--- Job prod1 Start 08/22/08 01:38:17 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 --- prod1.gms(106) 2 Mb --- GDXin=/home/stefan/work/gams/models/LINlib/prod1.gdx --- prod1.gms(148) 3 Mb --- Starting execution: elapsed 0:00:00.008 --- prod1.gms(123) 4 Mb --- Generating MIP model m --- prod1.gms(124) 4 Mb --- 209 rows 251 columns 5,352 non-zeroes --- 149 discrete-columns --- Executing COINCBC: elapsed 0:00:00.022 GAMS/CoinCbc 2.1 LP/MIP Solver written by J. Forrest Problem statistics: 250 columns and 208 rows. 149 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 -100 - 0.01 seconds 0 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 0 strengthened rows, 100 substitutions processed model has 107 rows, 149 columns (149 integer) and 5049 elements Objective coefficients multiple of 1 Cutoff increment increased from 1e-05 to 0.999 Pass 1: suminf. 12.81070 obj. -86.1161 iterations 18 Pass 2: suminf. 11.84728 obj. -85.1527 iterations 2 Pass 3: suminf. 3.67817 obj. -71.3218 iterations 25 Pass 4: suminf. 0.37926 obj. -56.6207 iterations 20 Pass 5: suminf. 0.00093 obj. -48.9991 iterations 13 Pass 6: suminf. 0.00093 obj. -48.9991 iterations 0 Pass 7: suminf. 3.38598 obj. -46.3518 iterations 35 Pass 8: suminf. 2.07764 obj. -45.9224 iterations 9 Solution found of -36 Before mini branch and bound, 71 integers at bound fixed and 0 continuous Full problem 107 rows 149 columns, reduced to 76 rows 71 columns Mini branch and bound improved solution from -36 to -50 (0.12 seconds) Round again with cutoff of -53.6808 Pass 9: suminf. 12.81070 obj. -86.1161 iterations 18 Pass 10: suminf. 11.84728 obj. -85.1527 iterations 2 Pass 11: suminf. 6.40191 obj. -77.5981 iterations 15 Pass 12: suminf. 2.59200 obj. -68.408 iterations 15 Pass 13: suminf. 0.55309 obj. -58.4469 iterations 15 Pass 14: suminf. 0.31918 obj. -53.6808 iterations 10 Pass 15: suminf. 0.27287 obj. -53.7271 iterations 4 Pass 16: suminf. 4.32010 obj. -53.6808 iterations 44 Pass 17: suminf. 3.56029 obj. -53.6808 iterations 2 Pass 18: suminf. 2.97904 obj. -53.6808 iterations 5 Pass 19: suminf. 2.97904 obj. -53.6808 iterations 1 Pass 20: suminf. 3.09148 obj. -53.6808 iterations 5 Pass 21: suminf. 2.65426 obj. -53.6808 iterations 7 Pass 22: suminf. 3.09148 obj. -53.6808 iterations 5 Pass 23: suminf. 4.86724 obj. -53.6808 iterations 41 Pass 24: suminf. 4.20231 obj. -53.6808 iterations 7 Pass 25: suminf. 3.92088 obj. -53.6808 iterations 6 Pass 26: suminf. 3.92088 obj. -53.6808 iterations 3 Pass 27: suminf. 4.19731 obj. -53.6808 iterations 4 Pass 28: suminf. 4.19731 obj. -53.6808 iterations 5 No solution found this major pass Before mini branch and bound, 58 integers at bound fixed and 0 continuous Full problem 107 rows 149 columns, reduced to 100 rows 89 columns Mini branch and bound did not improve solution (0.35 seconds) After 0.35 seconds - Feasibility pump exiting with objective of -50 - took 0.35 seconds Integer solution of -50 found by feasibility pump after 0 iterations and 0 nodes (0.35 seconds) Full problem 107 rows 149 columns, reduced to 0 rows 0 columns 67 added rows had average density of 51.791 At root node, 67 cuts changed objective from -86.8082 to -83.1196 in 100 passes Cut generator 0 (Probing) - 76 row cuts (47 active), 0 column cuts in 11.005 seconds - new frequency is 1 Cut generator 1 (Gomory) - 3 row cuts (2 active), 0 column cuts in 0.376 seconds - new frequency is -100 Cut generator 2 (Knapsack) - 853 row cuts (3 active), 0 column cuts in 0.344 seconds - new frequency is 1 Cut generator 3 (Clique) - 0 row cuts (0 active), 0 column cuts in 0.016 seconds - new frequency is -100 Cut generator 4 (MixedIntegerRounding2) - 65 row cuts (0 active), 0 column cuts in 0.748 seconds - new frequency is -100 Cut generator 5 (FlowCover) - 0 row cuts (0 active), 0 column cuts in 0.032 seconds - new frequency is -100 Cut generator 6 (TwoMirCuts) - 646 row cuts (12 active), 0 column cuts in 0.204 seconds - new frequency is -100 After 0 nodes, 1 on tree, -50 best solution, best possible -81.4415 (14.67 seconds) Integer solution of -51 found after 6058 iterations and 303 nodes (19.20 seconds) Full problem 107 rows 149 columns, reduced to 26 rows 32 columns Integer solution of -52 found by combine solutions after 6109 iterations and 308 nodes (19.26 seconds) Integer solution of -54 found after 17778 iterations and 813 nodes (26.00 seconds) Full problem 107 rows 149 columns, reduced to 48 rows 57 columns After 1000 nodes, 136 on tree, -54 best solution, best possible -71.802 (27.46 seconds) Integer solution of -55 found after 25418 iterations and 1213 nodes (28.89 seconds) Full problem 107 rows 149 columns, reduced to 53 rows 64 columns Integer solution of -56 found after 30907 iterations and 1503 nodes (30.93 seconds) Full problem 107 rows 149 columns, reduced to 60 rows 74 columns After 2000 nodes, 266 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -69.6413 (33.61 seconds) After 3000 nodes, 379 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -69.6413 (38.80 seconds) After 4000 nodes, 490 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -69.6413 (44.10 seconds) After 5000 nodes, 593 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -69.6413 (49.28 seconds) After 6000 nodes, 698 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -69.6413 (54.55 seconds) After 7000 nodes, 780 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -69.6413 (59.64 seconds) After 8000 nodes, 790 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -69.6413 (63.98 seconds) After 9000 nodes, 847 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -69.6413 (68.94 seconds) After 10000 nodes, 913 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -68.4166 (73.56 seconds) After 11000 nodes, 948 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -68.4166 (78.02 seconds) After 12000 nodes, 1026 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -60.4495 (83.25 seconds) After 13000 nodes, 1222 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -59.5222 (89.37 seconds) After 14000 nodes, 1313 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -59.5222 (94.35 seconds) After 15000 nodes, 1534 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -58.9232 (100.44 seconds) After 16000 nodes, 1853 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -58.7303 (107.70 seconds) After 17000 nodes, 2101 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -58.527 (113.51 seconds) After 18000 nodes, 2140 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -58.527 (118.02 seconds) After 19000 nodes, 2293 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -58.207 (122.08 seconds) After 20000 nodes, 2501 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -57.9921 (127.42 seconds) After 21000 nodes, 2826 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -57.9564 (134.69 seconds) After 22000 nodes, 2684 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -57.9564 (138.15 seconds) After 23000 nodes, 2869 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -57.914 (144.11 seconds) After 24000 nodes, 2939 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -57.8716 (148.93 seconds) After 25000 nodes, 2866 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -57.8235 (152.77 seconds) After 26000 nodes, 2566 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -57.8235 (155.09 seconds) After 27000 nodes, 2392 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -57.7566 (158.04 seconds) After 28000 nodes, 2137 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -57.6722 (160.23 seconds) After 29000 nodes, 1785 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -57.5623 (161.87 seconds) After 30000 nodes, 1589 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -57.5623 (165.27 seconds) After 31000 nodes, 1170 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -57.342 (166.49 seconds) After 32000 nodes, 990 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -57 (168.73 seconds) After 33000 nodes, 1048 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -57 (173.32 seconds) After 34000 nodes, 641 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -57 (176.45 seconds) After 35000 nodes, 376 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -57 (180.93 seconds) After 36000 nodes, 127 on tree, -56 best solution, best possible -57 (184.92 seconds) Search completed - best objective -56, took 455026 iterations and 36425 nodes (186.14 seconds) Strong branching done 11178 times (177282 iterations), fathomed 71 nodes and fixed 435 variables Maximum depth 64, 185386 variables fixed on reduced cost Cuts at root node changed objective from -86.8082 to -81.4415 Probing was tried 18973 times and created 22964 cuts of which 19813 were active after adding rounds of cuts (106.291 seconds) Gomory was tried 100 times and created 3 cuts of which 2 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.376 seconds) Knapsack was tried 4109 times and created 29653 cuts of which 3454 were active after adding rounds of cuts (4.632 seconds) Clique was tried 100 times and created 0 cuts of which 0 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.016 seconds) MixedIntegerRounding2 was tried 100 times and created 65 cuts of which 0 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.748 seconds) FlowCover was tried 100 times and created 0 cuts of which 0 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.032 seconds) TwoMirCuts was tried 100 times and created 646 cuts of which 12 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.204 seconds) 100 bounds tightened after postprocessing Result - Finished objective -56 after 36425 nodes and 455026 iterations - took 186.38 seconds (total time 186.39) Total time 186.39 Solved to optimality. MIP solution: -56 (36425 nodes, 186.39 seconds) Best possible: -56 Absolute gap: 0 (absolute tolerance optca: 0) Relative gap: 0 (relative tolerance optcr: 0) --- Restarting execution --- prod1.gms(124) 0 Mb --- Reading solution for model m *** Status: Normal completion --- Job prod1.gms Stop 08/22/08 01:41:26 elapsed 0:03:08.727