gams:should_i_use_bounds_or_singleton_equations

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

gams:should_i_use_bounds_or_singleton_equations [2007/09/28 13:30] 127.0.0.1 external edit |
gams:should_i_use_bounds_or_singleton_equations [2007/10/20 07:44] (current) Franz Nelissen |
||
---|---|---|---|

Line 22: | Line 22: | ||

In general bounds (i.e. ''x.lo'', and ''x.up'') are more efficient than equations: a bound does not make the model bigger while an equation does. For solvers with good presolvers this advantage is less pronounced, as the presolver will convert "singleton equations" like x(i) =g= 1000; into bounds automatically. | In general bounds (i.e. ''x.lo'', and ''x.up'') are more efficient than equations: a bound does not make the model bigger while an equation does. For solvers with good presolvers this advantage is less pronounced, as the presolver will convert "singleton equations" like x(i) =g= 1000; into bounds automatically. | ||

- | Similarly preferably you should not generate many ''.fx'' fixed variables. In many cases you can use dollar conditions in the model so that GAMS will not generate them. You can also use the ''.holdfixed'' model suffix; this will cause GAMS to consider fixed variables as constants. Again, for a solver with a good presolver many fixed | + | Similarly preferably you should not generate many ''.fx'' fixed variables. In many cases you can use dollar conditions in the model so that GAMS will not generate them. You can also use the ''.holdfixed'' model suffix; this will cause GAMS to consider fixed variables as constants. Again, for a solver with a good presolver many fixed variables are not an issue; they will be removed from the model automatically. |

- | variables are not an issue:they will be removed from the model automatically. | + | |

IMPRESSUM / LEGAL NOTICE
PRIVACY POLICY
gams/should_i_use_bounds_or_singleton_equations.txt · Last modified: 2007/10/20 07:44 by Franz Nelissen