Potential Numerical Bug in MIP Solving

For this instance https://gist.github.com/zxt5/dc43466d22ebdb82056796a35323a23a

Gurobi generates the optimal solution with the objective of 3754.. by default,

but generates a solution with the objective of 3759.. with parameters:

Presolve=2 BarCorrectors=1 ScaleFlag=1 NodeMethod=2 GomoryPasses=1 

Is this inconsistency expected for this case?

I am using 12.0.2 on Ubuntu. The log:

gurobi_cl Presolve=2 BarCorrectors=1 ScaleFlag=1 NodeMethod=2 GomoryPasses=1  seed.lp
Set parameter Username
Set parameter LicenseID to value 2648392
Set parameter ScaleFlag to value 1
Set parameter BarCorrectors to value 1
Set parameter NodeMethod to value 2
Set parameter GomoryPasses to value 1
Set parameter LogFile to value "gurobi.log"
Set parameter Presolve to value 2
Using license file /home/x27zhou/gurobi.lic
Academic license - for non-commercial use only - expires 2026-04-07

Gurobi Optimizer version 12.0.2 build v12.0.2rc0 (linux64 - "Ubuntu 20.04.5 LTS")
Copyright (c) 2025, Gurobi Optimization, LLC

Read LP format model from file seed.lp
Reading time = 0.00 seconds
OBJ: 127 rows, 20 columns, 2540 nonzeros

Using Gurobi shared library /home/x27zhou/solvers/gurobi/gurobi1202/linux64/lib/libgurobi.so.12.0.2

CPU model: AMD Ryzen 9 7950X 16-Core Processor, instruction set [SSE2|AVX|AVX2|AVX512]
Thread count: 16 physical cores, 32 logical processors, using up to 32 threads

Non-default parameters:
ScaleFlag  1
BarCorrectors  1
NodeMethod  2
GomoryPasses  1
Presolve  2

Optimize a model with 127 rows, 20 columns and 2540 nonzeros
Model fingerprint: 0xf7b7c71d
Variable types: 12 continuous, 8 integer (0 binary)
Coefficient statistics:
  Matrix range     [1e-02, 1e+02]
  Objective range  [5e+00, 1e+02]
  Bounds range     [2e+02, 2e+02]
  RHS range        [8e+01, 5e+03]
Presolve time: 0.00s
Presolved: 127 rows, 20 columns, 2540 nonzeros
Variable types: 12 continuous, 8 integer (0 binary)
Root relaxation presolved: 127 rows, 20 columns, 2540 nonzeros


Root relaxation: objective 3.722155e+03, 45 iterations, 0.00 seconds (0.00 work units)

    Nodes    |    Current Node    |     Objective Bounds      |     Work
 Expl Unexpl |  Obj  Depth IntInf | Incumbent    BestBd   Gap | It/Node Time

     0     0 3722.15470    0    8          - 3722.15470      -     -    0s
H    0     0                    3789.0149760 3722.15470  1.76%     -    0s
     0     0 3729.10656    0    8 3789.01498 3729.10656  1.58%     -    0s
H    0     0                    3783.0598033 3729.10656  1.43%     -    0s
     0     0 3729.10656    0    8 3783.05980 3729.10656  1.43%     -    0s
     0     2 3729.10656    0    8 3783.05980 3729.10656  1.43%     -    0s
H   17    27                    3774.5055277 3731.40208  1.14%   6.1    0s
H   20    27                    3767.7824514 3731.40208  0.97%   6.1    0s
H   25    24                    3759.2454608 3731.40208  0.74%   6.3    0s

Cutting planes:
  Gomory: 4

Explored 148 nodes (703 simplex iterations) in 0.85 seconds (0.52 work units)
Thread count was 32 (of 32 available processors)

Solution count 5: 3759.25 3767.78 3774.51 ... 3789.01

Optimal solution found (tolerance 1.00e-04)
Best objective 3.759245460789e+03, best bound 3.759245460789e+03, gap 0.0000%