Jump to content

Talk:Second-order cone programming

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by WalkingRandomly2021 (talk | contribs) at 17:23, 14 July 2021. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
WikiProject iconMathematics Start‑class Low‑priority
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-priority on the project's priority scale.
WikiProject iconSystems: Operations research Stub‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Systems, which collaborates on articles related to systems and systems science.
StubThis article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is within the field of Operations research.

Expert needed? Too technical?

There is an expert tag on this page but I cannot see where it is really needed. I'd like to get some feedback before deleting the tag. Zfeinst (talk) 20:14, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It says "too technical" and I didn't understand the notation so I've tried to wikilink some. - Rod57 (talk) 09:55, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Second order?

Can we explain why this is second-order - rather than first or third order ? - Rod57 (talk) 09:55, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone add a picture?

I don't want to read all these boring maths. Please add a picture that explains the problem and solution. 128.196.56.50 (talk) 20:33, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Solvers section should not be deleted

I don't think the deletion of the "Solvers (...)" section is justified. See, for instance, that linear programming and quadratic programming both have big solvers tables. What do you think MrOllie? BernardoSulzbach (talk) 15:32, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I went on and reverted the deletion after 48 hours without response. BernardoSulzbach (talk) 17:54, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The solvers section is missing MATLAB's coneprog function which has been available since version 2020b. I won't add it myself since I work at MathWorks but I think that this will improve the coverage of this section. I also note that there are only commercial solvers in this section. If you google 'ECOS: An SOCP Solver for Embedded Systems' you'll find an open source one that you may wish to add for balance.