--- Job acc-tight-6 Start 08/21/08 17:01:34 GAMS Rev 228 Copyright (C) 1987-2008 GAMS Development. All rights reserved Licensee: Stefan Vigerske G071106/0001CB-LNX Humboldt University Berlin, Numerical Mathematics DC5918 --- Starting compilation --- acc-tight-6.gms(106) 2 Mb --- GDXin=/home/stefan/work/gams/models/LINlib/acc-tight-6.gdx --- acc-tight-6.gms(148) 4 Mb --- Starting execution: elapsed 0:00:00.021 --- acc-tight-6.gms(123) 4 Mb --- Generating MIP model m --- acc-tight-6.gms(124) 5 Mb --- 3,053 rows 1,340 columns 16,136 non-zeroes --- 1,339 discrete-columns --- acc-tight-6.gms(124) 5 Mb --- Executing COINCBC: elapsed 0:00:00.074 GAMS/CoinCbc 2.1 LP/MIP Solver written by J. Forrest Problem statistics: 1339 columns and 3052 rows. 1339 variables have integrality restrictions. Calling CBC main solution routine... Coin Cbc and Clp Solver version 2.10.00, build Jun 21 2008 command line - GAMS/CBC -solve -quit Continuous objective value is 0 - 0.94 seconds 4 variables fixed 164 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 0 strengthened rows, 137 substitutions 164 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 0 strengthened rows, 0 substitutions 1 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 0 strengthened rows, 101 substitutions 0 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 0 strengthened rows, 86 substitutions 0 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 0 strengthened rows, 29 substitutions 0 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 0 strengthened rows, 4 substitutions 0 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 0 strengthened rows, 1 substitutions 0 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 0 strengthened rows, 5 substitutions processed model has 2619 rows, 1083 columns (1083 integer) and 13615 elements Objective coefficients multiple of 1 Cutoff increment increased from 1e-05 to 0.999 Pass 1: suminf. 74.24512 obj. 0 iterations 2460 Pass 2: suminf. 59.61559 obj. 0 iterations 1930 Pass 3: suminf. 56.87379 obj. 0 iterations 710 Pass 4: suminf. 55.03730 obj. 0.0060471 iterations 594 Pass 5: suminf. 53.80212 obj. 0 iterations 316 Pass 6: suminf. 53.06818 obj. 0.00693477 iterations 361 Pass 7: suminf. 52.97891 obj. 0.00116541 iterations 226 Pass 8: suminf. 52.65024 obj. 0.00275426 iterations 429 Pass 9: suminf. 52.41193 obj. 0.0110731 iterations 389 Pass 10: suminf. 52.05220 obj. 0 iterations 476 Pass 11: suminf. 51.65384 obj. 0.00238433 iterations 83 Pass 12: suminf. 50.74683 obj. 0.00542499 iterations 299 Pass 13: suminf. 50.38508 obj. 0.0111681 iterations 212 Pass 14: suminf. 51.35866 obj. 0.0474076 iterations 690 Pass 15: suminf. 50.51589 obj. 0.0378089 iterations 411 Pass 16: suminf. 51.47047 obj. 0.0365729 iterations 567 Pass 17: suminf. 50.58629 obj. 0.0250232 iterations 382 Pass 18: suminf. 48.92738 obj. 0.0589354 iterations 843 Pass 19: suminf. 47.44846 obj. 0.0782454 iterations 854 Pass 20: suminf. 46.80815 obj. 0.0601291 iterations 298 No solution found this major pass Before mini branch and bound, 153 integers at bound fixed and 0 continuous Full problem 2619 rows 1083 columns, reduced to 2374 rows 930 columns - too large Mini branch and bound did not improve solution (4.53 seconds) After 4.53 seconds - Feasibility pump exiting - took 4.52 seconds 92 added rows had average density of 602.717 At root node, 92 cuts changed objective from 0 to 0 in 3 passes Cut generator 0 (Probing) - 495 row cuts (36 active), 0 column cuts in 0.092 seconds - new frequency is 1 Cut generator 1 (Gomory) - 550 row cuts (56 active), 0 column cuts in 0.732 seconds - new frequency is 1 Cut generator 2 (Knapsack) - 0 row cuts (0 active), 0 column cuts in 0.012 seconds - new frequency is -100 Cut generator 3 (Clique) - 0 row cuts (0 active), 0 column cuts in 0.020 seconds - new frequency is -100 Cut generator 4 (MixedIntegerRounding2) - 0 row cuts (0 active), 0 column cuts in 0.012 seconds - new frequency is -100 Cut generator 5 (FlowCover) - 0 row cuts (0 active), 0 column cuts in 0.004 seconds - new frequency is -100 Cut generator 6 (TwoMirCuts) - 0 row cuts (0 active), 0 column cuts in 0.324 seconds - new frequency is -100 After 0 nodes, 1 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (55.40 seconds) After 100 nodes, 39 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (232.71 seconds) After 200 nodes, 46 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (333.66 seconds) After 300 nodes, 47 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (421.60 seconds) After 400 nodes, 44 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (484.25 seconds) After 500 nodes, 43 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (551.95 seconds) After 600 nodes, 44 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (614.70 seconds) After 700 nodes, 43 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (676.26 seconds) After 800 nodes, 47 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (728.84 seconds) After 900 nodes, 49 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (778.62 seconds) After 1000 nodes, 49 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (829.40 seconds) After 1100 nodes, 45 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (893.02 seconds) After 1200 nodes, 50 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (961.31 seconds) After 1300 nodes, 53 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (1019.05 seconds) After 1400 nodes, 48 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (1076.64 seconds) After 1500 nodes, 51 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (1132.84 seconds) After 1600 nodes, 50 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (1186.35 seconds) After 1700 nodes, 49 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (1233.71 seconds) After 1800 nodes, 50 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (1308.66 seconds) After 1900 nodes, 49 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (1370.92 seconds) After 2000 nodes, 45 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (1433.96 seconds) After 2100 nodes, 46 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (1488.70 seconds) After 2200 nodes, 52 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (1536.66 seconds) After 2300 nodes, 49 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (1582.41 seconds) After 2400 nodes, 50 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (1648.64 seconds) After 2500 nodes, 54 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (1708.51 seconds) After 2600 nodes, 58 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (1771.91 seconds) Exiting on maximum time Partial search - best objective 1e+50 (best possible 0), took 2590701 iterations and 2646 nodes (1798.00 seconds) Strong branching done 4340 times (423567 iterations), fathomed 0 nodes and fixed 0 variables Maximum depth 35, 0 variables fixed on reduced cost Cuts at root node changed objective from 0 to 0 Probing was tried 361 times and created 1646 cuts of which 764 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.720 seconds) Gomory was tried 361 times and created 662 cuts of which 58 were active after adding rounds of cuts (4.348 seconds) Knapsack was tried 3 times and created 0 cuts of which 0 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.012 seconds) Clique was tried 3 times and created 0 cuts of which 0 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.020 seconds) MixedIntegerRounding2 was tried 3 times and created 0 cuts of which 0 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.012 seconds) FlowCover was tried 3 times and created 0 cuts of which 0 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.004 seconds) TwoMirCuts was tried 3 times and created 0 cuts of which 0 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.324 seconds) Result - Stopped on time objective 1e+50 after 2646 nodes and 2590701 iterations - took 1800.42 seconds (total time 1801.36) Total time 1801.36 Time limit reached. No feasible solution found. Best possible: 0 --- Restarting execution --- acc-tight-6.gms(124) 0 Mb --- Reading solution for model m *** Status: Normal completion --- Job acc-tight-6.gms Stop 08/21/08 17:31:40 elapsed 0:30:05.631