Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Introduction
Background
The Euclidean Case
References
All Topics
Mathematics
Pure Mathematics

Universally optimal distribution of points on spheres

Profile image of Abhinav KumarAbhinav Kumar

2006, Journal of the American Mathematical Society

Abstract

We study configurations of points on the unit sphere that minimize potential energy for a broad class of potential functions (viewed as functions of the squared Euclidean distance between points). Call a configuration sharp if there are m m distances between distinct points in it and it is a spherical ( 2 m − 1 ) (2m-1) -design. We prove that every sharp configuration minimizes potential energy for all completely monotonic potential functions. Examples include the minimal vectors of the E 8 E_8 and Leech lattices. We also prove the same result for the vertices of the 600 600 -cell, which do not form a sharp configuration. For most known cases, we prove that they are the unique global minima for energy, as long as the potential function is strictly completely monotonic. For certain potential functions, some of these configurations were previously analyzed by Yudin, Kolushov, and Andreev; we build on their techniques. We also generalize our results to other compact two-point homogeneo...

Related papers

Universal lower bounds for potential energy of spherical codes
Peter Boyvalenkov, Peter Dragnev, Maya Stoyanova

We derive and investigate lower bounds for the potential energy of finite spherical point sets (spherical codes). Our bounds are optimal in the following sense -they cannot be improved by employing polynomials of the same or lower degrees in the Delsarte-Yudin method. However, improvements are sometimes possible and we provide a necessary and sufficient condition for the existence of such better bounds. All our bounds can be obtained in a unified manner that does not depend on the potential function, provided the potential is given by an absolutely monotone function of the inner product between pairs of points, and this is the reason for us to call them universal. We also establish a criterion for a given code of dimension n and cardinality N not to be LP-universally optimal, e.g. we show that two codes conjectured by Ballinger et al to be universally optimal are not LP-universally optimal.

View PDFchevron_right
Optimal and Near Optimal Configurations on Lattices and Manifolds
Peter Grabner

Oberwolfach Reports, 2012

Optimal configurations of points arise in many contexts, for example classical ground states for interacting particle systems, Euclidean packings of convex bodies, as well as minimal discrete and continuous energy problems for general kernels. Relevant questions in this area include the understanding of asymptotic optimal configurations, of lattice and periodic configurations, the development of algorithmic constructions of near optimal configurations, and the application of methods in convex optimization such as linear and semidefinite programming. : 11K41, 52C17, 11H31.

View PDFchevron_right
The Stolarsky Principle and Energy Optimization on the Sphere
Feng Dai

Constructive Approximation, 2018

The classical Stolarsky invariance principle connects the spherical cap L 2 discrepancy of a finite point set on the sphere to the pairwise sum of Euclidean distances between the points. In this paper we further explore and extend this phenomenon. In addition to a new elementary proof of this fact, we establish several new analogs, which relate various notions of discrepancy to different discrete energies. In particular, we find that the hemisphere discrepancy is related to the sum of geodesic distances. We also extend these results to arbitrary measures on the sphere and arbitrary notions of discrepancy and apply them to problems of energy optimization and combinatorial geometry and find that, surprisingly, the geodesic distance energy behaves differently than its Euclidean counterpart.

View PDFchevron_right
Universal upper and lower bounds on energy of spherical designs
Maya Stoyanova

2015

Linear programming (polynomial) techniques are used to obtain lower and upper bounds for the potential energy of spherical designs. This approach gives unified bounds that are valid for a large class of potential functions. Our lower bounds are optimal for absolutely monotone potentials in the sense that for the linear programming technique they cannot be improved by using polynomials of the same or lower degree. When additional information about the structure (upper and lower bounds for the inner products) of the designs is known, improvements on the bounds are obtained. Furthermore, we provide `test functions' for determining when the linear programming lower bounds for energy can be improved utilizing higher degree polynomials. We also provide some asymptotic results for these energy bounds.

View PDFchevron_right
Distributing points on the sphere: Partitions, separation, quadrature and energy
Paul C Leopardi
View PDFchevron_right
Locally Optimal 2-Periodic Sphere Packings
Alexei Andreanov

Discrete & Computational Geometry, 2019

The sphere packing problem is an old puzzle. We consider packings with m spheres in the unit cell (m-periodic packings). For the case m = 1 (lattice packings), Voronoi proved there are finitely many inequivalent local optima and presented an algorithm to enumerate them, and this computation has been implemented in up to d = 8 dimensions. We generalize Voronoi's method to m > 1 and present a procedure to enumerate all locally optimal 2-periodic sphere packings in any dimension, provided there are finitely many. We implement this computation in d = 3, 4, and 5 and show that no 2-periodic packing surpasses the density of the optimal lattices in these dimensions. A partial enumeration is performed in d = 6.

View PDFchevron_right
Mesh ratios for best-packing and limits of minimal energy configurations
Andriy Bondarenko

Acta Mathematica Hungarica, 2014

For N -point best-packing configurations ω N on a compact metric space (A, ρ), we obtain estimates for the mesh-separation ratio γ(ω N , A), which is the quotient of the covering radius of ω N relative to A and the minimum pairwise distance between points in ω N . For best-packing configurations ω N that arise as limits of minimal Riesz s-energy configurations as s → ∞, we prove that γ(ω N , A) ≤ 1 and this bound can be attained even for the sphere. In the particular case when N = 5 on S 2 with ρ the Euclidean metric, we prove our main result that among the infinitely many 5-point best-packing configurations there is a unique configuration, namely a square-base pyramid ω * 5 , that is the limit (as s → ∞) of 5-point s-energy minimizing configurations. Moreover, γ(ω * 5 , S 2 ) = 1.

View PDFchevron_right
An octahedral equal area partition of the sphere and near optimal configurations of points
Adrian Holhos, Daniela Roşca

Computers & Mathematics with Applications, 2014

We construct a new area preserving map from the unit sphere to the regular octahedron, both centered at the origin. Its inverse map allows the construction of uniform and refinable grids on a sphere, starting from any triangular uniform and refinable grid on the faces of the octahedron. We prove that our new grids are diameter bounded and then, for the resulting configurations of points we calculate some Riesz s-energies and we compare them with the optimal ones. For some configurations, we also calculate the point energies and we list the minimum and maximum values, concluding that these values are very close. Finally, we show how we can map a hemisphere of the Earth onto a square, using our new area preserving projection. The simplicity and the symmetry of our formulas lead to fast computations.

View PDFchevron_right
Distribution of points on the sphere and spherical designs
Congpei AN

2011

I hereby declare that this submission is my own work and that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, it contains no material previously published or written by another person nor material which to a substantial extent has been accepted for the award of any other degree or diploma of a university or other institute of higher learning, except where due acknowledgment is made in the text.

View PDFchevron_right
Distributing Points on the Sphere, I
Ali Katanforoush

Experimental Mathematics, 2003

View PDFchevron_right

References (63)

  1. N. N. Andreev, An extremal property of the icosahedron, East J. Approx. 2 (1996), 459-462. MR1426716 (97m:52022)
  2. N. N. Andreev, Location of points on a sphere with minimal energy (Russian), Tr. Mat. Inst. Steklova 219 (1997), 27-31; translation in Proc. Steklov Inst. Math. 219 (1997), 20-24. MR1642295 (99i:52019)
  3. N. N. Andreev, A spherical code (Russian), Uspekhi Mat. Nauk 54 (1999), 255-256; translation in Russian Math. Surveys 54 (1999), 251-253. MR1706807
  4. G. Andrews, R. Askey, and R. Roy, Special Functions, Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications 71, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1999. MR1688958 (2000g:33001)
  5. R. Askey, Orthogonal Polynomials and Special Functions, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 1975. MR0481145 (58:1288)
  6. J. Baez, The octonions, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. (N.S.) 39 (2002), 145-205, arXiv: math.RA/0105155; see also errata in Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 42 (2005), 213. MR1886087 (2003f:17003); MR2132837
  7. E. Bannai, A. Munemasa, and B. Venkov, The nonexistence of certain tight spherical designs, Algebra i Analiz 16 (2004), 1-23. MR2090848 (2005e:05022)
  8. BS] E. Bannai and N. J. A. Sloane, Uniqueness of certain spherical codes, Canad. J. Math. 33 (1981), no. 2, 437-449. MR0617634 (83a:94020)
  9. K. Bőrőczky, Packing of spheres in spaces of constant curvature, Acta Math. Acad. Sci. Hung. 32 (1978), 243-261. MR0512399 (80h:52014)
  10. K. Bőrőczky, Jr., Finite packing and covering, Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics 154, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2004. MR2078625 (2005g:52045)
  11. BD] P. Boyvalenkov and D. Danev, Uniqueness of the 120-point spherical 11-design in four dimensions, Arch. Math. (Basel) 77 (2001), no. 4, 360-368. MR1853553 (2002f:05045)
  12. CGS] P. J. Cameron, J. M. Goethals, and J. J. Seidel, Strongly regular graphs having strongly regular subconstituents, J. Algebra 55 (1978), 257-280. MR0523457 (81d:05034)
  13. H. Cohn, New upper bounds on sphere packings II , Geom. Topol. 6 (2002), 329-353, arXiv:math.MG/0110010. MR1914571 (2004b:52032)
  14. H. Cohn and N. D. Elkies, New upper bounds on sphere packings I , Ann. of Math. 157 (2003), 689-714, arXiv:math.MG/0110009. MR1973059 (2004b:11096)
  15. H. Cohn and A. Kumar, Optimality and uniqueness of the Leech lattice among lattices, preprint, 2003, arXiv:math.MG/0403263.
  16. H. Cohn and A. Kumar, The densest lattice in twenty-four dimensions, Electron. Res. Announc. Amer. Math. Soc. 10 (2004), 58-67, arXiv:math.MG/0408174. MR2075897 (2005e:11089)
  17. H. Cohn and A. Kumar, Uniqueness of the (22, 891, 1/4) spherical code, preprint, 2004, arXiv:math.MG/0607448.
  18. H. Cohn, J. H. Conway, N. D. Elkies, and A. Kumar, The D 4 root system is not universally optimal, preprint, 2004, arXiv:math.MG/0607447.
  19. J. Conway, R. Hardin, and N. J. A. Sloane, Packing lines, planes, etc.: packings in Grassmannian spaces, Experiment. Math. 5 (1996), 139-159. MR1418961 (98a:52029)
  20. CS] J. Conway and N. J. A. Sloane, Sphere Packings, Lattices and Groups, third edi- tion, Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften 290, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1999. MR1662447 (2000b:11077)
  21. H. Cuypers, A note on the tight spherical 7-design in R 23 and 5-design in R 7 , Des. Codes Cryptogr. 34 (2005), 333-337. MR2128339 (2005k:05058)
  22. P. J. Davis, Interpolation and Approximation, Blaisdell Publishing Company, New York, 1963. MR0157156 (28:393)
  23. P. Delsarte, J. Goethals, and J. Seidel, Spherical codes and designs, Geometriae Dedi- cata 6 (1977), 363-388. MR0485471 (58:5302)
  24. W. Ebeling, Lattices and codes. A course partially based on lectures by F. Hirzebruch, second edition, Advanced Lectures in Mathematics, Friedr. Vieweg & Sohn, Braun- schweig, 2002. MR1938666 (2003i:11093)
  25. N. Elkies, Optimal codes in homogeneous spaces, unpublished manuscript, 1995.
  26. R. Gangolli, Positive definite kernels on homogeneous spaces and certain stochastic pro- cesses related to Lévy's Brownian motion of several parameters, Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré Sect. B (N.S.) 3 (1967), 121-226. MR0215331 (35:6172)
  27. G. Gasper, Linearization of the product of Jacobi polynomials I , Canad. J. Math. 22 (1970), 171-175. MR0257433 (41:2084)
  28. C. Godsil and G. Royle, Algebraic Graph Theory, Graduate Texts in Mathematics 207, Springer-Verlag, New York, 2001. MR1829620 (2002f:05002)
  29. GS] J. Goethals and J. Seidel, The regular two-graph on 276 vertices, Discrete Math. 12 (1975), 143-158. MR0384597 (52:5471)
  30. GV] S. W. Graham and J. D. Vaaler, A class of extremal functions for the Fourier transform, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 265 (1981), no. 1, 283-302. MR0607121 (82i:42008)
  31. R. Hartshorne, Algebraic Geometry, Graduate Texts in Mathematics 52, Springer- Verlag, New York, 1977. MR0463157 (57:3116)
  32. R. A. Horn and C. R. Johnson, Matrix Analysis, Cambridge University Press, 1985. MR0832183 (87e:15001)
  33. G. A. Kabatiansky and V. I. Levenshtein, Bounds for packings on a sphere and in space (Russian), Problemy Peredači Informacii 14 (1978), 3-25; translation in Problems of Information Transmission 14 (1978), no. 1, 1-17. MR0514023 (58:24018)
  34. A. V. Kolushov and V. A. Yudin, On the Korkin-Zolotarev construction (Russian), Diskret. Mat. 6 (1994), 155-157; translation in Discrete Math. Appl. 4 (1994), 143-146. MR1273240 (95j:52033)
  35. A. V. Kolushov and V. A. Yudin, Extremal dispositions of points on the sphere, Anal. Math. 23 (1997), 25-34. MR1630001 (99f:41039)
  36. J. Leech, Equilibrium of sets of particles on a sphere, Math. Gaz. 41 (1957), 81-90. MR0086325 (19:165b)
  37. V. I. Levenshtein, On bounds for packings in n-dimensional Euclidean space (Russian), Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 245 (1979), 1299-1303; translation in Soviet Math. Dokl. 20 (1979), 417-421. MR0529659 (80d:52017)
  38. V. I. Levenshtein, Designs as maximum codes in polynomial metric spaces, Acta Appl. Math. 29 (1992), 1-82. MR1192833 (93j:05012)
  39. V. I. Levenshtein, Universal bounds for codes and designs, in Handbook of Coding The- ory, Vol. I , North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1998, pages 499-648. MR1667942
  40. Yu. I. Manin, Cubic Forms: Algebra, Geometry, Arithmetic, second edition, North- Holland Mathematical Library 4, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1986. MR0833513 (87d:11037)
  41. J. Martinet, Perfect lattices in Euclidean spaces, Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wis- senschaften 327, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2003. MR1957723 (2003m:11099)
  42. R. J. McEliece, E. R. Rodemich, H. C. Rumsey, Jr., and L. R. Welch, New upper bounds on the rate of a code via the Delsarte-MacWilliams inequalities, IEEE Trans. Information Theory 23 (1977), 157-166. MR0439403 (55:12296)
  43. H. Montgomery, Minimal theta functions, Glasgow Math. J. 30 (1988), 75-85. MR0925561 (89d:11029)
  44. A. M. Odlyzko and N. J. A. Sloane, New bounds on the number of unit spheres that can touch a unit sphere in n dimensions, J. Combin. Theory Ser. A 26 (1979), 210-214. MR0530296 (81d:52010)
  45. PS] G. Pólya and G. Szegő, Problems and theorems in analysis, Vol. II , revised and enlarged translation by C. E. Billigheimer of the fourth German edition, Springer-Verlag, New York-Heidelberg, 1976. MR0465631 (57:5529)
  46. W. Rudin, Functional Analysis, second edition, McGraw-Hall, New York, 1991. MR1157815 (92k:46001)
  47. SS] P. Sarnak and A. Strömbergsson, Minima of Epstein's zeta function and heights of flat tori, Invent. Math. 165 (2006), 115-151. MR2221138
  48. I. J. Schoenberg, Positive definite functions on spheres, Duke Math. J. 9 (1942), 96-108. MR0005922 (3:232c)
  49. K. Schütte and B. L. van der Waerden, Auf welcher Kugel haben 5, 6, 7, 8 oder 9 Punkte mit Mindestabstand 1 Platz? , Math. Ann. 123 (1951), 96-124. MR0042150 (13:61e)
  50. SZ] P. D. Seymour and T. Zaslavsky, Averaging sets: a generalization of mean values and spherical designs, Adv. in Math. 52 (1984), 213-240. MR0744857 (85m:05031)
  51. SY] E. Shult and A. Yanushka, Near n-gons and line systems, Geom. Dedicata 9 (1980), 1-72. MR0566437 (82b:51018)
  52. B. Simon, Orthogonal polynomials on the unit circle, Part 1: Classical theory, American Mathematical Society Colloquium Publications 54, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2005. MR2105088 (2006a:42002a)
  53. N. J. A. Sloane, with the collaboration of R. H. Hardin, W. D. Smith, and others, Tables of spherical codes, published electronically at http://www.research.att.com/~njas/ packings/.
  54. E. M. Stein and G. Weiss, Introduction to Fourier analysis on Euclidean spaces, Prince- ton Mathematical Series 32, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 1971. MR0304972 (46:4102)
  55. R. Strichartz, A Guide to Distribution Theory and Fourier Transforms, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, 1994. MR1276724 (95f:42001)
  56. G. Szegő, Orthogonal Polynomials, fourth edition, AMS Colloquium Publications 23, American Mathematical Society, Providence, Rhode Island, 1975. MR0372517 (51:8724)
  57. J. Tits, Ovoïdes et groupes de Suzuki, Arch. Math. 13 (1962), 187-198. MR0140572 (25:3990)
  58. J. D. Vaaler, Some extremal functions in Fourier analysis, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. (N.S.) 12 (1985), 183-216. MR0776471 (86g:42005)
  59. H. C. Wang, Two-point homogeneous spaces, Ann. Math. 55 (1952), 177-191. MR0047345 (13:863a)
  60. D. V. Widder, The Laplace Transform, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 1941. MR0005923 (3:232d)
  61. R. A. Wilson, Vector stabilizers and subgroups of Leech lattice groups, J. Algebra 127 (1989), 387-408. MR1028461 (91g:20020)
  62. V. A. Yudin, Minimum potential energy of a point system of charges (Russian), Diskret. Mat. 4 (1992), 115-121; translation in Discrete Math. Appl. 3 (1993), 75-81. MR1181534 (93f:31008)
  63. Microsoft Research, One Microsoft Way, Redmond, Washington 98052-6399 E-mail address: cohn@microsoft.com

Related papers

Energy minimization, periodic sets and spherical designs
Renaud Coulangeon

We study energy minimization for pair potentials among periodic sets in Euclidean spaces. We derive some sufficient conditions under which a point lattice locally minimizes the energy associated to a large class of potential functions. This allows in particular to prove a local version of Cohn and Kumar's conjecture that A 2 , D 4 , E 8 and the Leech lattice are globally universally optimal, regarding energy minimization, and among periodic sets of fixed point density.

View PDFchevron_right
Experimental Study of Energy-Minimizing Point Configurations on Spheres
Brandon Ballinger

Experimental Mathematics, 2009

In this paper we report on massive computer experiments aimed at finding spherical point configurations that minimize potential energy. We present experimental evidence for two new universal optima (consisting of 40 points in 10 dimensions and 64 points in 14 dimensions), as well as evidence that there are no others with at most 64 points. We also describe several other new polytopes, and we present new geometrical descriptions of some of the known universal optima.

View PDFchevron_right
Point sets of minimal energy
Peter Grabner

Applied Algebra and Number Theory

View PDFchevron_right
Distributing many points on a sphere
Edward Saff, A. Kuijlaars

The Mathematical Intelligencer, 1997

he problem of distributing a large number of points uniformly over the surface of a tsphere has not only inspired mathematical researchers, it has the attracted attention ~f:/t/~176 ::t:u;hifi;l:: ::/i~:l :i~t;~ ogous problem is simply that of uniformly distributing points on the circumference of a disk, and equally spaced points provide an obvious answer. So we are faced with this question: What sets of points on the sphere imitate the role of the roots of unity on the unit circle? One way such points can be generated is via optimization with respect to a suitable criterion such as "generalized energy." Although there is a large and growing literature concerning such optimal spherical configurations of N points when N is "small," here we shall focus on this question from an asymptotic perspective (N--~ ~).

View PDFchevron_right
On Euclidean Designs and Potential Energy
Makoto Tagami

The Electronic Journal of Combinatorics, 2012

We study Euclidean designs from the viewpoint of the potential energy. For a finite set in Euclidean space, we formulate a linear programming bound for the potential energy by applying harmonic analysis on a sphere. We also introduce the concept of strong Euclidean designs from the viewpoint of the linear programming bound, and we give a Fisher type inequality for strong Euclidean designs. A finite set on Euclidean space is called a Euclidean $a$-code if any distinct two points in the set are separated at least by $a$. As a corollary of the linear programming bound, we give a method to determine an upper bound on the cardinalities of Euclidean $a$-codes on concentric spheres of given radii. Similarly we also give a method to determine a lower bound on the cardinalities of Euclidean $t$-designs as an analogue of the linear programming bound.

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Mathematics
  • Chemistry
  • Pure Mathematics
  • Potential Function
  • Contents
  • Configuration space
    • 580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved