-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 73
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Incorrect Optimal Solution from scip #126
Comments
Please share a log. What is the difference between the SCIP_CMD run at the top and the SCIP run that returns the same result as other solvers? Chances are the solution from the first run is infeasible. You can check that by typing "check" in the interactive shell after solving has finished. |
Sorry if I wasn't clear. There is no difference between SCIP_CMD and SCIP, which SCIP_CMD is because I was calling scip solver from pulp. I used the cmd line Seems you are right, the solution violated the constraint. Some output:
Any suggestions? |
Here is a simplified instance by MIP-DD for SCIP The issue seems to lie in linear presolving since it occurs for multiple heuristics. |
It seems that this is an issue with the shifting heuristic which feeds a infeasible solution to SCIP. Meanwhile we try to work on this issue. |
I see, thank you for the reply. |
As already mentioned, it is not the shifting heuristic because it also fails on the simplified problem with only |
The presolved problem is actually correct and solved tolerably so this is really only due to tolerances relative to increased sides caused by fixings. There is already an unmerged approach to keep track on the original sides but this is a rather extensive change. In the meantime you could simply try with a smaller feasibility tolerance like |
I am using scip to solve (minimize) this MIP problem seed.txt and getting the result:
Solver: SCIP_CMD
Status: Optimal
Objective: -38885.13248833593
x0 = -192.0, x1 = 47.8781752203214, x2 = -179.0, x3 = -2.0, x4 = -12.0, x5 = 168.0, x6 = 200.0, x7 = 200.0,
All other solvers I have tried (HiGHS, SCIP, GLPK, GUROBI) returned the following results with only floating-point difference:
Status: Optimal
Objective: -38873.438164852254
x0 = -192.0, x1 = 48.94401244167961, x2 = -178.0, x3 = -1.0, x4 = -11.0, x5 = 169.0, x6 = 200.0, x7 = 200.0,
I'm not sure if this inconsistency is expected. I would appreciate any suggestions or instructions.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: