--- Job ran10x26 Start 08/21/08 11:45:30 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 --- ran10x26.gms(106) 2 Mb --- GDXin=/home/stefan/work/gams/models/LINlib/ran10x26.gdx --- ran10x26.gms(148) 3 Mb --- Starting execution: elapsed 0:00:00.010 --- ran10x26.gms(123) 4 Mb --- Generating MIP model m --- ran10x26.gms(124) 4 Mb --- 297 rows 521 columns 1,561 non-zeroes --- 260 discrete-columns --- Executing COINCBC: elapsed 0:00:00.019 GAMS/CoinCbc 2.0 LP/MIP Solver written by J. Forrest Problem statistics: 520 columns and 296 rows. 260 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 3857.02 - 0.01 seconds processed model has 296 rows, 520 columns (260 integer) and 1040 elements Pass 1: obj. 1.39374 --> up = 0 , down = 0 -- rand = 8 ( 27) - solution found of 5117 Before mini branch and bound, 243 integers at bound fixed and 243 continuous Full problem 296 rows 520 columns, reduced to 15 rows 18 columns Mini branch and bound improved solution from 5117 to 4729 (0.01 seconds) Round again with cutoff of 4641.8 Pass 2: obj. 1.39374 --> up = 0 , down = 0 -- rand = 8 ( 17) Pass 3: obj. 2.17519 --> up = 0 , down = 1 Pass 4: obj. 1.24590 --> up = 0 , down = 0 -- rand = 4 ( 27) Pass 5: obj. 2.28765 --> up = 0 , down = 2 Pass 6: obj. 0.67318 --> up = 0 , down = 0 -- rand = 4 ( 24) Pass 7: obj. 2.62323 --> up = 1 , down = 2 Pass 8: obj. 1.19803 --> up = 0 , down = 0 -- rand = 4 ( 11) Pass 9: obj. 1.30461 --> up = 0 , down = 1 Pass 10: obj. 0.46546 --> up = 0 , down = 0 -- rand = 3 ( 27) Pass 11: obj. 2.07947 --> up = 0 , down = 1 Pass 12: obj. 1.07947 --> up = 0 , down = 0 -- rand = 4 ( 14) Pass 13: obj. 1.99667 --> up = 0 , down = 1 Pass 14: obj. 1.19803 --> up = 0 , down = 0 -- rand = 4 ( 14) Pass 15: obj. 1.30461 --> up = 0 , down = 1 Pass 16: obj. 0.46546 --> up = 0 , down = 0 -- rand = 3 ( 22) Pass 17: obj. 2.07947 --> up = 0 , down = 1 Pass 18: obj. 1.07947 --> up = 0 , down = 0 -- rand = 4 ( 19) Pass 19: obj. 1.99667 --> up = 0 , down = 1 Pass 20: obj. 1.19803 --> up = 0 , down = 0 -- rand = 4 ( 28) Pass 21: obj. 1.30461 --> No solution found this major pass Before mini branch and bound, 239 integers at bound fixed and 238 continuous Full problem 296 rows 520 columns, reduced to 12 rows 15 columns Mini branch and bound did not improve solution (0.06 seconds) After 0.06 seconds - Feasibility pump exiting - took 0.06 seconds Integer solution of 4729 found by feasibility pump after 0 iterations and 0 nodes (0.06 seconds) Full problem 296 rows 520 columns, reduced to 0 rows 0 columns 34 added rows had average density of 108.618 At root node, 34 cuts changed objective from 3857.02 to 4044.78 in 11 passes Cut generator 0 (Probing) - 0 row cuts (0 active), 0 column cuts in 0.140 seconds - new frequency is 10 Cut generator 1 (Gomory) - 164 row cuts (5 active), 0 column cuts in 0.024 seconds - new frequency is 1 Cut generator 2 (Knapsack) - 77 row cuts (10 active), 0 column cuts in 0.032 seconds - new frequency is 1 Cut generator 3 (Clique) - 0 row cuts (0 active), 0 column cuts in -0.000 seconds - new frequency is -100 Cut generator 4 (MixedIntegerRounding2) - 59 row cuts (16 active), 0 column cuts in 0.004 seconds - new frequency is 1 Cut generator 5 (FlowCover) - 0 row cuts (0 active), 0 column cuts in 0.000 seconds - new frequency is -100 Cut generator 6 (TwoMirCuts) - 36 row cuts (3 active), 0 column cuts in 0.044 seconds - new frequency is -100 After 0 nodes, 1 on tree, 4729 best solution, best possible 4044.78 (0.83 seconds) After 1000 nodes, 94 on tree, 4729 best solution, best possible 4057.53 (7.46 seconds) After 2000 nodes, 84 on tree, 4729 best solution, best possible 4057.53 (9.56 seconds) After 3000 nodes, 90 on tree, 4729 best solution, best possible 4057.53 (11.59 seconds) After 4000 nodes, 97 on tree, 4729 best solution, best possible 4057.53 (13.54 seconds) After 5000 nodes, 88 on tree, 4729 best solution, best possible 4057.53 (15.39 seconds) After 6000 nodes, 93 on tree, 4729 best solution, best possible 4057.53 (17.75 seconds) After 7000 nodes, 91 on tree, 4729 best solution, best possible 4057.53 (20.27 seconds) Integer solution of 4667 found after 53971 iterations and 7532 nodes (21.31 seconds) Full problem 296 rows 520 columns, reduced to 38 rows 47 columns Integer solution of 4648 found by rounding after 54879 iterations and 7558 nodes (21.49 seconds) Full problem 296 rows 520 columns, reduced to 50 rows 65 columns Integer solution of 4572 found by rounding after 54880 iterations and 7559 nodes (21.51 seconds) Full problem 296 rows 520 columns, reduced to 50 rows 65 columns Integer solution of 4539 found by combine solutions after 54923 iterations and 7560 nodes (21.53 seconds) Integer solution of 4530 found by combine solutions after 54945 iterations and 7561 nodes (21.53 seconds) Integer solution of 4461 found by rounding after 55190 iterations and 7571 nodes (21.59 seconds) Full problem 296 rows 520 columns, reduced to 50 rows 65 columns After 8000 nodes, 296 on tree, 4461 best solution, best possible 4140.22 (23.84 seconds) Integer solution of 4370 found by rounding after 72222 iterations and 8152 nodes (24.48 seconds) Full problem 296 rows 520 columns, reduced to 61 rows 80 columns After 9000 nodes, 769 on tree, 4370 best solution, best possible 4171.9 (27.65 seconds) Integer solution of 4352 found by rounding after 115372 iterations and 9869 nodes (30.83 seconds) Full problem 296 rows 520 columns, reduced to 70 rows 94 columns Integer solution of 4329 found by combine solutions after 115398 iterations and 9871 nodes (32.25 seconds) After 10000 nodes, 1132 on tree, 4329 best solution, best possible 4184 (32.66 seconds) Strong branching is fixing too many variables, too expensively! After 11000 nodes, 1502 on tree, 4329 best solution, best possible 4193.09 (35.87 seconds) After 12000 nodes, 1847 on tree, 4329 best solution, best possible 4199.69 (38.84 seconds) After 13000 nodes, 2174 on tree, 4329 best solution, best possible 4204.62 (41.87 seconds) Integer solution of 4287 found after 184586 iterations and 13916 nodes (44.23 seconds) Full problem 296 rows 520 columns, reduced to 72 rows 97 columns After 14000 nodes, 1814 on tree, 4287 best solution, best possible 4205.38 (44.53 seconds) After 15000 nodes, 2006 on tree, 4287 best solution, best possible 4210.52 (47.46 seconds) After 16000 nodes, 2165 on tree, 4287 best solution, best possible 4214.78 (50.17 seconds) After 17000 nodes, 2296 on tree, 4287 best solution, best possible 4218.33 (52.77 seconds) After 18000 nodes, 2361 on tree, 4287 best solution, best possible 4218.33 (55.02 seconds) After 19000 nodes, 2472 on tree, 4287 best solution, best possible 4221.83 (57.65 seconds) After 20000 nodes, 2564 on tree, 4287 best solution, best possible 4225.12 (60.23 seconds) After 21000 nodes, 2645 on tree, 4287 best solution, best possible 4227.91 (63.01 seconds) Integer solution of 4281 found after 261547 iterations and 21725 nodes (64.49 seconds) Full problem 296 rows 520 columns, reduced to 72 rows 97 columns After 22000 nodes, 2479 on tree, 4281 best solution, best possible 4228.79 (65.41 seconds) After 23000 nodes, 2550 on tree, 4281 best solution, best possible 4231.72 (68.57 seconds) After 24000 nodes, 2595 on tree, 4281 best solution, best possible 4234.69 (71.86 seconds) After 25000 nodes, 2628 on tree, 4281 best solution, best possible 4237.47 (74.97 seconds) After 26000 nodes, 2626 on tree, 4281 best solution, best possible 4237.47 (77.12 seconds) After 27000 nodes, 2633 on tree, 4281 best solution, best possible 4240.71 (80.30 seconds) After 28000 nodes, 2617 on tree, 4281 best solution, best possible 4243.57 (83.45 seconds) After 29000 nodes, 2629 on tree, 4281 best solution, best possible 4246.23 (86.33 seconds) After 30000 nodes, 2568 on tree, 4281 best solution, best possible 4246.23 (88.29 seconds) After 31000 nodes, 2586 on tree, 4281 best solution, best possible 4249.04 (90.55 seconds) After 32000 nodes, 2595 on tree, 4281 best solution, best possible 4251.27 (92.81 seconds) Integer solution of 4270 found after 345048 iterations and 32051 nodes (92.89 seconds) Full problem 296 rows 520 columns, reduced to 72 rows 97 columns After 33000 nodes, 1751 on tree, 4270 best solution, best possible 4253.33 (94.93 seconds) After 34000 nodes, 1607 on tree, 4270 best solution, best possible 4253.34 (96.65 seconds) After 35000 nodes, 1538 on tree, 4270 best solution, best possible 4255.96 (98.65 seconds) After 36000 nodes, 1443 on tree, 4270 best solution, best possible 4258.18 (100.60 seconds) After 37000 nodes, 1323 on tree, 4270 best solution, best possible 4260.12 (102.44 seconds) After 38000 nodes, 1106 on tree, 4270 best solution, best possible 4260.12 (104.03 seconds) After 39000 nodes, 975 on tree, 4270 best solution, best possible 4262.4 (106.00 seconds) After 40000 nodes, 810 on tree, 4270 best solution, best possible 4264.82 (107.95 seconds) After 41000 nodes, 586 on tree, 4270 best solution, best possible 4266.78 (109.80 seconds) After 42000 nodes, 243 on tree, 4270 best solution, best possible 4266.79 (111.41 seconds) Search completed - best objective 4270, took 393521 iterations and 42696 nodes (112.66 seconds) Strong branching done 13722 times (151119 iterations), fathomed 613 nodes and fixed 3127 variables Maximum depth 80, 435279 variables fixed on reduced cost Cuts at root node changed objective from 3857.02 to 4044.78 Probing was tried 2080 times and created 874 cuts of which 437 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.964 seconds) Gomory was tried 4936 times and created 879 cuts of which 407 were active after adding rounds of cuts (2.440 seconds) Knapsack was tried 5480 times and created 5886 cuts of which 1929 were active after adding rounds of cuts (5.948 seconds) Clique was tried 11 times and created 0 cuts of which 0 were active after adding rounds of cuts (-0.000 seconds) MixedIntegerRounding2 was tried 5480 times and created 8973 cuts of which 6531 were active after adding rounds of cuts (1.456 seconds) FlowCover was tried 1 times and created 0 cuts of which 0 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.000 seconds) TwoMirCuts was tried 11 times and created 36 cuts of which 3 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.044 seconds) Result - Finished objective 4270 after 42696 nodes and 393521 iterations - took 112.67 seconds (total time 112.68) Total time 112.69 Solved to optimality. Writing solution. Objective: 4270 Time: 112.69 s --- Restarting execution --- ran10x26.gms(124) 0 Mb --- Reading solution for model m *** Status: Normal completion --- Job ran10x26.gms Stop 08/21/08 11:47:23 elapsed 0:01:53.492