--- Job seymour1 Start 08/24/08 07:19:40
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
--- seymour1.gms(106) 2 Mb
--- GDXin=/home/stefan/work/gams/models/LINlib/seymour1.gdx
--- seymour1.gms(148) 4 Mb
--- Starting execution: elapsed 0:00:00.046
--- 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 Cbc: elapsed 0:00:00.159

GAMS/Cbc 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 2.20.00, build Aug 23 2008
command line - GAMS/CBC -solve -quit
Continuous objective value is 403.846 - 2.14 seconds
Optimal - objective value 403.846
0 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 114 strengthened rows, 0 substitutions
0 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 114 strengthened rows, 0 substitutions
0 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 103 strengthened rows, 0 substitutions
0 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 103 strengthened rows, 0 substitutions
0 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 103 strengthened rows, 0 substitutions
0 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 103 strengthened rows, 0 substitutions
0 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 103 strengthened rows, 0 substitutions
0 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 103 strengthened rows, 0 substitutions
0 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 103 strengthened rows, 0 substitutions
0 fixed, 0 tightened bounds, 103 strengthened rows, 0 substitutions
processed model has 4789 rows, 1153 columns (309 integer) and 33022 elements
Pass   1: (0.42 seconds) suminf.   13.55075 (29) obj. 421.797 iterations 860
Pass   2: (0.44 seconds) suminf.   13.30075 (27) obj. 422.047 iterations 7
Solution found of 432.047
Branch and bound needed to clear up 3 general integers
Full problem 4790 rows 1153 columns, reduced to 3282 rows 833 columns - too large
Mini branch and bound could not fix general integers
No solution found this major pass
Before mini branch and bound, 170 integers at bound fixed and 320 continuous of which 2 were internal integer and 0 internal continuous
Full problem 4789 rows 1153 columns, reduced to 4308 rows 663 columns - too large
Mini branch and bound did not improve solution (1.34 seconds)
After 1.34 seconds - Feasibility pump exiting - took 1.33 seconds
Integer solution of 449.557 found by greedy cover after 0 iterations and 0 nodes (2.76 seconds)
Full problem 4789 rows 1153 columns, reduced to 3271 rows 858 columns - too large
Integer solution of 447.557 found by combine solutions after 4616 iterations and 0 nodes (7.28 seconds)
36 added rows had average density of 372.556
At root node, 36 cuts changed objective from 404.352 to 406.458 in 10 passes
Cut generator 0 (Probing) - 22 row cuts, 0 column cuts (15 active)  in 0.072 seconds - new frequency is 2
Cut generator 1 (Gomory) - 1394 row cuts, 0 column cuts (21 active)  in 0.284 seconds - new frequency is 1
Cut generator 2 (Knapsack) - 0 row cuts, 0 column cuts (0 active)  in 0.028 seconds - new frequency is -100
Cut generator 3 (Clique) - 0 row cuts, 0 column cuts (0 active)  in 0.008 seconds - new frequency is -100
Cut generator 4 (MixedIntegerRounding2) - 0 row cuts, 0 column cuts (0 active)  in 0.056 seconds - new frequency is -100
Cut generator 5 (FlowCover) - 0 row cuts, 0 column cuts (0 active)  in 0.292 seconds - new frequency is -100
Cut generator 6 (TwoMirCuts) - 263 row cuts, 0 column cuts (0 active)  in 0.248 seconds - new frequency is -100
Optimal - objective value 406.458
Optimal - objective value 406.458
After 0 nodes, 1 on tree, 447.557 best solution, best possible 406.458 (8.93 seconds)
Integer solution of 416.422 found by greedy cover after 5316 iterations and 1 nodes (10.82 seconds)
Full problem 4789 rows 1153 columns, reduced to 4075 rows 937 columns - too large
After 100 nodes, 53 on tree, 416.422 best solution, best possible 407.422 (44.73 seconds)
Integer solution of 416.099 found after 63449 iterations and 164 nodes (58.40 seconds)
Full problem 4789 rows 1153 columns, reduced to 4281 rows 976 columns - too large
After 200 nodes, 108 on tree, 416.099 best solution, best possible 407.422 (69.05 seconds)
After 300 nodes, 160 on tree, 416.099 best solution, best possible 407.422 (86.94 seconds)
Integer solution of 412.152 found after 111702 iterations and 312 nodes (89.61 seconds)
Full problem 4789 rows 1153 columns, reduced to 4299 rows 978 columns - too large
After 400 nodes, 149 on tree, 412.152 best solution, best possible 407.422 (114.99 seconds)
Integer solution of 412.133 found after 173408 iterations and 487 nodes (133.48 seconds)
Full problem 4789 rows 1153 columns, reduced to 4300 rows 979 columns - too large
After 500 nodes, 179 on tree, 412.133 best solution, best possible 407.61 (136.96 seconds)
Integer solution of 411.387 found after 194061 iterations and 559 nodes (150.31 seconds)
Full problem 4789 rows 1153 columns, reduced to 4383 rows 984 columns - too large
After 600 nodes, 174 on tree, 411.387 best solution, best possible 407.61 (164.22 seconds)
After 700 nodes, 223 on tree, 411.387 best solution, best possible 408.183 (196.77 seconds)
Integer solution of 411.029 found after 290458 iterations and 769 nodes (213.22 seconds)
Full problem 4789 rows 1153 columns, reduced to 4388 rows 988 columns - too large
After 800 nodes, 232 on tree, 411.029 best solution, best possible 408.183 (223.27 seconds)
After 900 nodes, 271 on tree, 411.029 best solution, best possible 408.327 (249.56 seconds)
After 1000 nodes, 298 on tree, 411.029 best solution, best possible 408.327 (272.82 seconds)
After 1100 nodes, 334 on tree, 411.029 best solution, best possible 408.43 (301.25 seconds)
After 1200 nodes, 355 on tree, 411.029 best solution, best possible 408.43 (326.68 seconds)
After 1300 nodes, 372 on tree, 411.029 best solution, best possible 408.43 (349.11 seconds)
After 1400 nodes, 399 on tree, 411.029 best solution, best possible 408.546 (373.42 seconds)
After 1500 nodes, 425 on tree, 411.029 best solution, best possible 408.546 (399.11 seconds)
After 1600 nodes, 437 on tree, 411.029 best solution, best possible 408.769 (418.32 seconds)
After 1700 nodes, 454 on tree, 411.029 best solution, best possible 408.795 (440.16 seconds)
After 1800 nodes, 469 on tree, 411.029 best solution, best possible 408.795 (461.76 seconds)
Integer solution of 410.963 found after 635571 iterations and 1837 nodes (466.71 seconds)
Full problem 4789 rows 1153 columns, reduced to 4388 rows 988 columns - too large
After 1900 nodes, 480 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 409.08 (485.97 seconds)
After 2000 nodes, 520 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 409.252 (513.18 seconds)
After 2100 nodes, 562 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 409.349 (538.90 seconds)
After 2200 nodes, 608 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 409.447 (564.06 seconds)
After 2300 nodes, 648 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 409.493 (589.27 seconds)
After 2400 nodes, 692 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 409.545 (614.63 seconds)
After 2500 nodes, 734 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 409.598 (640.44 seconds)
After 2600 nodes, 772 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 409.635 (664.20 seconds)
After 2700 nodes, 809 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 409.67 (692.78 seconds)
After 2800 nodes, 841 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 409.708 (718.71 seconds)
After 2900 nodes, 873 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 409.734 (745.65 seconds)
After 3000 nodes, 899 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 409.772 (775.03 seconds)
After 3100 nodes, 927 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 409.803 (804.42 seconds)
After 3200 nodes, 955 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 409.838 (832.21 seconds)
After 3300 nodes, 982 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 409.859 (860.93 seconds)
After 3400 nodes, 1004 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 409.888 (889.96 seconds)
After 3500 nodes, 1034 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 409.919 (918.47 seconds)
After 3600 nodes, 1054 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 409.95 (948.28 seconds)
After 3700 nodes, 1075 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 409.985 (977.50 seconds)
After 3800 nodes, 1088 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 410.024 (1003.08 seconds)
After 3900 nodes, 1100 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 410.048 (1029.51 seconds)
After 4000 nodes, 1115 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 410.077 (1054.87 seconds)
After 4100 nodes, 1131 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 410.101 (1081.05 seconds)
After 4200 nodes, 1144 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 410.125 (1107.17 seconds)
After 4300 nodes, 1154 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 410.148 (1133.05 seconds)
After 4400 nodes, 1163 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 410.169 (1158.64 seconds)
After 4500 nodes, 1175 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 410.191 (1181.41 seconds)
After 4600 nodes, 1181 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 410.217 (1205.88 seconds)
After 4700 nodes, 1193 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 410.234 (1230.59 seconds)
After 4800 nodes, 1203 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 410.25 (1254.73 seconds)
After 4900 nodes, 1219 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 410.271 (1278.99 seconds)
After 5000 nodes, 1234 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 410.293 (1300.53 seconds)
After 5100 nodes, 1245 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 410.311 (1324.02 seconds)
After 5200 nodes, 1262 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 410.325 (1352.05 seconds)
After 5300 nodes, 1276 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 410.343 (1379.06 seconds)
After 5400 nodes, 1284 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 410.356 (1406.08 seconds)
After 5500 nodes, 1293 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 410.373 (1433.41 seconds)
After 5600 nodes, 1297 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 410.392 (1459.72 seconds)
After 5700 nodes, 1298 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 410.409 (1485.52 seconds)
After 5800 nodes, 1307 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 410.425 (1512.11 seconds)
After 5900 nodes, 1308 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 410.442 (1537.92 seconds)
After 6000 nodes, 1307 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 410.459 (1565.47 seconds)
After 6100 nodes, 1308 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 410.474 (1588.62 seconds)
After 6200 nodes, 1296 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 410.49 (1614.40 seconds)
After 6300 nodes, 1288 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 410.505 (1638.24 seconds)
After 6400 nodes, 1288 on tree, 410.963 best solution, best possible 410.52 (1661.52 seconds)
Integer solution of 410.764 found after 2097104 iterations and 6404 nodes (1662.57 seconds)
Full problem 4789 rows 1153 columns, reduced to 4388 rows 988 columns - too large
After 6500 nodes, 697 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.532 (1679.57 seconds)
After 6600 nodes, 672 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.546 (1694.45 seconds)
After 6700 nodes, 647 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.56 (1710.90 seconds)
After 6800 nodes, 617 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.577 (1726.57 seconds)
After 6900 nodes, 586 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.593 (1740.82 seconds)
After 7000 nodes, 548 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.605 (1754.99 seconds)
After 7100 nodes, 524 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.614 (1768.19 seconds)
After 7200 nodes, 489 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.628 (1782.84 seconds)
After 7300 nodes, 448 on tree, 410.764 best solution, best possible 410.642 (1796.82 seconds)
Exiting on maximum time
Partial search - best objective 410.764 (best possible 410.642), took 2182311 iterations and 7317 nodes (1799.28 seconds)
Strong branching done 460 times (5170 iterations), fathomed 0 nodes and fixed 0 variables
Maximum depth 39, 32588 variables fixed on reduced cost
Cuts at root node changed objective from 404.352 to 406.458
Probing was tried 4230 times and created 7169 cuts of which 3203 were active after adding rounds of cuts (19.985 seconds)
Gomory was tried 1586 times and created 6874 cuts of which 360 were active after adding rounds of cuts (13.021 seconds)
Knapsack was tried 10 times and created 0 cuts of which 0 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.028 seconds)
Clique was tried 10 times and created 0 cuts of which 0 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.008 seconds)
MixedIntegerRounding2 was tried 10 times and created 0 cuts of which 0 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.056 seconds)
FlowCover was tried 10 times and created 0 cuts of which 0 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.292 seconds)
TwoMirCuts was tried 10 times and created 263 cuts of which 0 were active after adding rounds of cuts (0.248 seconds)
implication was tried 4451 times and created 0 cuts of which 0 were active after adding rounds of cuts
Result - Stopped on time objective 410.7637013945249 after 7317 nodes and 2182311 iterations - took 1800.16 seconds (total time 1802.30)
Total time 1822.12

Time limit reached. Have feasible solution.
MIP solution:           410.7637014   (7317 nodes, 1822.12 seconds)
Best possible:           410.641605
Absolute gap:                0.1221   (absolute tolerance optca: 0)
Relative gap:            0.00029733   (relative tolerance optcr: 0)
--- Restarting execution
--- seymour1.gms(124) 0 Mb
--- Reading solution for model m
*** Status: Normal completion
--- Job seymour1.gms Stop 08/24/08 07:50:05 elapsed 0:30:25.384