--- Job acc-tight-3 Start 08/23/08 21:37:16 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 --- acc-tight-3.gms(106) 2 Mb --- GDXin=/home/stefan/work/gams/models/LINlib/acc-tight-3.gdx --- acc-tight-3.gms(148) 4 Mb --- Starting execution: elapsed 0:00:00.025 --- acc-tight-3.gms(123) 4 Mb --- Generating MIP model m --- acc-tight-3.gms(124) 5 Mb --- 3,048 rows 1,336 columns 16,110 non-zeroes --- 1,335 discrete-columns --- acc-tight-3.gms(124) 5 Mb --- Executing Cbc: elapsed 0:00:00.083 GAMS/Cbc 2.1 LP/MIP Solver written by J. Forrest Problem statistics: 1335 columns and 3047 rows. 1335 variables have integrality restrictions. Calling CBC main solution routine... Coin Cbc and Clp Solver version 2.20.00, build Aug 23 2008 command line - GAMS/CBC -solve -quit Continuous objective value is 0 - 0.96 seconds Optimal - objective value 0 163 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 0 strengthened rows, 186 substitutions 163 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 0 strengthened rows, 0 substitutions 2 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 0 strengthened rows, 94 substitutions 0 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 0 strengthened rows, 94 substitutions 0 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 0 strengthened rows, 4 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 2620 rows, 1083 columns (1083 integer) and 13632 elements Pass 1: suminf. 68.96645 (487) obj. 0 iterations 2140 Pass 2: suminf. 63.52757 (442) obj. 0 iterations 831 Pass 3: suminf. 62.62452 (470) obj. 0 iterations 419 Pass 4: suminf. 59.65250 (437) obj. 0 iterations 522 Pass 5: suminf. 58.97851 (431) obj. 0 iterations 340 Pass 6: suminf. 59.19897 (440) obj. 0 iterations 358 Pass 7: suminf. 59.58267 (424) obj. 0 iterations 187 Pass 8: suminf. 59.53525 (440) obj. 0 iterations 152 Pass 9: suminf. 59.53525 (440) obj. 0 iterations 0 Pass 10: suminf. 59.41975 (434) obj. 0 iterations 110 Pass 11: suminf. 58.64316 (451) obj. 0 iterations 401 Pass 12: suminf. 56.40622 (431) obj. 0 iterations 816 Pass 13: suminf. 56.86041 (466) obj. 0 iterations 381 Pass 14: suminf. 56.47029 (468) obj. 0 iterations 297 Pass 15: suminf. 56.99716 (475) obj. 0 iterations 235 Pass 16: suminf. 56.17418 (471) obj. 0 iterations 455 Pass 17: suminf. 55.22754 (475) obj. 0 iterations 242 Pass 18: suminf. 54.28482 (511) obj. 0 iterations 344 Pass 19: suminf. 54.28482 (511) obj. 0 iterations 0 Pass 20: suminf. 54.69078 (521) obj. 0 iterations 85 No solution found this major pass Before mini branch and bound, 229 integers at bound fixed and 0 continuous Full problem 2620 rows 1083 columns, reduced to 2246 rows 853 columns - too large Mini branch and bound did not improve solution (3.58 seconds) After 3.58 seconds - Feasibility pump exiting - took 3.57 seconds 139 added rows had average density of 68.4173 At root node, 139 cuts changed objective from 0 to 0 in 4 passes Cut generator 0 (Probing) - 434 row cuts, 0 column cuts (139 active) in 0.168 seconds - new frequency is 1 Cut generator 1 (Gomory) - 824 row cuts, 0 column cuts (0 active) in 0.692 seconds - new frequency is 1 Cut generator 2 (Knapsack) - 0 row cuts, 0 column cuts (0 active) in 0.008 seconds - new frequency is -100 Cut generator 3 (Clique) - 7 row cuts, 0 column cuts (0 active) in 0.016 seconds - new frequency is -100 Cut generator 4 (MixedIntegerRounding2) - 0 row cuts, 0 column cuts (0 active) in 0.020 seconds - new frequency is -100 Cut generator 5 (FlowCover) - 0 row cuts, 0 column cuts (0 active) in 0.008 seconds - new frequency is -100 Cut generator 6 (TwoMirCuts) - 0 row cuts, 0 column cuts (0 active) in 0.304 seconds - new frequency is -100 Optimal - objective value 0 Optimal - objective value 0 After 0 nodes, 1 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (13.23 seconds) After 100 nodes, 42 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (61.71 seconds) After 200 nodes, 52 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (81.91 seconds) After 300 nodes, 55 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (99.68 seconds) After 400 nodes, 55 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (116.53 seconds) After 500 nodes, 50 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (135.12 seconds) After 600 nodes, 56 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (156.11 seconds) After 700 nodes, 56 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (171.27 seconds) After 800 nodes, 51 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (186.78 seconds) After 900 nodes, 57 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (206.35 seconds) After 1000 nodes, 55 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (231.33 seconds) After 1100 nodes, 60 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (248.44 seconds) After 1200 nodes, 59 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (271.53 seconds) After 1300 nodes, 64 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (290.91 seconds) After 1400 nodes, 72 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (311.54 seconds) After 1500 nodes, 79 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (329.84 seconds) After 1600 nodes, 79 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (347.22 seconds) After 1700 nodes, 71 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (365.94 seconds) After 1800 nodes, 72 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (388.98 seconds) After 1900 nodes, 77 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (410.27 seconds) After 2000 nodes, 82 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (427.72 seconds) After 2100 nodes, 93 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (448.84 seconds) After 2200 nodes, 79 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (470.49 seconds) After 2300 nodes, 76 on tree, 1e+50 best solution, best possible 0 (489.11 seconds) Integer solution of 0 found after 724217 iterations and 2329 nodes (495.61 seconds) Search completed - best objective 0, took 724217 iterations and 2329 nodes (495.61 seconds) Strong branching done 2096 times (22633 iterations), fathomed 0 nodes and fixed 2 variables Maximum depth 25, 0 variables fixed on reduced cost Cuts at root node changed objective from 0 to 0 Probing was tried 601 times and created 19151 cuts of which 3299 were active after adding rounds of cuts (5.368 seconds) Gomory was tried 595 times and created 913 cuts of which 0 were active after adding rounds of cuts (7.832 seconds) Knapsack was tried 4 times and created 0 cuts of which 0 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.008 seconds) Clique was tried 4 times and created 7 cuts of which 0 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.016 seconds) MixedIntegerRounding2 was tried 4 times and created 0 cuts of which 0 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.020 seconds) FlowCover was tried 4 times and created 0 cuts of which 0 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.008 seconds) TwoMirCuts was tried 4 times and created 0 cuts of which 0 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.304 seconds) implication was tried 1678 times and created 13642 cuts of which 660 were active after adding rounds of cuts Result - Finished objective 0 after 2329 nodes and 724217 iterations - took 497.51 seconds (total time 498.47) Total time 498.68 Solved to optimality. MIP solution: 0 (2329 nodes, 498.69 seconds) Best possible: 0 Absolute gap: 0 (absolute tolerance optca: 0) Relative gap: 0 (relative tolerance optcr: 0) --- Restarting execution --- acc-tight-3.gms(124) 0 Mb --- Reading solution for model m *** Status: Normal completion --- Job acc-tight-3.gms Stop 08/23/08 21:45:35 elapsed 0:08:19.116