@article{GleixnerHendelGamrathetal.2021, author = {Gleixner, Ambros and Hendel, Gregor and Gamrath, Gerald and Achterberg, Tobias and Bastubbe, Michael and Berthold, Timo and Christophel, Philipp M. and Jarck, Kati and Koch, Thorsten and Linderoth, Jeff and L{\"u}bbecke, Marco and Mittelmann, Hans and Ozyurt, Derya and Ralphs, Ted and Salvagnin, Domenico and Shinano, Yuji}, title = {MIPLIB 2017: Data-Driven Compilation of the 6th Mixed-Integer Programming Library}, volume = {13}, journal = {Mathematical Programming Computation}, number = {3}, doi = {10.1007/s12532-020-00194-3}, pages = {443 -- 490}, year = {2021}, abstract = {We report on the selection process leading to the sixth version of the Mixed Integer Programming Library. Selected from an initial pool of over 5,000 instances, the new MIPLIB 2017 collection consists of 1,065 instances. A subset of 240 instances was specially selected for benchmarking solver performance. For the first time, the compilation of these sets was done using a data-driven selection process supported by the solution of a sequence of mixed integer optimization problems, which encoded requirements on diversity and balancedness with respect to instance features and performance data.}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{HendelBertholdAchterberg2011, author = {Hendel, Gregor and Berthold, Timo and Achterberg, Tobias}, title = {Rounding and Propagation Heuristics for Mixed Integer Programming}, booktitle = {Operations Research Proceedings 2011}, pages = {71 -- 76}, year = {2011}, abstract = {Primal heuristics are an important component of state-of-the-art codes for mixed integer programming. In this paper, we focus on primal heuristics that only employ computationally inexpensive procedures such as rounding and logical deductions (propagation). We give an overview of eight different approaches. To assess the impact of these primal heuristics on the ability to find feasible solutions, in particular early during search, we introduce a new performance measure, the primal integral. Computational experiments evaluate this and other measures on MIPLIB~2010 benchmark instances.}, language = {en} } @misc{BertholdHendel2013, author = {Berthold, Timo and Hendel, Gregor}, title = {Shift-And-Propagate}, issn = {1438-0064}, doi = {10.1007/s10732-014-9271-0}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0297-zib-17596}, year = {2013}, abstract = {For mixed integer programming, recent years have seen a growing interest in the design of general purpose primal heuristics for use inside complete solvers. Many of these heuristics rely on an optimal LP solution. Finding this may itself take a significant amount of time. The presented paper addresses this issue by the introduction of the Shift-And-Propagate heuristic. Shift-And-Propagate is a pre-root primal heuristic that does not require a previously found LP solution. It applies domain propagation techniques to quickly drive a variable assignment towards feasibility. Computational experiments indicate that this heuristic is a powerful supplement of existing rounding and propagation heuristics.}, language = {en} } @misc{AchterbergBertholdHendel2011, author = {Achterberg, Tobias and Berthold, Timo and Hendel, Gregor}, title = {Rounding and Propagation Heuristics for Mixed Integer Programming}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-642-29210-1_12}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0297-zib-13255}, number = {11-29}, year = {2011}, abstract = {Primal heuristics are an important component of state-of-the-art codes for mixed integer programming. In this paper, we focus on primal heuristics that only employ computationally inexpensive procedures such as rounding and logical deductions (propagation). We give an overview of eight different approaches. To assess the impact of these primal heuristics on the ability to find feasible solutions, in particular early during search, we introduce a new performance measure, the primal integral. Computational experiments evaluate this and other measures on MIPLIB~2010 benchmark instances.}, language = {en} } @article{BertholdHendelKoch2017, author = {Berthold, Timo and Hendel, Gregor and Koch, Thorsten}, title = {From feasibility to improvement to proof: three phases of solving mixed-integer programs}, volume = {33}, journal = {Optimization Methods and Software}, number = {3}, publisher = {Taylor \& Francis}, doi = {10.1080/10556788.2017.1392519}, pages = {499 -- 517}, year = {2017}, abstract = {Modern mixed-integer programming (MIP) solvers employ dozens of auxiliary algorithmic components to support the branch-and-bound search in finding and improving primal solutions and in strengthening the dual bound. Typically, all components are tuned to minimize the average running time to prove optimality. In this article, we take a different look at the run of a MIP solver. We argue that the solution process consists of three distinct phases, namely achieving feasibility, improving the incumbent solution, and proving optimality. We first show that the entire solving process can be improved by adapting the search strategy with respect to the phase-specific aims using different control tunings. Afterwards, we provide criteria to predict the transition between the individual phases and evaluate the performance impact of altering the algorithmic behaviour of the non-commercial MIP solver Scip at the predicted phase transition points.}, language = {en} } @article{BertholdHendel2014, author = {Berthold, Timo and Hendel, Gregor}, title = {Shift-and-Propagate}, volume = {21}, journal = {Journal of Heuristics}, number = {1}, doi = {10.1007/s10732-014-9271-0}, pages = {73 -- 106}, year = {2014}, abstract = {In recent years, there has been a growing interest in the design of general purpose primal heuristics for use inside complete mixed integer programming solvers. Many of these heuristics rely on an optimal LP solution, which may take a significant amount of time to find. In this paper, we address this issue by introducing a pre-root primal heuristic that does not require a previously found LP solution. This heuristic, named Shift-and-Propagate , applies domain propagation techniques to quickly drive a variable assignment towards feasibility. Computational experiments indicate that this heuristic is a powerful supplement to existing rounding and propagation heuristics.}, language = {en} } @misc{BertholdHendelKoch2016, author = {Berthold, Timo and Hendel, Gregor and Koch, Thorsten}, title = {The Three Phases of MIP Solving}, issn = {1438-0064}, doi = {10.1080/10556788.2017.1392519}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0297-zib-61607}, year = {2016}, abstract = {Modern MIP solvers employ dozens of auxiliary algorithmic components to support the branch-and-bound search in finding and improving primal solutions and in strengthening the dual bound. Typically, all components are tuned to minimize the average running time to prove optimality. In this article, we take a different look at the run of a MIP solver. We argue that the solution process consists of three different phases, namely achieving feasibility, improving the incumbent solution, and proving optimality. We first show that the entire solving process can be improved by adapting the search strategy with respect to the phase-specific aims using different control tunings. Afterwards, we provide criteria to predict the transition between the individual phases and evaluate the performance impact of altering the algorithmic behavior of the MIP solver SCIP at the predicted phase transition points.}, language = {en} }