  About ten years ago, a paper proposed the first integer linear programming
formulation for the constrained two-dimensional guillotine cutting problem
(with unlimited cutting stages). Since, six other formulations followed, five
of them in the last two years. This spike of interest gave no opportunity for a
comprehensive comparison between the formulations. We review each formulation
and compare their empirical results over instance datasets of the literature.
We adapt most formulations to allow for piece rotation. The possibility of
adaptation was already predicted but not realized by the prior work. The
results show the dominance of pseudo-polynomial formulations until the point
instances become intractable by them, while more compact formulations keep
achieving good primal solutions. Our study also reveals a small but consistent
advantage of the Gurobi solver over the CPLEX solver in our context; that the
choice of solver hardly benefits one formulation over another; and a mistake in
the generation of the T instances, which should have the same optima with or
without guillotine cuts. Our study also proposes hybridising the most recent
formulation with a prior formulation for a restricted version of the problem.
The hybridisations show a reduction of about 20% of the branch-and-bound time
thanks to the symmetries broken by the hybridisation.
