[Coin-ipopt] Re: Bug report
Zhiwen Chong
zhiwen.chong at elf.mcgill.ca
Sun Apr 9 23:49:31 EDT 2006
On 5-Apr-06, at 10:23 AM, Andreas Waechter wrote:
> Setting a slightly positive bound on that variable might help.
> Note, by default Ipopt relaxes the user-given bounds slightly (by
> about 1e-8) before it solves the problem, so that if you put 0 as
> bound, it is actually slightly negative. Setting the option
> bound_relax_factor to 0 makes Ipopt not change the original bounds.
That's useful to know.
> That is strange. Did you download the MC19 code from Harwell and
> put it into Extern/HSL/mc19ad.f ? If you didn't, the option is
> ignored, otherwise it's strange that it is ignored (well, it is
> currently not an option one can set through AMPL, but that will
> change in the new release. However, providing the option in
> PARAMS.DAT should have worked). If you download it now, you need
> to run configure again and recompile for Ipopt to include this
> scaling method.
Yes, I had mc19ad.f compiled into my Ipopt 3.0.1.
Well, I just downloaded and compiled the latest Ipopt (3.10) and put
all my solver parameters in ipopt.opt, including the
linear_system_scaling option. Now, it seems that this version of
Ipopt doesn't print out a list of the currently active options when
it runs, but I believe it *is* reading the ipopt.opt file because
when when I change the print_level, the effect is immediately visible.
So I think the linear_system_scaling option is *probably* active.
>>> I hope this helps,
>> Yup it does, thanks!
> ...? So, you were able to solve the problem?
Yup, based on your advice, I reformulated the problem with slightly
positive bounds (plus some other relaxations + scaling) and it solves
correctly now. It was a bad formulation to start with.
Thanks!
More information about the Coin-ipopt
mailing list