我使用 OPL 在 IBM Optimization Studio 中实现了一个 LP 问题来创建模型。在验证模型后，我想将其放入 Java 中，以便为模拟目的编写参数脚本。我找到了使用以下代码在 Java 中使用我的 OLP 模型的最快方法：
IloOplFactory.setDebugMode(false);
IloOplFactory oplF = new IloOplFactory();
IloOplErrorHandler errHandler = oplF.createOplErrorHandler(System.out);
IloOplModelSource modelSource = oplF.createOplModelSource("myModel.mod");
IloCplex cplex = null;
cplex = oplF.createCplex();
IloOplSettings settings = oplF.createOplSettings(errHandler);
IloOplModelDefinition def = oplF.createOplModelDefinition(modelSource, settings);
IloOplModel opl = oplF.createOplModel(def, cplex);
String inDataFile = "myData.dat";
IloOplDataSource dataSource = oplF.createOplDataSource(inDataFile);
opl.addDataSource(dataSource);
opl.generate();
opl.convertAllIntVars(); // converts integer bounds into LP compatible format
if (cplex.solve()) {
double obj = opl.getCplex().getObjValue();
System.out.println("OBJECTIVE: " + obj);
}
现在的问题是，如果我在 IBM Optimization Studio 和 Java 中运行“myModel.mod”和“myData.dat”，我会得到非常不同的客观结果。
在 IBM 优化工作室中：
solution (optimal) with objective 125
在 Java 中：
Parallel mode: deterministic, using up to 4 threads for concurrent optimization.
Tried aggregator 1 time.
LP Presolve eliminated 0 rows and 1 columns.
Reduced LP has 5280 rows, 5325 columns, and 25525 nonzeros.
Presolve time = 0.01 sec. (3.77 ticks)
Iteration log . . .
Iteration: 1 Dual objective = 0.000000
Iteration: 345 Dual objective = 90.297455
Iteration: 568 Dual objective = 117.206047
Perturbation started.
Iteration: 707 Dual objective = 117.206047
Removing perturbation.
Reinitializing dual norms . . .
Dual simplex solved model.
OBJECTIVE: 117.20608137232513
我查看了数据集和我的模型，甚至不可能达到小于 125 的目标（我使用极值来确保我的目标变量之一是 125，因此低于该值的任何东西都不可能）。
有谁知道为什么这些结果不同？与 IBM 相比，Java 的设置是否可能有所不同？我是否可以将我的 IBM 优化工作室设置导入 Java 来进行测试？
谢谢！
编辑：这里是 IBM Optimization studio 日志，我忘了包括那些。它确实显示了更多关于整数被截断的信息，但这是我对这两个程序的第一次体验，所以有人可以帮我找出问题所在或这一切意味着什么吗？
Found incumbent of value 125.000000 after 0.00 sec. (0.53 ticks)
Tried aggregator 1 time.
MIP Presolve eliminated 5027 rows and 4764 columns.
MIP Presolve modified 1191 coefficients.
Reduced MIP has 253 rows, 562 columns, and 1958 nonzeros.
Reduced MIP has 562 binaries, 0 generals, 0 SOSs, and 0 indicators.
Presolve time = 0.02 sec. (8.46 ticks)
Probing fixed 8 vars, tightened 0 bounds.
Probing time = 0.00 sec. (2.86 ticks)
Tried aggregator 1 time.
MIP Presolve eliminated 158 rows and 306 columns.
MIP Presolve modified 293 coefficients.
Reduced MIP has 95 rows, 256 columns, and 632 nonzeros.
Reduced MIP has 256 binaries, 0 generals, 0 SOSs, and 0 indicators.
Presolve time = 0.02 sec. (1.73 ticks)
Probing fixed 6 vars, tightened 0 bounds.
Probing time = 0.00 sec. (0.12 ticks)
Tried aggregator 1 time.
MIP Presolve eliminated 29 rows and 30 columns.
MIP Presolve modified 2 coefficients.
Reduced MIP has 66 rows, 226 columns, and 522 nonzeros.
Reduced MIP has 226 binaries, 0 generals, 0 SOSs, and 0 indicators.
Presolve time = 0.00 sec. (0.42 ticks)
Probing time = 0.00 sec. (0.07 ticks)
Clique table members: 34.
MIP emphasis: balance optimality and feasibility.
MIP search method: dynamic search.
Parallel mode: deterministic, using up to 4 threads.
Root relaxation solution time = 0.00 sec. (0.36 ticks)
Nodes Cuts/
Node Left Objective IInf Best Integer Best Bound ItCnt Gap
* 0+ 0 125.0000 123.0000 1.60%
0 0 123.8469 4 125.0000 123.8469 62 0.92%
0 0 cutoff 125.0000 81 0.00%
Elapsed time = 0.09 sec. (17.09 ticks, tree = 0.00 MB, solutions = 1)
Zero-half cuts applied: 1
Gomory fractional cuts applied: 1
Root node processing (before b&c):
Real time = 0.09 sec. (17.22 ticks)
Parallel b&c, 4 threads:
Real time = 0.00 sec. (0.00 ticks)
Sync time (average) = 0.00 sec.
Wait time (average) = 0.00 sec.
------------
Total (root+branch&cut) = 0.09 sec. (17.22 ticks)
编辑 2：我发现我的矩阵 0..1 中的整数值没有被四舍五入为 0 或 1，而是被计为 0.932...如何强制 Java cplex 舍入我的整数？
已解决：它是“opl.convertAllIntVars();” 它将所有内容都转换为双打。我从示例代码中取出并删除了它，现在一切正常。