at 1:46