I have formulated an optimization problem that is expressed as: $$\begin{align*} \underset{\mathbf{x}}{\text{minimize}} &&-\log(ax_1)-\log(bx_2)\\ \text{s.t.} && x_1 \leq 0.2\\ \text{} && x_2\leq x_3 \\ && x_1+x_2+x_3=1 \\ \end{align*}$$ where $a,b>0$ and $\mathbf{x} \in \mathbb{R}^3_+$. I would like to solve this problem via the Lagrange dual function. However, I can't solve it. Here's my approach. I rewrite the problem as $$ \mathfrak{L}(x,\lambda,\nu) = \{-\log(ax_1)-\log(bx_2)+\lambda_1 (x_1-0.2) + \lambda_2(x_2-x_3) + \nu (x_1+x_2+x_3-1) \} $$ $$ G(\lambda,\nu)= \underset{x}{\text{inf}} \{ \ \mathfrak{L}(x,\lambda,\nu) \ \} $$
At this point, I try to find $G(\lambda,\nu)$ by (partially) differentiating $\mathfrak{L}(x,\lambda,\nu)$ w.r.t. $\mathbf{x}$. Using this approach, I can obtain the optimal $x_1^*$ and $x_2^*$ as follows: $$x_1^*=\Big[\frac{1}{\nu-\lambda_1}\Big]^+$$ $$x_2^*=\Big[\frac{1}{\nu+\lambda_2}\Big]^+$$ but not $x_3^*$. I thought this occurs because the objective function is not related to the variable $x_3$ so there is no optimal $x_3$. Rather $x_3$ is just a variable that has to satisfy the constraint. For instance, if I extend $\mathbf{x}$ into $\mathbb{R}^4$ and change the equality constraint to $\mathbf{1}^Tx=1$, I should have a set of $(x_3,x_4)$. For the above question, the partial derivative of $\mathfrak{L}(x,\lambda)$ w.r.t. $x_3$ leads to an equation that has no $x_3$ variable, i.e. $\nu = \lambda_2$ when the derivative is set to zero. I tried to change the objective function to a linear one, i.e. without log, but I face similar problem where the derivative is not related to the optimal variable. Thus, I would like to seek for an advice on how to solve this kind of problem via the dual method.