Radius estimates for Alexandrov space with boundary
Jian Ge, Ronggang Li

TL;DR
This paper investigates the radius and boundary volume estimates of Alexandrov spaces with positive or non-negative curvature and convex boundaries, extending known results and exploring rigidity conditions in this geometric setting.
Contribution
It provides new radius estimates and boundary volume bounds for Alexandrov spaces with convex boundaries, including a non-negatively curved rigidity result.
Findings
Radius bounds for positively curved Alexandrov spaces
Boundary volume estimates for non-negatively curved spaces
Rigidity conditions characterizing equality cases
Abstract
In this note, we study the radius of positively curved or non-negatively curved Alexandrov space with strictly convex boundary, with convexity measured by the Base-Angle defined by Alexander and Bishop. We also estimate the volume of the boundary of non-negatively curved spaces as well as the rigidity case, which can be thought as a non-negatively curved version of a recent result of Grove-Petersen.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsGeometric Analysis and Curvature Flows · Geometric and Algebraic Topology · Point processes and geometric inequalities
\newaliascnt
conjtheorem \newaliascntcortheorem \newaliascntlemmatheorem \newaliascntfacttheorem \newaliascntclaimtheorem \newaliascntproptheorem \newaliascntdefinitiontheorem \aliascntresettheconj \aliascntresetthecor \aliascntresetthelemma \aliascntresetthefact \aliascntresettheclaim \aliascntresettheprop \aliascntresetthedefinition
\newaliascntexampletheorem \aliascntresettheexample
\newaliascntrmktheorem \aliascntresetthermk
Radius Estimates for Alexandrov Space with Boundary
Jian Ge
Beijing International center for Mathematical Research, Peking University. Beijing 100871, China
and
Ronggang Li
School of Mathematical Science, Peking University. Beijing 100871, China
Abstract.
In this note, we study the radius of positively curved or non-negatively curved Alexandrov space with strictly convex boundary, with convexity measured by the Base-Angle defined by Alexander and Bishop. We also estimate the volume of the boundary of non-negatively curved spaces as well as the rigidity case, which can be thought as a non-negatively curved version of a recent result of Grove-Petersen.
Key words and phrases:
Alexandrov space, Riemannian manifold, Radius, Rigidity
2000 Mathematics Subject Classification:
Primary: 53C23, 53C20
0. Introduction
Let be a closed -dimensional Riemannian manifold with Ricci curvature bound from below by , then by the classical Bonnet-Myers theorem the diameter of has the upper bound: . Let , i.e. an -dimensional Alexandrov space with curvature bounded from below by , we have the same diameter estimate , by [BGP92]. The positive lower bound of the curvature is crucial here, since for any , the cylinder has infinite diameter. On the other hand, if the Ricci curvature of is nonnegative, and is non-empty with mean curvature satisfies , we can still estimate the inner radius of , i.e. the largest radius of a metric ball inscribed inside the manifold: . cf. [Li14]. Cf. also [Ge15] for a unified treatment for all lower curvature bounds. In this case, one cannot estimate the diameter as the solid cylinder with cross section a unit disc: shows. For Alexandrov spaces, one expects that a similar estimate holds. First, the mean curvature assumption in [Li14] needs to be replaced by something meaningful for non-smooth spaces. This has been done by Alexander-Bishop in [AB10], where the authors defined a function called Base-Angle at each foot point.
Definition \thedefinition ([AB10]).
Let be an -dimensional Alexandrov space with non-empty boundary . For , the base angle at of a chord of at an endpoint is the angle formed by the direction of and , where is the space of directions at of . We call the boundary has extrinsic curvature in the base-angle sense at or , if the base angle at of a chord of length from satisfies
[TABLE]
It can be verified that if is a Riemannian manifold with smooth boundary, a Base-Angle lower bound is equivalent to a lower bound on the principal curvatures the boundary. We will call the boundary is -convex, if the base-angle at each foot point, which will be written as . Recall that a point is called a foot point, if there exists such that
[TABLE]
We use to denote the distance between subsets and in . In [AB10] it is then proved, among other things, that the inner radius of with -convex boundary satisfies the expected estimate, see Section 1.
In this note, we are interested in the radius estimate for with -convex boundary . Recall the radius of at is defined by
[TABLE]
and the radius of is defined by
[TABLE]
Now we state our main theorems
Theorem 0.1**.**
Let , with . We have:
[TABLE]
with equality holds if and only if is isometric to the warped product .
Theorem 0.2**.**
Let , with . We have:
[TABLE]
with equality holds if and only if is isometric to the warped product .
Remark \thermk.
As one can easily see, our upper bound of the radius is the same as the upper bound of inner-radius proved in Section 1 by Alexander-Bishop, but our theorem does not imply their estimate since we use the inner radius estimate in our proof of radius estimate. On the other hand, our result gives shaper estimates of inner-radius, in fact, we insert more terms between the inner-radius and Alexander-Bishop’s upper bound. See Theorem 1.2 and Theorem 1.3 for details.
Let with nonempty boundary , the Boundary Conjecture says that equipped with the induced path metric is again an Alexandrov space with the same lower curvature bound . In particular, if , we expect has lower curvature bound , thus it would follows from the Boundary Conjecture that and , where denotes the unit -sphere. The volume upper bound of was called Lytchak’s Problem in [Pet07], and Petrunin proved it using gradient exponential map. The rigidity result is proved only recently by Grove-Petersen [GP18]. In the [Ge18], the first author estimates the volume of Alexandrov space with fixed boundary, where we could think of the convexity of the boundary as positive curvatures. As the classical Gauss equation relates the intrinsic curvature of submanifold and ambient space via the second fundament form. So we propose the following Boundary Conjecture for Alexandrov spaces with curved boundary:
Conjecture \theconj.
Let and , then .
Our next theorem gives an evidence of this conjecture. Namely we get a solution to the Lytchak’s Problem for the non-negatively curved Alexandrov space with -convex boundary, as well as a rigidity result parallel to the one in [GP18]:
Theorem 0.3**.**
Let with . Suppose . Then
[TABLE]
Moreover, if is intrinsically isometric to , then is isometric to the unit disk in .
Note that in the classical positive mass theorem implies that the Euclidean admits not compact perturbation while keeping lower scalar curvature bound [math]. On the hand, the boundary hypersurface is assumed to be smooth or with a restricted type of singularity, cf. [ST02, ST18] . Our approach to this problem uses no assumption on the smoothness of the boundary at all. However, we required a much strong curvature condition.
Acknowledgment: We would like to thank Stephanie Alexander and Yuguang Shi for their interest in our work and helpful discussions.
1. Proofs of the Radius Estimates
One key ingredient of our proof is the following concavity estimates of the distance function :
Theorem 1.1** ([AB10]).**
Let and . Let
[TABLE]
where is the radius of the circle with geodesic curvature equals to in the -dimensional space form of curvature . If , then is nonnegative, and the function satisfies
[TABLE]
where .
The non-negativity of implies that the inner radius estimate of , i.e.
Corollary \thecor ([AB10], Cor. 1.9).
Let and be as above, then the inner radius of satisfies
[TABLE]
In particular, for and for . Moreover, in the case and , there is a unique point realized the maximum of , which is called the soul of .
First, we need characterize the set of points with maximal distance to the soul .
Lemma \thelemma.
Let with and . Let be the soul of . Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
For any in the interior of , let be a foot point such that . Let be the unit-speed geodesic from to . We have:
[TABLE]
since otherwise there would exist a geodesic from to with and , then by the first variation formula
[TABLE]
for small. Here the set consists of initial directions of all the unit speed geodesics from to .
On the other hand, is a concave function with the maximum achieved at , it follows that is monotone, therefore . Hence a contradiction.
Since , is the foot point achieves the distance form to , we have:
[TABLE]
by replacing the above by . Therefore the first variation formula tells is increasing along . It follows that
[TABLE]
Therefore the conclusion holds. ∎
Remark \thermk.
It can be showed that can only be achieved by geodesics from to some points on . In fact, if for some , then we have the strict inequality . Therefore if there were an interior point satisfies , it follows that for any . In particular, the equality holds at , therefore . By the convexity of , we have . Hence a contradiction.
The following elementary comparison result for ODEs is needed.
Lemma \thelemma.
For any , let and be real functions on satisfying:
[TABLE]
respectively, while (if , define as ), , . Then
[TABLE]
where is the first zero of .
Proof.
For the case , let and . Then , and the ordinary functions of and makes
[TABLE]
Then
[TABLE]
In the case that , it is easy to see , thus by , and then, follows from . ∎
The Theorem 0.2 and Theorem 0.1 are in fact easy corollaries of the following theorems, where we insert one more term between the inner radius estimates of Section 1. As we can see easily
[TABLE]
Recall that and . We have:
Theorem 1.2**.**
If and . Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
Set . Let be a geodesic of length with and . Therefore . Let
[TABLE]
Then satisfies
[TABLE]
where . Since is the critical point for the distance function , we have Define
[TABLE]
Since we are working for the case , . Therefore the function satisfies the following differential inequality:
[TABLE]
Let
[TABLE]
then one verifies easily:
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
that follows:
[TABLE]
for , where the is the first zero of by Section 1. Especially when , we have
[TABLE]
∎
Proof of Theorem 0.2.
One observe that
[TABLE]
since . We have:
[TABLE]
that is . ∎
Now we move to the discussion on the case .
Theorem 1.3**.**
Let and . Let be the inner radius of . We have:
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let . Suppose is a geodesic of length , with and . Therefore by Section 1. Let
[TABLE]
then
[TABLE]
where . Since is the critical point for , we know In this case,
[TABLE]
thus
[TABLE]
satisfying
[TABLE]
Let
[TABLE]
then
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
It follows that
[TABLE]
Therefore, when , we have
[TABLE]
∎
Proof of Theorem 0.1.
By Theorem 1.3 and Section 1: we have:
[TABLE]
Thus the conclusion follows. ∎
2. Discussion of the Equality Cases
In this section we discuss various equality case in the estimates below. Recall that the inner radius and . By the previous theorems we have for the case :
[TABLE]
and for the case :
[TABLE]
For simplicity, we will refer the terms in the (2.1) and (2.2) as 1 to 5 from the left to the right.
**Proposition \theprop **($\leavevmode\hbox to14.18pt{\vbox to14.18pt{\pgfpicture\makeatletter\hbox{\hskip 7.09111pt\lower-7.09111pt\hbox to0.0pt{\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }\definecolor{pgfstrokecolor}{rgb}{0,0,0}\pgfsys@color@rgb@stroke{0}{0}{0}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@color@rgb@fill{0}{0}{0}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@setlinewidth{0.4pt}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\nullfont\hbox to0.0pt{\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }{{{}}\hbox{\hbox{{\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }{{}{{{}}}{{}}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{{}\pgfsys@moveto{6.89111pt}{0.0pt}\pgfsys@curveto{6.89111pt}{3.8059pt}{3.8059pt}{6.89111pt}{0.0pt}{6.89111pt}\pgfsys@curveto{-3.8059pt}{6.89111pt}{-6.89111pt}{3.8059pt}{-6.89111pt}{0.0pt}\pgfsys@curveto{-6.89111pt}{-3.8059pt}{-3.8059pt}{-6.89111pt}{0.0pt}{-6.89111pt}\pgfsys@curveto{3.8059pt}{-6.89111pt}{6.89111pt}{-3.8059pt}{6.89111pt}{0.0pt}\pgfsys@closepath\pgfsys@moveto{0.0pt}{0.0pt}\pgfsys@stroke\pgfsys@invoke{ }
}{{{{}}\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@transformcm{1.0}{0.0}{0.0}{1.0}{-2.5pt}{-3.22221pt}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\hbox{{\definecolor{pgfstrokecolor}{rgb}{0,0,0}\pgfsys@color@rgb@stroke{0}{0}{0}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@color@rgb@fill{0}{0}{0}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\hbox{{1}} }}\pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope}}} \pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope}}} } \pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope{{{}}}{}{}\hss}\pgfsys@discardpath\pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope\hss}}\lxSVG@closescope\endpgfpicture}}=\leavevmode\hbox to14.18pt{\vbox to14.18pt{\pgfpicture\makeatletter\hbox{\hskip 7.09111pt\lower-7.09111pt\hbox to0.0pt{\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }\definecolor{pgfstrokecolor}{rgb}{0,0,0}\pgfsys@color@rgb@stroke{0}{0}{0}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@color@rgb@fill{0}{0}{0}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@setlinewidth{0.4pt}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\nullfont\hbox to0.0pt{\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }{{{}}\hbox{\hbox{{\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }{{}{{{}}}{{}}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{{}\pgfsys@moveto{6.89111pt}{0.0pt}\pgfsys@curveto{6.89111pt}{3.8059pt}{3.8059pt}{6.89111pt}{0.0pt}{6.89111pt}\pgfsys@curveto{-3.8059pt}{6.89111pt}{-6.89111pt}{3.8059pt}{-6.89111pt}{0.0pt}\pgfsys@curveto{-6.89111pt}{-3.8059pt}{-3.8059pt}{-6.89111pt}{0.0pt}{-6.89111pt}\pgfsys@curveto{3.8059pt}{-6.89111pt}{6.89111pt}{-3.8059pt}{6.89111pt}{0.0pt}\pgfsys@closepath\pgfsys@moveto{0.0pt}{0.0pt}\pgfsys@stroke\pgfsys@invoke{ } }{{{{}}\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@transformcm{1.0}{0.0}{0.0}{1.0}{-2.5pt}{-3.22221pt}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\hbox{{\definecolor{pgfstrokecolor}{rgb}{0,0,0}\pgfsys@color@rgb@stroke{0}{0}{0}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@color@rgb@fill{0}{0}{0}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\hbox{{5}} }}\pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope}}} \pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope}}} } \pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope{{{}}}{}{}\hss}\pgfsys@discardpath\pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope\hss}}\lxSVG@closescope\endpgfpicture}}$, [AB10]).
The equality in (2.1) (resp. in (2.2)) implies that the space is isometric to the cone (resp. ).
As one can see in our proof of Theorem 1.2 and Theorem 1.3, the same type of rigidity holds, that is.
**Proposition \theprop **($\leavevmode\hbox to14.18pt{\vbox to14.18pt{\pgfpicture\makeatletter\hbox{\hskip 7.09111pt\lower-7.09111pt\hbox to0.0pt{\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }\definecolor{pgfstrokecolor}{rgb}{0,0,0}\pgfsys@color@rgb@stroke{0}{0}{0}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@color@rgb@fill{0}{0}{0}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@setlinewidth{0.4pt}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\nullfont\hbox to0.0pt{\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }{{{}}\hbox{\hbox{{\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }{{}{{{}}}{{}}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{{}\pgfsys@moveto{6.89111pt}{0.0pt}\pgfsys@curveto{6.89111pt}{3.8059pt}{3.8059pt}{6.89111pt}{0.0pt}{6.89111pt}\pgfsys@curveto{-3.8059pt}{6.89111pt}{-6.89111pt}{3.8059pt}{-6.89111pt}{0.0pt}\pgfsys@curveto{-6.89111pt}{-3.8059pt}{-3.8059pt}{-6.89111pt}{0.0pt}{-6.89111pt}\pgfsys@curveto{3.8059pt}{-6.89111pt}{6.89111pt}{-3.8059pt}{6.89111pt}{0.0pt}\pgfsys@closepath\pgfsys@moveto{0.0pt}{0.0pt}\pgfsys@stroke\pgfsys@invoke{ }
}{{{{}}\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@transformcm{1.0}{0.0}{0.0}{1.0}{-2.5pt}{-3.22221pt}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\hbox{{\definecolor{pgfstrokecolor}{rgb}{0,0,0}\pgfsys@color@rgb@stroke{0}{0}{0}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@color@rgb@fill{0}{0}{0}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\hbox{{2}} }}\pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope}}} \pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope}}} } \pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope{{{}}}{}{}\hss}\pgfsys@discardpath\pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope\hss}}\lxSVG@closescope\endpgfpicture}}=\leavevmode\hbox to14.18pt{\vbox to14.18pt{\pgfpicture\makeatletter\hbox{\hskip 7.09111pt\lower-7.09111pt\hbox to0.0pt{\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }\definecolor{pgfstrokecolor}{rgb}{0,0,0}\pgfsys@color@rgb@stroke{0}{0}{0}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@color@rgb@fill{0}{0}{0}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@setlinewidth{0.4pt}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\nullfont\hbox to0.0pt{\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }{{{}}\hbox{\hbox{{\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }{{}{{{}}}{{}}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{{}\pgfsys@moveto{6.89111pt}{0.0pt}\pgfsys@curveto{6.89111pt}{3.8059pt}{3.8059pt}{6.89111pt}{0.0pt}{6.89111pt}\pgfsys@curveto{-3.8059pt}{6.89111pt}{-6.89111pt}{3.8059pt}{-6.89111pt}{0.0pt}\pgfsys@curveto{-6.89111pt}{-3.8059pt}{-3.8059pt}{-6.89111pt}{0.0pt}{-6.89111pt}\pgfsys@curveto{3.8059pt}{-6.89111pt}{6.89111pt}{-3.8059pt}{6.89111pt}{0.0pt}\pgfsys@closepath\pgfsys@moveto{0.0pt}{0.0pt}\pgfsys@stroke\pgfsys@invoke{ } }{{{{}}\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@transformcm{1.0}{0.0}{0.0}{1.0}{-2.5pt}{-3.22221pt}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\hbox{{\definecolor{pgfstrokecolor}{rgb}{0,0,0}\pgfsys@color@rgb@stroke{0}{0}{0}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@color@rgb@fill{0}{0}{0}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\hbox{{5}} }}\pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope}}} \pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope}}} } \pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope{{{}}}{}{}\hss}\pgfsys@discardpath\pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope\hss}}\lxSVG@closescope\endpgfpicture}}$).
The equality in (2.1) (resp. in (2.2)) implies that the space is isometric to the cone (resp. ).
The following example shows that class of spaces satisfying or are very large.
**Example \theexample **(
2
4 ).
We construct , and in the Euclidean space as the intersection of three balls centered at and respectively, where , . Soul of is the origin of , the inner radius of is while the radius is , which is also the distance from the soul to the boundary of . A similar example in can be constructed easily.
**Proposition \theprop **(
1
4 ).
The equality in (2.1) (resp. in (2.2)) follows the equivalent in 2, thus that the space is isometric to the cone (resp. ).
The case contains all positively curved Alexandrov spaces with boundary. The upper bound
5
in (2.2) is . In this case, the following rigidity theorem is proved by Petersen and Grove
Proposition \theprop ([GP18]).
Let and is intrinsically isometric to . Then is isometric to the lens for some , where is the spherical join.
3. The Filling of Round Sphere
In this section, we prove Theorem 0.3. The volume estimate uses the same idea as Petrunin’s in [Pet07] we include it only for completeness. The rigidity part uses our discussion on the equality case in the previous section.
Proof of Theorem 0.3.
For with no empty boundary, the distance function to the boundary is concave in . Thus the gradient exponential map maps onto . Moreover also gives a homotopy equivalence of and , which is homotopy to , by noting that the soul is the only critical point of the distance function to . Since is a compact Alexandrov space without boundary, we have . Hence , the geodesic must have a point of \operatorname{gexp}_{s}\big{(}\partial\overline{B}_{b}(o_{s})\big{)}. Since the inverse of the gradient exponential map is uniquely defined inside any geodesic starting at , it can only be for is a short map. Thus
[TABLE]
On another hand, Using gradient exponential map is a distance non-increasing map, we have
[TABLE]
If is intrinsically isometric to , the previous inequalities implies . Recall
[TABLE]
we get thus by the Corollary 1.10 in [AB10], is isometric to the ball of radius about the vertex in a [math]-cone over it’s boundary. Since is isometric to , such cone is , therefore the conclusion holds. ∎
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[AB 10] Stephanie B. Alexander and Richard L. Bishop. Extrinsic curvature of semiconvex subspaces in Alexandrov geometry. Ann. Global Anal. Geom. , 37(3):241–262, 2010.
- 2[BGP 92] Yu. Burago, M. Gromov, and G. Perelman. A. D. Aleksandrov spaces with curvatures bounded below. Uspekhi Mat. Nauk , 47(2(284)):3–51, 222, 1992.
- 3[Ge 15] Jian Ge. Comparison theorems for manifolds with mean convex boundary. Commun. Contemp. Math. , 17(5):1550010, 12, 2015.
- 4[Ge 18] Jian Ge. Fillings of positively curved Alexandrov spaces. Preprint, 2018.
- 5[GP 18] Karsten Grove and Peter Petersen. A lens rigidity theorem in Alexandrov geometry. Preprint, 2018.
- 6[Li 14] Martin Man-chun Li. A sharp comparison theorem for compact manifolds with mean convex boundary. J. Geom. Anal. , 24(3):1490–1496, 2014.
- 7[Pet 07] Anton Petrunin. Semiconcave functions in Alexandrov’s geometry. In Surveys in differential geometry. Vol. XI , volume 11 of Surv. Differ. Geom. , pages 137–201. Int. Press, Somerville, MA, 2007.
- 8[ST 02] Yuguang Shi and Luen-Fai Tam. Positive mass theorem and the boundary behaviors of compact manifolds with nonnegative scalar curvature. J. Differential Geom. , 62(1):79–125, 2002.
