--- Job seymour1 Start 08/22/08 03:29:23 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 --- seymour1.gms(106) 2 Mb --- GDXin=/home/stefan/work/gams/models/LINlib/seymour1.gdx --- seymour1.gms(148) 4 Mb --- Starting execution: elapsed 0:00:00.031 --- seymour1.gms(123) 5 Mb --- Generating MIP model m --- seymour1.gms(124) 7 Mb --- 4,945 rows 1,373 columns 34,922 non-zeroes --- 451 discrete-columns --- seymour1.gms(124) 7 Mb --- Executing COINCBC: elapsed 0:00:00.135 GAMS/CoinCbc 2.1 LP/MIP Solver written by J. Forrest Problem statistics: 1372 columns and 4944 rows. 451 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 403.846 - 1.88 seconds 0 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 115 strengthened rows, 0 substitutions 0 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 115 strengthened rows, 0 substitutions 0 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 115 strengthened rows, 0 substitutions 0 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 115 strengthened rows, 0 substitutions 0 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 115 strengthened rows, 0 substitutions 0 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 115 strengthened rows, 0 substitutions 0 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 115 strengthened rows, 0 substitutions 0 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 115 strengthened rows, 0 substitutions 0 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 115 strengthened rows, 0 substitutions 0 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 115 strengthened rows, 0 substitutions processed model has 4808 rows, 1153 columns (309 integer) and 33047 elements Pass 1: (0.37 seconds) suminf. 37.27509 obj. 418.105 iterations 767 Pass 2: (0.39 seconds) suminf. 36.27509 obj. 418.605 iterations 17 Pass 3: (0.41 seconds) suminf. 10.27509 obj. 428.605 iterations 49 Pass 4: (0.42 seconds) suminf. 10.27509 obj. 428.605 iterations 19 Solution found of 437.105 Full problem 4809 rows 1153 columns, reduced to 3264 rows 835 columns - too large Mini branch and bound could not fix general integers Before mini branch and bound, 148 integers at bound fixed and 335 continuous Full problem 4808 rows 1153 columns, reduced to 4428 rows 670 columns - too large Mini branch and bound did not improve solution (0.94 seconds) After 0.94 seconds - Feasibility pump exiting with objective of 9 - took 0.93 seconds Integer solution of 423.778 found by feasibility pump after 0 iterations and 0 nodes (1.94 seconds) Full problem 4808 rows 1153 columns, reduced to 3348 rows 834 columns - too large Integer solution of 421.778 found by combine solutions after 0 iterations and 0 nodes (3.05 seconds) Integer solution of 419.778 found by combine solutions after 2420 iterations and 0 nodes (4.91 seconds) 25 added rows had average density of 102.04 At root node, 25 cuts changed objective from 403.846 to 405.779 in 5 passes Cut generator 0 (Probing) - 23 row cuts (16 active), 0 column cuts in 0.028 seconds - new frequency is 1 Cut generator 1 (Gomory) - 110 row cuts (8 active), 0 column cuts in 0.120 seconds - new frequency is 1 Cut generator 2 (Knapsack) - 0 row cuts (0 active), 0 column cuts in 0.016 seconds - new frequency is -100 Cut generator 3 (Clique) - 0 row cuts (0 active), 0 column cuts in -0.000 seconds - new frequency is -100 Cut generator 4 (MixedIntegerRounding2) - 0 row cuts (0 active), 0 column cuts in 0.036 seconds - new frequency is -100 Cut generator 5 (FlowCover) - 0 row cuts (0 active), 0 column cuts in 0.076 seconds - new frequency is -100 Cut generator 6 (TwoMirCuts) - 98 row cuts (1 active), 0 column cuts in 0.160 seconds - new frequency is -100 After 0 nodes, 1 on tree, 419.778 best solution, best possible 405.779 (5.78 seconds) Integer solution of 417.778 found by combine solutions after 2884 iterations and 1 nodes (6.82 seconds) Integer solution of 415.778 found by combine solutions after 3638 iterations and 2 nodes (8.24 seconds) After 100 nodes, 53 on tree, 415.778 best solution, best possible 407.148 (94.22 seconds) After 200 nodes, 101 on tree, 415.778 best solution, best possible 407.148 (144.94 seconds) After 300 nodes, 152 on tree, 415.778 best solution, best possible 407.148 (173.23 seconds) Integer solution of 412.11 found after 141746 iterations and 313 nodes (176.06 seconds) Full problem 4808 rows 1153 columns, reduced to 3589 rows 901 columns - too large After 400 nodes, 183 on tree, 412.11 best solution, best possible 407.148 (207.34 seconds) After 500 nodes, 232 on tree, 412.11 best solution, best possible 407.382 (238.71 seconds) After 600 nodes, 281 on tree, 412.11 best solution, best possible 407.382 (268.48 seconds) After 700 nodes, 330 on tree, 412.11 best solution, best possible 407.382 (289.61 seconds) After 800 nodes, 380 on tree, 412.11 best solution, best possible 407.382 (309.07 seconds) Integer solution of 410.792 found after 359500 iterations and 844 nodes (316.96 seconds) Full problem 4808 rows 1153 columns, reduced to 3698 rows 928 columns - too large After 900 nodes, 243 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 407.382 (326.54 seconds) After 1000 nodes, 258 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 407.459 (345.01 seconds) After 1100 nodes, 248 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 407.459 (360.61 seconds) After 1200 nodes, 278 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 407.459 (383.68 seconds) After 1300 nodes, 288 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.182 (405.08 seconds) After 1400 nodes, 310 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.247 (427.82 seconds) After 1500 nodes, 343 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.247 (449.42 seconds) After 1600 nodes, 336 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.247 (459.25 seconds) After 1700 nodes, 359 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.247 (480.67 seconds) After 1800 nodes, 369 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.247 (500.85 seconds) After 1900 nodes, 393 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.247 (519.21 seconds) After 2000 nodes, 398 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.247 (534.85 seconds) After 2100 nodes, 410 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.247 (555.21 seconds) After 2200 nodes, 424 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.247 (574.50 seconds) After 2300 nodes, 438 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.247 (595.77 seconds) After 2400 nodes, 441 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.247 (614.77 seconds) After 2500 nodes, 440 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.247 (631.14 seconds) After 2600 nodes, 447 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.247 (649.35 seconds) After 2700 nodes, 467 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.247 (670.90 seconds) After 2800 nodes, 481 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.479 (692.10 seconds) After 2900 nodes, 490 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.479 (712.70 seconds) After 3000 nodes, 495 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.479 (731.68 seconds) After 3100 nodes, 497 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.479 (749.45 seconds) After 3200 nodes, 505 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.479 (768.01 seconds) After 3300 nodes, 510 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.479 (787.85 seconds) After 3400 nodes, 513 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.479 (805.12 seconds) After 3500 nodes, 514 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.479 (823.60 seconds) After 3600 nodes, 518 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.479 (841.59 seconds) After 3700 nodes, 519 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.479 (856.99 seconds) After 3800 nodes, 523 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.479 (874.90 seconds) After 3900 nodes, 531 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.479 (895.82 seconds) After 4000 nodes, 523 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.479 (912.78 seconds) After 4100 nodes, 520 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.479 (929.48 seconds) After 4200 nodes, 509 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.479 (946.20 seconds) After 4300 nodes, 517 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.479 (965.87 seconds) After 4400 nodes, 505 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.479 (981.91 seconds) After 4500 nodes, 494 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.479 (998.44 seconds) After 4600 nodes, 492 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.479 (1012.90 seconds) After 4700 nodes, 481 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.689 (1030.28 seconds) After 4800 nodes, 473 on tree, 410.792 best solution, best possible 408.689 (1047.67 seconds) Integer solution of 410.764 found after 1331015 iterations and 4859 nodes (1054.74 seconds) Full problem 4808 rows 1153 columns, reduced to 3699 rows 930 columns - too large After 4900 nodes, 463 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 409.276 (1066.17 seconds) After 5000 nodes, 501 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 409.735 (1091.65 seconds) After 5100 nodes, 537 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 409.924 (1116.83 seconds) After 5200 nodes, 558 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.038 (1139.28 seconds) After 5300 nodes, 580 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.13 (1161.13 seconds) After 5400 nodes, 592 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.187 (1181.74 seconds) After 5500 nodes, 595 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.244 (1200.86 seconds) After 5600 nodes, 600 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.287 (1219.54 seconds) After 5700 nodes, 600 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.323 (1236.65 seconds) After 5800 nodes, 589 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.365 (1254.85 seconds) After 5900 nodes, 578 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.41 (1270.59 seconds) After 6000 nodes, 565 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.44 (1285.92 seconds) After 6100 nodes, 553 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.472 (1300.92 seconds) After 6200 nodes, 530 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.504 (1315.12 seconds) After 6300 nodes, 504 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.529 (1328.00 seconds) After 6400 nodes, 463 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.556 (1341.41 seconds) After 6500 nodes, 428 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.577 (1354.11 seconds) After 6600 nodes, 395 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.603 (1366.20 seconds) After 6700 nodes, 358 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.624 (1377.71 seconds) After 6800 nodes, 324 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.64 (1388.91 seconds) After 6900 nodes, 287 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.66 (1399.84 seconds) After 7000 nodes, 247 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.677 (1410.77 seconds) After 7100 nodes, 204 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.696 (1421.82 seconds) After 7200 nodes, 162 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.715 (1432.63 seconds) After 7300 nodes, 127 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.727 (1442.53 seconds) After 7400 nodes, 86 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.741 (1452.82 seconds) After 7500 nodes, 45 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.751 (1462.60 seconds) After 7600 nodes, 1 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.764 (1472.58 seconds) Search completed - best objective 410.7637013945249, took 1769265 iterations and 7601 nodes (1472.69 seconds) Strong branching done 3602 times (206190 iterations), fathomed 0 nodes and fixed 40 variables Maximum depth 30, 24303 variables fixed on reduced cost Cuts at root node changed objective from 403.846 to 405.779 Probing was tried 4065 times and created 1206 cuts of which 922 were active after adding rounds of cuts (14.109 seconds) Gomory was tried 915 times and created 2906 cuts of which 343 were active after adding rounds of cuts (5.816 seconds) Knapsack was tried 5 times and created 0 cuts of which 0 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.016 seconds) Clique was tried 5 times and created 0 cuts of which 0 were active after adding rounds of cuts (-0.000 seconds) MixedIntegerRounding2 was tried 5 times and created 0 cuts of which 0 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.036 seconds) FlowCover was tried 5 times and created 0 cuts of which 0 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.076 seconds) TwoMirCuts was tried 5 times and created 98 cuts of which 1 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.160 seconds) Result - Finished objective 410.7637013945249 after 7601 nodes and 1769265 iterations - took 1473.34 seconds (total time 1475.23) Total time 1498.02 Solved to optimality. MIP solution: 410.7637014 (7601 nodes, 1498.03 seconds) Best possible: 410.7637014 Absolute gap: 0 (absolute tolerance optca: 0) Relative gap: 0 (relative tolerance optcr: 0) --- Restarting execution --- seymour1.gms(124) 0 Mb --- Reading solution for model m *** Status: Normal completion --- Job seymour1.gms Stop 08/22/08 03:54:23 elapsed 0:24:59.814