I am looking into the following constrained quadratic program in $x \in \mathcal{R}^4$
$$\begin{array}{ll} \text{minimize} & \| x \|_2^2\\ \text{subject to} & A x = b\\ & x_{\min} \le x_i \le x_{\max}, \quad\forall i \in \{1,2,3,4\} \end{array}$$
where $A \in \mathcal{R}^{3 \times 4}$ and $b \in \mathcal{R}^3$. I would like to solve it without using an iterative quadratic solver.
For now, I am thinking about the following "algorithm":
Use the Moore–Penrose inverse to find optimal $x$.
If any of the constraints are violated, fix one $x_i$ at the boundary value at a time, and find the rest of $x$ by the regular inverse. This is repeated for each $x_i$, resulting in 4 different vectors (if only one side of the constraint is violated). I finally choose the one of these with the lowest norm.
Now I wonder if this seems like a sound strategy? If so, does anyone know if the strategy has a name that I can search for?. If anyone has other suggestions for how to solve the problem without iterative quadratic solvers I appreciate the feedback.
This seems like something that should have been asked before on this site, but I could not find it searching. Sorry if duplicate.
Assuming the problem has a solution, your strategy is pretty much there, with a couple small tweaks.
The problem you have specified though looks familiar enough that dealing with the combinatorial explosion at the boundary is probably already solved with a simpler algorithm. For example, applying the method of Lagrange Multipliers you can conclude that there is some vector $\lambda$ so that $x=\frac12A^T\lambda$, hence $AA^T\lambda=2b$. That won't really help if the optimal solution is outside your range of interest, but symmetric linear solvers are typically quite a bit faster than more general purpose tools.
Other thoughts that come to mind, if the constraint $Ax=b$ is tight then with probability $1$ (with most common distributions of entries for $A$ and $b$) the system has the maximum possible rank (in your case, a $3\times4$ matrix has maximal rank $3$). If the system were square then by definition, it would minimize $\|x\|_2^2$ (since it's the only solution, so it's the minimum across all solutions), and you would just have to hope that it satisfies the remaining inequalities.
Update: Your comment is interesting. In the event that you don't care about the general problem and are definitely working with a $3\times4$ matrix with maximal rank there is quite a bit more we can say about the system.
First, that means the general solution to the system of equations can be represented by $\lambda v_h+v_p$, where $v_h$ is any nonzero solution to the homogeneous equation $Ax=0$ and $v_p$ is any solution to the particular equation $Ax=b$. Note that $v_h$ is any nonzero right singular vector corresponding to the singular value $0$ and that any major linear algebra libraries can compute those extremely efficiently. Additionally, finding a single solution to $Ax=b$ is also implemented in those libraries and very fast.
All that said, now we have the reduced problem of minimizing $\|\lambda v_h+v_p\|_2^2$ where $v_h$ and $v_p$ are both known and $\lambda$ is just a scalar, still subject to $m\leq\lambda v_h+v_p\leq M$ (coordinate-wise inequality) for some vectors $m$ and $M$. That system of inequalities can quickly be turned into a single lower bound and a single upper bound for $\lambda$. It might be possible that the inequalities can't all be satisfied, and this will be the step where you determine satisfiability of your equations.
Let $v_{hi}$ and $v_{pi}$ denote the $i$-th coordinate of the homogeneous and particular solutions, respectively. Differentiating with respect to $\lambda$ and setting equal to $0$ we conclude $$\lambda=-\frac{\sum v_{pi}}{\sum v_{hi}}$$.
From there, just check the upper and lower bounds for $\lambda$ for any smaller values (might not be necessary -- I'm a little tired to think about convexity and whatnot) or if the previously computed value falls outside the interval of interest.