--- Job bienst2 Start 08/23/08 23:51:37 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 --- bienst2.gms(106) 2 Mb --- GDXin=/home/stefan/work/gams/models/LINlib/bienst2.gdx --- bienst2.gms(148) 3 Mb --- Starting execution: elapsed 0:00:00.008 --- bienst2.gms(123) 4 Mb --- Generating MIP model m --- bienst2.gms(124) 4 Mb --- 577 rows 506 columns 2,186 non-zeroes --- 35 discrete-columns --- bienst2.gms(124) 4 Mb --- Executing Cbc: elapsed 0:00:00.021 GAMS/Cbc 2.1 LP/MIP Solver written by J. Forrest Problem statistics: 505 columns and 576 rows. 35 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 11.7241 - 0.01 seconds Optimal - objective value 11.7241 processed model has 520 rows, 449 columns (35 integer) and 2072 elements Pass 1: suminf. 5.00000 (30) obj. 11.7241 iterations 2 Pass 2: suminf. 5.00000 (27) obj. 13.3795 iterations 51 Pass 3: suminf. 4.37229 (17) obj. 29.9634 iterations 218 Pass 4: suminf. 0.98942 (3) obj. 62 iterations 238 Pass 5: suminf. 0.00000 (0) obj. 86 iterations 139 Solution found of 86 Before mini branch and bound, 3 integers at bound fixed and 200 continuous Full problem 520 rows 449 columns, reduced to 300 rows 243 columns - too large Mini branch and bound did not improve solution (0.09 seconds) Round again with cutoff of 78.5724 Pass 6: suminf. 5.00000 (30) obj. 11.7241 iterations 2 Pass 7: suminf. 5.36087 (29) obj. 13.3333 iterations 42 Pass 8: suminf. 1.50000 (5) obj. 67.5 iterations 380 Pass 9: suminf. 1.00000 (3) obj. 68.1025 iterations 11 Pass 10: suminf. 1.00000 (3) obj. 68.1025 iterations 0 Pass 11: suminf. 1.08067 (6) obj. 71.9474 iterations 169 Pass 12: suminf. 0.00000 (0) obj. 78 iterations 62 Solution found of 78 Before mini branch and bound, 1 integers at bound fixed and 213 continuous Full problem 520 rows 449 columns, reduced to 299 rows 231 columns - too large Mini branch and bound did not improve solution (0.18 seconds) After 0.18 seconds - Feasibility pump exiting with objective of 78 - took 0.18 seconds Integer solution of 69.6667 found by feasibility pump after 0 iterations and 0 nodes (0.22 seconds) Full problem 520 rows 449 columns, reduced to 162 rows 172 columns 58 added rows had average density of 108.086 At root node, 58 cuts changed objective from 11.7241 to 37.514 in 100 passes Cut generator 0 (Probing) - 253 row cuts, 0 column cuts (27 active) in 0.152 seconds - new frequency is 1 Cut generator 1 (Gomory) - 2188 row cuts, 0 column cuts (31 active) in 0.268 seconds - new frequency is 1 Cut generator 2 (Knapsack) - 0 row cuts, 0 column cuts (0 active) in 0.048 seconds - new frequency is -100 Cut generator 3 (Clique) - 0 row cuts, 0 column cuts (0 active) in 0.020 seconds - new frequency is -100 Cut generator 4 (MixedIntegerRounding2) - 747 row cuts, 0 column cuts (0 active) in 0.084 seconds - new frequency is 1 Cut generator 5 (FlowCover) - 169 row cuts, 0 column cuts (0 active) in 0.856 seconds - new frequency is 1 Cut generator 6 (TwoMirCuts) - 197 row cuts, 0 column cuts (0 active) in 0.052 seconds - new frequency is -100 Optimal - objective value 37.514 Optimal - objective value 37.514 After 0 nodes, 1 on tree, 69.6667 best solution, best possible 37.514 (6.72 seconds) Integer solution of 68.25 found after 63768 iterations and 137 nodes (12.86 seconds) Full problem 520 rows 449 columns, reduced to 392 rows 321 columns - too large Integer solution of 63.2857 found after 73259 iterations and 189 nodes (13.90 seconds) Full problem 520 rows 449 columns, reduced to 416 rows 345 columns - too large Integer solution of 61.75 found after 74873 iterations and 199 nodes (14.10 seconds) Full problem 520 rows 449 columns, reduced to 424 rows 353 columns - too large Integer solution of 56.5 found after 75732 iterations and 206 nodes (14.22 seconds) Full problem 520 rows 449 columns, reduced to 432 rows 361 columns - too large After 1000 nodes, 416 on tree, 56.5 best solution, best possible 38.6893 (31.65 seconds) After 2000 nodes, 808 on tree, 56.5 best solution, best possible 38.7363 (50.85 seconds) After 3000 nodes, 1173 on tree, 56.5 best solution, best possible 38.7363 (70.50 seconds) Integer solution of 55.5 found after 764846 iterations and 3865 nodes (89.98 seconds) Full problem 520 rows 449 columns, reduced to 432 rows 361 columns - too large After 4000 nodes, 1458 on tree, 55.5 best solution, best possible 38.7363 (93.53 seconds) After 5000 nodes, 1901 on tree, 55.5 best solution, best possible 38.7363 (119.58 seconds) After 6000 nodes, 2220 on tree, 55.5 best solution, best possible 38.7363 (137.44 seconds) After 7000 nodes, 2593 on tree, 55.5 best solution, best possible 38.7363 (161.99 seconds) After 8000 nodes, 2938 on tree, 55.5 best solution, best possible 38.7363 (180.70 seconds) After 9000 nodes, 3235 on tree, 55.5 best solution, best possible 38.7363 (198.10 seconds) After 10000 nodes, 3659 on tree, 55.5 best solution, best possible 40.0725 (221.37 seconds) After 11000 nodes, 3943 on tree, 55.5 best solution, best possible 40.0725 (240.02 seconds) After 12000 nodes, 4396 on tree, 55.5 best solution, best possible 45.3347 (269.08 seconds) After 13000 nodes, 4819 on tree, 55.5 best solution, best possible 46.25 (294.23 seconds) After 14000 nodes, 5095 on tree, 55.5 best solution, best possible 46.25 (309.48 seconds) After 15000 nodes, 5491 on tree, 55.5 best solution, best possible 47 (331.48 seconds) After 16000 nodes, 5865 on tree, 55.5 best solution, best possible 47.4679 (352.65 seconds) After 17000 nodes, 6190 on tree, 55.5 best solution, best possible 48 (370.34 seconds) After 18000 nodes, 6400 on tree, 55.5 best solution, best possible 48 (382.74 seconds) After 19000 nodes, 6716 on tree, 55.5 best solution, best possible 48.5 (399.84 seconds) After 20000 nodes, 7016 on tree, 55.5 best solution, best possible 48.8333 (416.34 seconds) After 21000 nodes, 7324 on tree, 55.5 best solution, best possible 49.125 (432.11 seconds) After 22000 nodes, 7402 on tree, 55.5 best solution, best possible 49.125 (441.81 seconds) After 23000 nodes, 7672 on tree, 55.5 best solution, best possible 49.3673 (456.91 seconds) After 24000 nodes, 7934 on tree, 55.5 best solution, best possible 49.5739 (471.09 seconds) After 25000 nodes, 8163 on tree, 55.5 best solution, best possible 49.8333 (484.76 seconds) Integer solution of 54.7273 found after 4322331 iterations and 25969 nodes (493.21 seconds) Full problem 520 rows 449 columns, reduced to 448 rows 377 columns - too large After 26000 nodes, 7401 on tree, 54.7273 best solution, best possible 49.8333 (493.69 seconds) After 27000 nodes, 7563 on tree, 54.7273 best solution, best possible 50.1669 (506.68 seconds) After 28000 nodes, 7725 on tree, 54.7273 best solution, best possible 50.4344 (519.13 seconds) After 29000 nodes, 7859 on tree, 54.7273 best solution, best possible 50.6 (532.11 seconds) After 30000 nodes, 7786 on tree, 54.7273 best solution, best possible 50.6016 (539.59 seconds) After 31000 nodes, 7997 on tree, 54.7273 best solution, best possible 50.6667 (555.53 seconds) After 32000 nodes, 8127 on tree, 54.7273 best solution, best possible 50.7928 (568.58 seconds) After 33000 nodes, 8219 on tree, 54.7273 best solution, best possible 50.9987 (579.81 seconds) After 34000 nodes, 8091 on tree, 54.7273 best solution, best possible 50.9987 (586.75 seconds) After 35000 nodes, 8225 on tree, 54.7273 best solution, best possible 51.0909 (599.06 seconds) After 36000 nodes, 8318 on tree, 54.7273 best solution, best possible 51.2286 (610.28 seconds) After 37000 nodes, 8376 on tree, 54.7273 best solution, best possible 51.395 (620.97 seconds) Integer solution of 54.6 found after 5344869 iterations and 37772 nodes (625.96 seconds) Full problem 520 rows 449 columns, reduced to 448 rows 377 columns - too large After 38000 nodes, 7998 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 51.427 (628.70 seconds) After 39000 nodes, 8032 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 51.625 (638.77 seconds) After 40000 nodes, 8045 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 51.75 (648.01 seconds) After 41000 nodes, 8063 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 51.9 (658.29 seconds) After 42000 nodes, 7813 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 51.9 (664.06 seconds) After 43000 nodes, 7861 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 52 (674.59 seconds) After 44000 nodes, 7864 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 52.0713 (685.01 seconds) After 45000 nodes, 7790 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 52.2085 (694.06 seconds) After 46000 nodes, 7541 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 52.2085 (699.64 seconds) After 47000 nodes, 7431 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 52.3812 (708.36 seconds) After 48000 nodes, 7321 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 52.5195 (717.04 seconds) After 49000 nodes, 7205 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 52.6397 (725.26 seconds) After 50000 nodes, 6912 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 52.6399 (730.28 seconds) After 51000 nodes, 6790 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 52.7997 (738.71 seconds) After 52000 nodes, 6840 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 52.8 (749.89 seconds) After 53000 nodes, 6693 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 52.9014 (758.22 seconds) After 54000 nodes, 6343 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 52.9014 (762.93 seconds) After 55000 nodes, 6203 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 53.0132 (770.85 seconds) After 56000 nodes, 5983 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 53.1486 (778.44 seconds) After 57000 nodes, 5821 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 53.25 (786.49 seconds) After 58000 nodes, 5464 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 53.25 (790.98 seconds) After 59000 nodes, 5282 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 53.3335 (799.31 seconds) After 60000 nodes, 5068 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 53.4581 (806.47 seconds) After 61000 nodes, 4811 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 53.5795 (813.35 seconds) After 62000 nodes, 4413 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 53.5795 (817.66 seconds) After 63000 nodes, 4217 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 53.6712 (824.93 seconds) After 64000 nodes, 3976 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 53.7627 (832.02 seconds) After 65000 nodes, 3680 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 53.8637 (838.56 seconds) After 66000 nodes, 3275 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 53.8637 (842.95 seconds) After 67000 nodes, 2954 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 53.9787 (849.27 seconds) After 68000 nodes, 2724 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 54.0353 (856.67 seconds) After 69000 nodes, 2418 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 54.1146 (862.77 seconds) After 70000 nodes, 1976 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 54.1146 (867.06 seconds) After 71000 nodes, 1621 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 54.2226 (872.89 seconds) After 72000 nodes, 1274 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 54.3095 (878.91 seconds) After 73000 nodes, 911 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 54.4132 (884.62 seconds) After 74000 nodes, 461 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 54.4142 (888.92 seconds) After 75000 nodes, 51 on tree, 54.6 best solution, best possible 54.5817 (894.99 seconds) Search completed - best objective 54.59999999999999, took 6933780 iterations and 75103 nodes (895.46 seconds) Strong branching done 70 times (5424 iterations), fathomed 0 nodes and fixed 0 variables Maximum depth 27, 2925 variables fixed on reduced cost Cuts at root node changed objective from 11.7241 to 37.514 Probing was tried 84729 times and created 444599 cuts of which 253039 were active after adding rounds of cuts (43.287 seconds) Gomory was tried 44813 times and created 46204 cuts of which 12580 were active after adding rounds of cuts (22.805 seconds) Knapsack was tried 100 times and created 0 cuts of which 0 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.048 seconds) Clique was tried 100 times and created 0 cuts of which 0 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.020 seconds) MixedIntegerRounding2 was tried 84729 times and created 358592 cuts of which 75252 were active after adding rounds of cuts (30.630 seconds) FlowCover was tried 84729 times and created 2000 cuts of which 94 were active after adding rounds of cuts (2.692 seconds) TwoMirCuts was tried 100 times and created 197 cuts of which 0 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.052 seconds) Result - Finished objective 54.59999999999999 after 75103 nodes and 6933780 iterations - took 895.48 seconds (total time 895.48) Total time 895.58 Solved to optimality. MIP solution: 54.6 (75103 nodes, 895.58 seconds) Best possible: 54.6 Absolute gap: 0 (absolute tolerance optca: 0) Relative gap: 0 (relative tolerance optcr: 0) --- Restarting execution --- bienst2.gms(124) 0 Mb --- Reading solution for model m *** Status: Normal completion --- Job bienst2.gms Stop 08/24/08 00:06:51 elapsed 0:15:13.517