--- Job danoint Start 08/21/08 06:31:19 GAMS Rev 227 Copyright (C) 1987-2008 GAMS Development. All rights reserved Licensee: Stefan Vigerske G071106/0001CB-LNX Humboldt University Berlin, Numerical Mathematics DC5918 --- Starting compilation --- danoint.gms(106) 2 Mb --- GDXin=/home/stefan/work/gams/models/LINlib/danoint.gdx --- danoint.gms(148) 3 Mb --- Starting execution: elapsed 0:00:00.029 --- danoint.gms(123) 4 Mb --- Generating MIP model m --- danoint.gms(124) 4 Mb --- 665 rows 522 columns 3,234 non-zeroes --- 56 discrete-columns --- danoint.gms(124) 4 Mb --- Executing COINCBC: elapsed 0:00:00.044 GAMS/CoinCbc 2.0 LP/MIP Solver written by J. Forrest Problem statistics: 521 columns and 664 rows. 56 variables have integrality restrictions. Calling CBC main solution routine... Coin Cbc and Clp Solver version 2.00.00, build Mar 20 2008 command line - GAMS/CBC -solve -quit Continuous objective value is 62.6373 - 0.08 seconds processed model has 608 rows, 465 columns (56 integer) and 3456 elements Pass 1: obj. 3.00000 --> up = 2 , down = 1 Pass 2: obj. 0.03501 --> up = 0 , down = 0 -- rand = 6 ( 15) Pass 3: obj. 2.00000 --> up = 1 , down = 1 Pass 4: obj. 0.00000 --> up = 0 , down = 0 -- rand = 0 ( 28) - solution found of 81 Before mini branch and bound, 4 integers at bound fixed and 250 continuous Full problem 608 rows 465 columns, reduced to 238 rows 168 columns Mini branch and bound improved solution from 81 to 79 (0.23 seconds) Round again with cutoff of 77.3637 Pass 5: obj. 3.00000 --> up = 2 , down = 1 Pass 6: obj. 0.03501 --> up = 0 , down = 0 -- rand = 6 ( 15) Pass 7: obj. 2.00000 --> up = 1 , down = 1 Pass 8: obj. 0.01233 --> up = 0 , down = 0 -- rand = 4 ( 16) Pass 9: obj. 0.51178 --> up = 0 , down = 0 -- rand = 14 ( 19) Pass 10: obj. 4.00000 --> up = 1 , down = 2 Pass 11: obj. 1.68900 --> up = 1 , down = 0 Pass 12: obj. 1.24468 --> up = 0 , down = 0 -- rand = 14 ( 28) Pass 13: obj. 2.24531 --> up = 0 , down = 2 Pass 14: obj. 0.37993 --> up = 0 , down = 0 -- rand = 11 ( 11) Pass 15: obj. 3.12588 --> up = 2 , down = 1 Pass 16: obj. 0.57542 --> up = 0 , down = 0 -- rand = 12 ( 12) Pass 17: obj. 2.19013 --> up = 1 , down = 1 Pass 18: obj. 0.44767 --> up = 0 , down = 0 -- rand = 14 ( 29) Pass 19: obj. 6.00000 --> up = 3 , down = 4 Pass 20: obj. 1.41684 --> up = 1 , down = 0 Pass 21: obj. 0.57476 --> up = 0 , down = 0 -- rand = 12 ( 12) Pass 22: obj. 2.62434 --> up = 0 , down = 2 Pass 23: obj. 0.74473 --> up = 0 , down = 0 -- rand = 12 ( 12) Pass 24: obj. 2.00000 --> No solution found this major pass Before mini branch and bound, 1 integers at bound fixed and 71 continuous Full problem 608 rows 465 columns, reduced to 529 rows 393 columns - too large Mini branch and bound did not improve solution (0.84 seconds) After 0.84 seconds - Feasibility pump exiting - took 0.84 seconds Integer solution of 79 found by feasibility pump after 0 iterations and 0 nodes (0.84 seconds) 44 added rows had average density of 169.068 At root node, 44 cuts changed objective from 62.6373 to 62.6767 in 100 passes Cut generator 0 (Probing) - 22 row cuts (8 active), 0 column cuts in 3.940 seconds - new frequency is 4 Cut generator 1 (Gomory) - 2983 row cuts (16 active), 0 column cuts in 0.484 seconds - new frequency is -100 Cut generator 2 (Knapsack) - 0 row cuts (0 active), 0 column cuts in 0.160 seconds - new frequency is -100 Cut generator 3 (Clique) - 0 row cuts (0 active), 0 column cuts in 0.004 seconds - new frequency is -100 Cut generator 4 (MixedIntegerRounding2) - 477 row cuts (18 active), 0 column cuts in 0.088 seconds - new frequency is -100 Cut generator 5 (FlowCover) - 153 row cuts (2 active), 0 column cuts in 0.776 seconds - new frequency is -100 Cut generator 6 (TwoMirCuts) - 3 row cuts (0 active), 0 column cuts in 0.104 seconds - new frequency is -100 After 0 nodes, 1 on tree, 79 best solution, best possible 62.6767 (13.86 seconds) After 1000 nodes, 68 on tree, 79 best solution, best possible 62.69 (36.96 seconds) Integer solution of 77.6667 found after 118871 iterations and 1296 nodes (39.88 seconds) Full problem 608 rows 465 columns, reduced to 330 rows 229 columns Integer solution of 72 found by combine solutions after 118882 iterations and 1297 nodes (40.88 seconds) Integer solution of 69 found after 145488 iterations and 1515 nodes (44.84 seconds) Full problem 608 rows 465 columns, reduced to 401 rows 281 columns - too large After 2000 nodes, 290 on tree, 69 best solution, best possible 62.69 (53.83 seconds) After 3000 nodes, 593 on tree, 69 best solution, best possible 62.69 (70.60 seconds) After 4000 nodes, 848 on tree, 69 best solution, best possible 62.69 (85.91 seconds) Integer solution of 68 found after 519205 iterations and 4996 nodes (100.45 seconds) Full problem 608 rows 465 columns, reduced to 428 rows 305 columns - too large After 5000 nodes, 995 on tree, 68 best solution, best possible 62.69 (100.68 seconds) After 6000 nodes, 1374 on tree, 68 best solution, best possible 62.69 (115.31 seconds) After 7000 nodes, 1618 on tree, 68 best solution, best possible 62.69 (127.88 seconds) After 8000 nodes, 1916 on tree, 68 best solution, best possible 62.6965 (142.50 seconds) Integer solution of 67 found after 852986 iterations and 8296 nodes (147.07 seconds) Full problem 608 rows 465 columns, reduced to 446 rows 321 columns - too large After 9000 nodes, 2080 on tree, 67 best solution, best possible 62.6965 (158.49 seconds) After 10000 nodes, 2495 on tree, 67 best solution, best possible 62.6965 (176.04 seconds) After 11000 nodes, 2851 on tree, 67 best solution, best possible 62.6965 (192.05 seconds) After 12000 nodes, 3347 on tree, 67 best solution, best possible 62.9036 (216.51 seconds) After 13000 nodes, 3845 on tree, 67 best solution, best possible 62.9647 (238.09 seconds) After 14000 nodes, 4294 on tree, 67 best solution, best possible 62.9647 (254.85 seconds) After 15000 nodes, 4792 on tree, 67 best solution, best possible 63.0109 (275.40 seconds) After 16000 nodes, 5288 on tree, 67 best solution, best possible 63.0492 (294.93 seconds) After 17000 nodes, 5782 on tree, 67 best solution, best possible 63.0796 (314.54 seconds) After 18000 nodes, 6212 on tree, 67 best solution, best possible 63.0796 (330.82 seconds) After 19000 nodes, 6705 on tree, 67 best solution, best possible 63.1054 (350.77 seconds) After 20000 nodes, 7199 on tree, 67 best solution, best possible 63.1251 (370.46 seconds) After 21000 nodes, 7690 on tree, 67 best solution, best possible 63.1442 (390.87 seconds) After 22000 nodes, 8124 on tree, 67 best solution, best possible 63.1442 (406.77 seconds) After 23000 nodes, 8621 on tree, 67 best solution, best possible 63.1617 (425.92 seconds) After 24000 nodes, 9116 on tree, 67 best solution, best possible 63.1785 (445.59 seconds) After 25000 nodes, 9606 on tree, 67 best solution, best possible 63.1928 (465.16 seconds) After 26000 nodes, 10036 on tree, 67 best solution, best possible 63.1928 (480.97 seconds) After 27000 nodes, 10448 on tree, 67 best solution, best possible 63.1928 (496.17 seconds) After 28000 nodes, 10860 on tree, 67 best solution, best possible 63.1928 (511.98 seconds) Integer solution of 66.5 found after 3353573 iterations and 28041 nodes (512.27 seconds) Full problem 608 rows 465 columns, reduced to 464 rows 337 columns - too large After 29000 nodes, 11035 on tree, 66.5 best solution, best possible 63.2054 (532.45 seconds) After 30000 nodes, 11529 on tree, 66.5 best solution, best possible 63.2189 (551.77 seconds) After 31000 nodes, 11967 on tree, 66.5 best solution, best possible 63.2189 (568.70 seconds) After 32000 nodes, 12402 on tree, 66.5 best solution, best possible 63.2189 (584.54 seconds) Integer solution of 66.375 found after 3867430 iterations and 32129 nodes (585.36 seconds) Full problem 608 rows 465 columns, reduced to 473 rows 345 columns - too large After 33000 nodes, 12667 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.2298 (602.86 seconds) After 34000 nodes, 13160 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.2422 (622.71 seconds) After 35000 nodes, 13597 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.2422 (639.07 seconds) After 36000 nodes, 14039 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.2422 (655.72 seconds) After 37000 nodes, 13699 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.2422 (662.94 seconds) After 38000 nodes, 14191 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.2528 (684.30 seconds) After 39000 nodes, 14619 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.2528 (701.64 seconds) After 40000 nodes, 15048 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.2528 (717.70 seconds) After 41000 nodes, 14745 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.2528 (725.27 seconds) After 42000 nodes, 15237 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.2642 (744.96 seconds) After 43000 nodes, 15646 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.2642 (760.89 seconds) After 44000 nodes, 16064 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.2642 (776.77 seconds) After 45000 nodes, 15823 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.2642 (784.05 seconds) After 46000 nodes, 16314 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.2755 (803.72 seconds) After 47000 nodes, 16735 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.2755 (820.16 seconds) After 48000 nodes, 17149 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.2755 (836.40 seconds) After 49000 nodes, 16871 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.2755 (844.46 seconds) After 50000 nodes, 17363 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.286 (864.11 seconds) After 51000 nodes, 17794 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.286 (880.25 seconds) After 52000 nodes, 18210 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.286 (896.39 seconds) After 53000 nodes, 17977 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.286 (904.35 seconds) After 54000 nodes, 18470 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.2972 (923.77 seconds) After 55000 nodes, 18874 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.2972 (939.81 seconds) After 56000 nodes, 19280 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.2972 (956.58 seconds) After 57000 nodes, 19045 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.2972 (964.16 seconds) After 58000 nodes, 19534 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.307 (984.28 seconds) After 59000 nodes, 19954 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.307 (1000.87 seconds) After 60000 nodes, 20352 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.307 (1017.70 seconds) After 61000 nodes, 20101 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.307 (1025.74 seconds) After 62000 nodes, 20588 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3149 (1047.59 seconds) After 63000 nodes, 20995 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3149 (1064.30 seconds) After 64000 nodes, 21419 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3149 (1080.95 seconds) After 65000 nodes, 21205 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3149 (1088.73 seconds) After 66000 nodes, 21695 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3243 (1108.66 seconds) After 67000 nodes, 22120 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3243 (1125.19 seconds) After 68000 nodes, 22548 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3243 (1141.96 seconds) After 69000 nodes, 22278 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3243 (1150.18 seconds) After 70000 nodes, 22770 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3335 (1170.40 seconds) After 71000 nodes, 23173 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3335 (1187.38 seconds) After 72000 nodes, 23589 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3335 (1204.08 seconds) After 73000 nodes, 23344 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3335 (1212.25 seconds) After 74000 nodes, 23836 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3422 (1232.02 seconds) After 75000 nodes, 24258 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3422 (1249.05 seconds) After 76000 nodes, 24671 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3422 (1265.52 seconds) After 77000 nodes, 24432 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3422 (1274.14 seconds) After 78000 nodes, 24918 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3505 (1294.98 seconds) After 79000 nodes, 25336 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3505 (1312.30 seconds) After 80000 nodes, 25747 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3505 (1329.64 seconds) After 81000 nodes, 25530 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3505 (1337.74 seconds) After 82000 nodes, 26022 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3588 (1358.67 seconds) After 83000 nodes, 26429 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3588 (1375.05 seconds) After 84000 nodes, 26852 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3588 (1391.10 seconds) After 85000 nodes, 26682 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3588 (1398.88 seconds) After 86000 nodes, 27171 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3672 (1418.74 seconds) After 87000 nodes, 27583 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3672 (1435.39 seconds) After 88000 nodes, 28003 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3672 (1451.89 seconds) After 89000 nodes, 27745 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3672 (1459.66 seconds) After 90000 nodes, 28234 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3745 (1479.07 seconds) After 91000 nodes, 28640 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3745 (1496.21 seconds) After 92000 nodes, 29063 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3745 (1511.96 seconds) After 93000 nodes, 28804 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3745 (1520.05 seconds) After 94000 nodes, 29286 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3827 (1539.63 seconds) After 95000 nodes, 29695 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3827 (1556.42 seconds) After 96000 nodes, 30113 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3827 (1572.78 seconds) After 97000 nodes, 29942 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3827 (1580.57 seconds) After 98000 nodes, 30427 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3896 (1600.18 seconds) After 99000 nodes, 30849 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3896 (1616.76 seconds) After 100000 nodes, 31252 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3896 (1633.59 seconds) After 101000 nodes, 30946 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3896 (1641.67 seconds) After 102000 nodes, 31437 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3953 (1662.77 seconds) After 103000 nodes, 31851 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3953 (1679.72 seconds) After 104000 nodes, 32252 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3953 (1696.09 seconds) After 105000 nodes, 32088 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.3953 (1704.18 seconds) After 106000 nodes, 32575 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.4022 (1723.72 seconds) After 107000 nodes, 32972 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.4022 (1739.69 seconds) After 108000 nodes, 33366 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.4022 (1755.95 seconds) After 109000 nodes, 33139 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.4022 (1764.07 seconds) After 110000 nodes, 33624 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.4102 (1782.93 seconds) After 111000 nodes, 34037 on tree, 66.375 best solution, best possible 63.4102 (1799.26 seconds) Exiting on maximum time Partial search - best objective 66.375 (best possible 63.4102), took 11982667 iterations and 111048 nodes (1800.77 seconds) Strong branching done 948 times (73769 iterations), fathomed 0 nodes and fixed 0 variables Maximum depth 38, 52745 variables fixed on reduced cost Cuts at root node changed objective from 62.6373 to 62.6767 Probing was tried 21479 times and created 35290 cuts of which 34701 were active after adding rounds of cuts (20.917 seconds) Gomory was tried 100 times and created 2983 cuts of which 16 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.484 seconds) Knapsack was tried 100 times and created 0 cuts of which 0 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.160 seconds) Clique was tried 100 times and created 0 cuts of which 0 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.004 seconds) MixedIntegerRounding2 was tried 100 times and created 477 cuts of which 18 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.088 seconds) FlowCover was tried 100 times and created 153 cuts of which 2 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.776 seconds) TwoMirCuts was tried 100 times and created 3 cuts of which 0 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.104 seconds) Result - Stopped on time objective 66.375 after 111048 nodes and 11982667 iterations - took 1800.78 seconds (total time 1800.86) Total time 1800.91 Time limit reached. Have feasible solution. Writing solution. Objective: 66.375 Time: 1800.92 s --- Restarting execution --- danoint.gms(124) 0 Mb --- Reading solution for model m *** Status: Normal completion --- Job danoint.gms Stop 08/21/08 07:01:36 elapsed 0:30:16.790