Warning: max constraint violation (9.2015e-06) exceeds tolerance
Answered
Gurobi Optimizer version 9.5.0 build v9.5.0rc5 (win64)
Gurobi Compute Server Worker version 9.5.0 build v9.5.0rc5 (win64)
Thread count: 8 physical cores, 8 logical processors, using up to 8 threads
Optimize a model with 2590 rows, 61568 columns and 358730 nonzeros
Model fingerprint: 0xfd9a5041
Model has 52 SOS constraints
Model has 284 general constraints
Variable types: 60509 continuous, 1059 integer (1059 binary)
Coefficient statistics:
Matrix range [1e-03, 5e+03]
Objective range [1e+00, 1e+01]
Bounds range [1e-04, 1e+04]
RHS range [1e+00, 5e+03]
GenCon rhs range [3e-01, 4e+03]
GenCon coe range [1e-01, 3e+05]
Presolve removed 259 rows and 1213 columns
Presolve time: 2.76s
Presolved: 2331 rows, 60355 columns, 316144 nonzeros
Presolved model has 17 SOS constraint(s)
Variable types: 59596 continuous, 759 integer (759 binary)
Found heuristic solution: objective 0.0000000
Root relaxation: objective -8.722800e+01, 1888 iterations, 0.18 seconds (0.17 work units)
Nodes | Current Node | Objective Bounds | Work
Expl Unexpl | Obj Depth IntInf | Incumbent BestBd Gap | It/Node Time
0 0 -87.22800 0 74 0.00000 -87.22800 - - 4s
0 0 -77.63462 0 311 0.00000 -77.63462 - - 8s
0 0 -77.10213 0 295 0.00000 -77.10213 - - 9s
0 0 -76.99283 0 292 0.00000 -76.99283 - - 9s
0 0 -76.87641 0 308 0.00000 -76.87641 - - 10s
0 0 -75.97268 0 309 0.00000 -75.97268 - - 11s
0 0 -75.97268 0 315 0.00000 -75.97268 - - 11s
0 0 -75.71492 0 323 0.00000 -75.71492 - - 12s
0 0 -75.60141 0 222 0.00000 -75.60141 - - 13s
0 2 -75.60141 0 210 0.00000 -75.60141 - - 15s
198 149 -33.45070 16 92 0.00000 -75.60141 - 139 20s
H 462 305 -27.2063206 -75.60141 178% 103 24s
H 463 305 -42.9563191 -75.60141 76.0% 103 24s
* 554 360 84 -42.9563195 -75.60141 76.0% 101 25s
1117 679 -62.77741 37 252 -42.95632 -75.60141 76.0% 103 30s
1542 896 -67.28322 23 213 -42.95632 -75.60141 76.0% 107 36s
1544 897 -64.95480 20 167 -42.95632 -75.60141 76.0% 107 46s
1548 900 -66.91967 32 540 -42.95632 -75.60141 76.0% 106 50s
1552 903 -59.58946 33 339 -42.95632 -75.60141 76.0% 106 55s
1555 906 -44.86568 15 257 -42.95632 -75.60141 76.0% 117 61s
1573 910 infeasible 19 -42.95632 -75.60141 76.0% 118 65s
H 1617 866 -56.5050293 -74.42772 31.7% 119 68s
H 1622 821 -56.5051856 -74.42772 31.7% 120 68s
1715 833 infeasible 40 -56.50519 -74.42772 31.7% 118 70s
H 1882 785 -56.5052020 -72.20901 27.8% 116 73s
1997 821 -60.29536 46 392 -56.50520 -68.71788 21.6% 113 75s
2269 891 -59.18354 81 282 -56.50520 -67.59928 19.6% 104 82s
H 2829 777 -59.5089389 -62.97545 5.83% 91.5 87s
3191 742 -59.79225 46 434 -59.50894 -61.46147 3.28% 87.7 90s
H 3223 696 -59.5990584 -61.46147 3.12% 87.4 90s
* 3415 540 127 -59.5990585 -61.43990 3.09% 84.3 90s
H 3465 499 -59.6042257 -61.43990 3.08% 83.5 90s
* 4010 453 104 -59.6043138 -60.39704 1.33% 78.7 94s
4145 442 -59.65942 57 353 -59.60431 -60.30637 1.18% 77.5 99s
4227 459 cutoff 60 -59.60431 -60.19047 0.98% 76.7 103s
4379 467 -59.64208 52 388 -59.60431 -60.04246 0.74% 75.3 105s
4487 500 -59.62236 59 257 -59.60431 -60.04246 0.74% 74.3 110s
H 4924 515 -59.6043171 -60.04246 0.74% 69.6 116s
5156 550 -59.64796 67 294 -59.60432 -60.03098 0.72% 67.2 124s
5171 568 -59.64673 68 290 -59.60432 -59.75267 0.25% 67.0 127s
5396 460 -59.65954 55 301 -59.60432 -59.73841 0.22% 65.1 131s
H 5681 444 -59.6043191 -59.68730 0.14% 62.9 133s
H 5704 444 -59.6043201 -59.68730 0.14% 62.8 133s
5705 334 -59.62309 75 234 -59.60432 -59.67225 0.11% 62.8 135s
Cutting planes:
Gomory: 2
Cover: 3
Implied bound: 63
MIR: 25
Flow cover: 41
GUB cover: 4
Inf proof: 3
Network: 4
RLT: 4
Relax-and-lift: 7
Explored 6224 nodes (381302 simplex iterations) in 135.74 seconds (210.23 work units)
Thread count was 8 (of 8 available processors)
Solution count 10: -59.6043 -59.6043 -59.6043 ... -56.5052
Optimal solution found (tolerance 1.00e-03)
Warning: max constraint violation (9.2015e-06) exceeds tolerance
Best objective -5.960432009866e+01, best bound -5.965331471614e+01, gap 0.0822%
cons = np.array(m.getConstrs())
slacks = m.getAttr("Slack", cons)
df = pd.DataFrame({
"violation":-slacks[slacks < 0],
"constr":cons[slacks < 0],
})
The code written above which gives the slacks data frame doesn't have violation. How can I identify which constraint is being violated then.
0
-
Official comment
-
Gurobi Staff
This post is more than two years old. Some information may not be up to date. For current information, please check the Gurobi Documentation or Knowledge Base. If you need more help, please create a new post in the community forum, or try Gurobot, our chatbot interface offering instant, expert-level support. -
-
-
Hi Sudheer,
The following code snippet should help:
def get_constr_from_index(model, index):
constr_boundaries_and_get = (
(model.NumConstrs, model.getConstrs),
(model.NumQConstrs, model.getQConstrs),
(model.NumSOS, model.getSOSs),
(model.NumGenConstrs, model.getGenConstrs),
)
for boundary, get_func in constr_boundaries_and_get:
if index < boundary:
return get_func()[index]
index -= boundary
raise ValueError(f"Constraint with index {index} not found in model")
def get_max_violated_constr(model):
constr = get_constr_from_index(model, model.ConstrVioIndex)
return constr
max_violated_constr = get_max_violated_constr(model)The max_violated_constr will then be the constraint you're looking for.
- Riley
0 -
Post is closed for comments.
Comments
2 comments