Talk:Second-order cone programming

Mathematics Start‑class Low‑priority

	Mathematics portal This 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.MathematicsWikipedia:WikiProject MathematicsTemplate:WikiProject Mathematicsmathematics
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-priority on the project's priority scale.

Systems: Operations research Stub‑class

	Systems science portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Systems, which collaborates on articles related to systems and systems science.SystemsWikipedia:WikiProject SystemsTemplate:WikiProject SystemsSystems
Stub	This 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.
	This article is within the field of Operations research.

It is requested that a mathematical diagram or diagrams be included in this article to improve its quality. Specific illustrations, plots, or diagrams can be requested at the Graphic Lab.
For more information, refer to discussion on this page and/or the listing at Wikipedia:Requested images.

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]