on the set
Can someone tell me if this is right?
Setting the partials equal to zero, we can find that
and we can see that x is either 0, 2, or -2. So the inflection points are (0,1), (2,0), (-2,0). So is the greatest value we can get.
Checking the boundary conditions, we see that things only get worse if we make x or y larger.
Forming the Hessian at this point,
This is a symmetric matrix, so the diagonal values are the eigenvalues. Both eigenvalues being negative means that the matrix is negative definite and (0,1) is a max of this function. Put another way, the leading principle minors alternate in sign so the matrix must be negative definite.
Can someone confirm that my calculations are right and make a note if I could have done something more efficiently? Thanks.
Yes. Both maximum and minimum must either lie at a point where the gradient is 0 or on the boundary of the set. Since the gradient is never 0 in this set, both maximum and minimum must be on the boundary. That means you must look at [tex]f(x,1)= 1- x^2[tex], and , . And, of course, you must check the point (1,1) itself.
Since this region is not bounded, there do not necessarily exist points where the function is maximum or minimum. (In this case, the maximum does exist but there is no minimum.)
In any case, I find that if , the max for would be . If , the max for would be . Since those combinations aren't within the boundary, is the winner. Correct?
If neither are feasible either (1,1) gives the maximum or there is no maximum. In this case the brute force approach of plotting the function over a reasonably sized part of the feasible quarter space shows that (1,1) is probably the point giving the maximum.