Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

More time does not mean better results? #458

Open
scorpioares opened this issue Jun 29, 2022 · 2 comments
Open

More time does not mean better results? #458

scorpioares opened this issue Jun 29, 2022 · 2 comments

Comments

@scorpioares
Copy link

Description
I am using LeapHybridCQMSolver to solve the CQM model. If I set the time_limit to None (which is 5s according to the details of problem status), the solver returns satisfying feasible solutions. However, if I set the time_limit to a larger constant such as 30s, the solver cannot find a feasible solution.

To Reproduce
I am unsure whether my model causes this kind of result or something from the SDK and solver. Since my model is under business work, I cannot provide it here.

Expected behavior
I expected a better result by making the time_limit parameter larger, or at least the same result.

Environment:

  • OS: [macOS 12.4]
  • Python version: [3.10]

Additional context
I wonder if it is a rare case and mostly comes from the model's structure or if it comes from the internal issue of the hybrid solver.

@arcondello
Copy link
Member

Hi @scorpioares, thanks for the report! Would it be possible to share the CQM that you submitting? You can save it by running

import shutil

with cqm.to_file() as src_f:
    with open('example.cqm', 'wb') as dest_f:
        shutil.copyfileobj(src_f, dest_f)

@scorpioares
Copy link
Author

@arcondello, thank you for your reply. I have saved the CQM file. How can I send it to you? Is there a safer way to do that to protect sensitive business information?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants