Why don't you just index the parameter tscaling() by t instead of ss? I.e. make it
parameter tscaling(t) /
t1 0.826
blah blah
/;
The set ss is not really helping you.
Search found 215 matches
- 4 years ago
- Forum: Syntax
- Topic: Element by Element Multplication in GAMS
- Replies: 4
- Views: 3307
- 4 years ago
- Forum: Syntax
- Topic: not equal tupels
- Replies: 4
- Views: 3174
Re: not equal tupels
Nikou, I find it helpful to use a tuple set so I can see what is in it. That's easier than looking at equations, and you can use the tuple set to define the subset of equations you generate. Like this: sets i / i1, i2 / j / j1, j2 / ; alias (i, i1), (j, j1); set tuples(i,j,i1,j1); tuples(i,j,i1,j1)$...
- 4 years ago
- Forum: Syntax
- Topic: Could not spawn gamscmex error
- Replies: 3
- Views: 3042
Re: Could not spawn gamscmex error
Roys, Fred's comment on running out of memory points to one likely cause. But if that's the case then GAMS should be giving you some sort of message and a cleaner exit. The output you have sent makes me suspect it could be some other sort of limit hit internally - we should be detecting and handling...
- 4 years ago
- Forum: Modeling
- Topic: Converting to Mixed Inter
- Replies: 1
- Views: 1867
Re: Converting to Mixed Inter
Hello,
It is quite common that the variables x_s have some finite upper bounds U_s. In practice, it's important that these bounds be small. For example, 100 is small. 1e10 is not small.
With these bounds, you can do:
x_s <= U_s * b_s
This is a typical big-M MIP formulation.
-Steve
It is quite common that the variables x_s have some finite upper bounds U_s. In practice, it's important that these bounds be small. For example, 100 is small. 1e10 is not small.
With these bounds, you can do:
x_s <= U_s * b_s
This is a typical big-M MIP formulation.
-Steve
- 4 years ago
- Forum: Solvers
- Topic: Using Branch and Bound in Cplex
- Replies: 3
- Views: 5360
Re: Using Branch and Bound in Cplex
Hello,
Why does your instructor want you to solve with branch & bound?
-Steve
Why does your instructor want you to solve with branch & bound?
-Steve
- 4 years ago
- Forum: Syntax
- Topic: Equation Set Condition
- Replies: 1
- Views: 2367
Re: Equation Set Condition
Hello, What you have will work in principle, although you should use ord() and an 'or' instead of 'and': EQ2(i,j)$(ord(j) = 1) or (ord(j) = 4).. X(i,j)=e=B(i,j); to get the complement of the tuples from EQ1. If it is really your intention to cover all the i,j tuples using one of the two equations th...
- 4 years ago
- Forum: Syntax
- Topic: Sum of Rows = Sum of Columns
- Replies: 5
- Views: 3917
Re: Sum of Rows = Sum of Columns
It would make it easier to help if you followed the posting rules:
app.php/rules
app.php/rules
- 4 years ago
- Forum: Syntax
- Topic: Sum of Rows = Sum of Columns
- Replies: 5
- Views: 3917
Re: Sum of Rows = Sum of Columns
Hi, Often, if you have a square matrix Q(i,j), the sets i and j are the same, e.g. you have alias(i,j). In this case, to force Q to be symmetric, you could do: equation forceSym(i,j); forceSym(i,j)$[ord(i) < ord(j)].. Q(i,j) =e= Q(j,i); Note that if you have such a constraint, you could enforce the ...
- 4 years ago
- Forum: Modeling
- Topic: Problem with constraint in MCP
- Replies: 4
- Views: 3258
Re: Problem with constraint in MCP
Hello, Just following up on this issue. The problem has been analyzed and fixed by the PATH team (thanks Todd!). The fix will be available with PATH 5.0.2 released with the next GAMS distribution. Until that is released, please run this model with preprocessing turned off, as described earlier in th...
- 4 years ago
- Forum: Modeling
- Topic: Problem with constraint in MCP
- Replies: 4
- Views: 3258
Re: Problem with constraint in MCP
Hi, I got the same results you did, and they didn't make sense to me either. I ran PATH without the preprocessor and then PATH returned a different (and consistent) solution. You can do the same thing by creating an option file path.opt with this line: preprocess 0 and tell PATH to use this option f...