Estimates for logarithmic and Riesz energies for spherical $t$-designs
Tetiana Stepanyuk

TL;DR
This paper derives asymptotic formulas for the discrete logarithmic energy and order estimates for Riesz s-energy of well-separated spherical t-designs on high-dimensional spheres, advancing understanding of their energy properties.
Contribution
It provides the first asymptotic equalities and order estimates for energies of spherical t-designs, linking design properties with energy asymptotics.
Findings
Asymptotic equalities for logarithmic energy of spherical t-designs
Order estimates for Riesz s-energy for s ≥ d
Results applicable to high-dimensional spheres
Abstract
In this paper we find asymptotic equalities for the discrete logarithmic energy of sequences of well separated spherical -designs on the unit sphere , . Also we establish exact order estimates for discrete Riesz -energy, , of sequences of well separated spherical -designs.
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.
∎
11institutetext: Tetiana A. Stepanyuk 22institutetext: *(1)*Graz University of Technology, Kopernikusgasse 24, Graz, Austria; *(2)Institute of Mathematics of Ukrainian National Academy of Sciences, 3, Tereshchenkivska st., 01601, Kyiv-4, Ukraine 22email: tania-*[email protected],
Estimates For Logarithmic and Riesz Energies For Spherical -designs
Tetiana A. Stepanyuk
Abstract
In this paper we find asymptotic equalities for the discrete logarithmic energy of sequences of well separated spherical -designs on the unit sphere , . Also we establish exact order estimates for discrete Riesz -energy, , of sequences of well separated spherical -designs.
Keywords:
The -energy, the logarithmic energy, spherical -design, well-separated point sets, sphere.
1 Introduction
Let , where , be the unit sphere in the Euclidean space , equipped with the Lebesgue measure normalized by .
Definition 1
A spherical -design is a finite subset with a characterising property that an equal weight integration rule with nodes from integrates all spherical polynomials of total degree at most exactly; that is,
[TABLE]
Here is the cardinality of or the number of points of spherical design.
The concept of spherical -design was introduced by Delsarte, Goethals and Seidel in the groundbreaking paper Delsarte-Goethals-Seidel1977:spherical_designs , since then they attracted a lot of interest from scientific community (see e.g., BrauchartGrabner ).
The logarithmic energy of a set of distinct points (or an -point set) on is defined as
[TABLE]
This paper investigates the logarithmic energy for spherical -designs. Spherical -designs of a fixed strength can have points arbitrary close together (see, e.g. HesseLeopardiTheCoulombEnergy ), hence the logarithmic energy of -point spherical -designs can have no asymptotic bounds in terms of and . That’s why we will have additional condition and consider the sequences of well–separated spherical -designs.
Definition 2
A sequence of -point sets , X_{N}=\big{\{}\mathbf{x}_{1},\ldots,\mathbf{x}_{N}\big{\}}, is called well-separated if there exists a positive constant such that
[TABLE]
The existence of -point spherical -designs with was proven by Bondarenko, Radchenko and Viazovska Bondarenko-Radchenko-Viazovska2013:optimal_designs . They showed that for , there exists a constant , which depends only of , such that for every there exists a spherical -design on with points. Two years later by these authors in Bondarenko-Radchenko-Viazovska2015:Well_separated the existence of -point well–separated spherical -designs with was proven. Namely, they showed that for each , , there exist positive constants and , depending only on , such that for every , there exists a spherical -design on , consisting of points with for .
On the basis of these results we always assume that .
We write to mean that there exist positive constants and independent of such that for all .
Denote by the minimal discrete logarithmic energy for -points on the sphere
[TABLE]
where the infimum is taken over all -points subsets of .
From the papers of Wagner Wagner , Kuijlaars and Saff KuijlaarsSaff:1998Asymptotics and Brauchart Brauchart2008 it follows that for and as the following asymptotic equality holds
[TABLE]
Also in BoyvalenkovDragnevHardinSaffStoyanova some general upper and lower bounds for the energy of spherical designs were found.
We show that for every well-separated sequence of -point spherical -designs on , , with the following asymptotic equality holds
[TABLE]
Comparing two last formulas, we have that the leading and second terms are exactly the same, and third terms are of the same order. So, we can summarize, that for logarithmic energy well-separated spherical -designs are as good as point sets which minimize the logarithmic energy.
For given the discrete Riesz -energy of a set of distinct points (or an -point set) on is defined as
[TABLE]
where denotes the Euclidian norm in of the vector . In the case the energy (5) is called as Coulomb energy.
Hesse Hesse:2009s-energy showed, that if spherical -designs with exist, then they have asymptotically minimal Riesz energy for . In particular, under the assumption that , it was shown that for , there exists a positive constant such that for every well separated sequence -point spherical -designs the following estimate holds
[TABLE]
and for , there exists a positive constant , such that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Denote by the minimal discrete -energy for -points on the sphere
[TABLE]
where the infimum is taken over all -points subsets of .
Kuijlaars and Saff KuijlaarsSaff:1998Asymptotics proved that for and , there exist constants , such that
[TABLE]
Also in KuijlaarsSaff:1998Asymptotics it was showed that for the following formula holds
[TABLE]
We show that for every well-separated sequence of -point spherical -designs on , , with the following relations are true:
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Here and further we use the Vinogradov notation to mean that there exists positive constant independent of such that for all .
First, we observe, that since for any -point set, the lower bound in (10) provides the lower bound for the -energy of any -point set. So, asymptotically for Riesz -energy, , well-separated spherical -designs are as good as point sets which minimize the -energy.
This paper is organised as follows: Section 2 provides basic notations and necessary background for Jacobi polynomials, Section 3 contains formulation of main results and proofs of theorems.
2 Preliminaries
In this paper we use the Pochhammer symbol , where and , defined by
[TABLE]
which can be written in the terms of the gamma function by means of
[TABLE]
For fixed the following asymptotic equality is true
[TABLE]
For any integrable function (see, e.g., Mueller1966:spherical_harmonics ) we have
[TABLE]
The Jacobi polynomials are the polynomials orthogonal over the interval with the weight function and normalised by the relation
[TABLE]
(see, e.g., (Magnus-Oberhettinger-Soni1966:formulas_theorems, , (5.2.1))).
We will also use formula
[TABLE]
and the connection coefficient formula (see, e.g., Theorem 7.1.4 from SpecialFunctions )
[TABLE]
For fixed and , the following relation gives an asymptotic approximation for (see, e.g., (Szegoe1975:orthogonal_polynomials, , Theorem 8.21.13))
[TABLE]
Thus, for the last asymptotic equality yields
[TABLE]
The following differentiation formula holds
[TABLE]
If , , then taking into account formula (Magnus-Oberhettinger-Soni1966:formulas_theorems, , (5.3.4))) and the fact that the Gegenbauer polynomials are a special case of the Jacobi polynomials (see, e.g., (Magnus-Oberhettinger-Soni1966:formulas_theorems, , (5.3.1))), we have that for the following expansion holds
[TABLE]
3 Main results
By a spherical cap of centre and angular radius we mean
[TABLE]
The normalised surface area of a spherical cap is given by
[TABLE]
If for sequence condition (2) holds, then any spherical cap , , where
[TABLE]
contains at most one point of the set .
From the elementary estimates
[TABLE]
we obtain
[TABLE]
The following two theorems are the main result of this paper.
Theorem 3.1
Let be fixed, be a sequence of well-separated spherical -designs on and . Then for the logarithmic energy the following estimate holds
[TABLE]
Theorem 3.2
Let be fixed, and be a sequence of well-separated spherical -designs on and . Then for the -energy satisfies the estimate
[TABLE]
and for , the -energy satisfies following estimates
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
3.1 Proof of Theorem 3.1
For each we divide the sphere into an upper hemisphere with ’north pole’ and a lower hemisphere :
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Noting that
[TABLE]
the logarithmic energy can be written in the form
[TABLE]
Let . The, putting in (20), we get
[TABLE]
Formula (19) implies, that
[TABLE]
Integrating from [math] to , we have
[TABLE]
We split the -energy into two parts
[TABLE]
From (2) and the fact the spherical cap contains at most one point of , the second term in (34), where the scalar product is close to , can be bounded from above by
[TABLE]
Taking into account (30), (33)–(35), we deduce
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Let us show that
[TABLE]
Applying (12), (13) and (18) to (38), we have
[TABLE]
From (Brauchart-Hesse2007:numerical_integration, , (3.30) and (3.33)), it follows that
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
This proves (40).
Now let us find the estimate for . The polynomial is a spherical polynomial of degree and is a spherical -design. That is why, an equal weight integration rule with nodes from integrates exactly, and
[TABLE]
Let is such, that for the following relation holds
[TABLE]
It is clear, that
[TABLE]
Then
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
Now we shall prove that
[TABLE]
Using (14), (41) and (46), we get
[TABLE]
From the definition of it is easy to see, that
[TABLE]
According to the definition of (45) we deduce
[TABLE]
Formulas (15), (19) and (37) imply
[TABLE]
From (16), (18) and (37) it follows that
[TABLE]
Relations (13) and (15) allow us to write
[TABLE]
Hence, (54) and (55) enable us to obtain
[TABLE]
Using (14), (53) and (56), we deduce
[TABLE]
Applying (56), we have
[TABLE]
where .
Relations (50)-(53), (57) and (58) prove (49).
Integrating by parts, we obtain
[TABLE]
So, combining (36), (40), (47), (49) and (59), we get
[TABLE]
This implies (25). Theorem 3.1 is proved.
∎
3.2 Proof of Theorem 3.2
In the same way as in the case for logarithmic energy, we split the -energy into two parts
[TABLE]
Taking into account that the Jacobi series (20) converges uniformly in {\Big{[}-1+\frac{c^{2}_{1}}{8N^{\frac{2}{d}}},1-\frac{c^{2}_{1}}{8N^{\frac{2}{d}}}\Big{]}}, for we get that
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Formula (65) from GrabnerStepanyukJAT implies
[TABLE]
Hence,
[TABLE]
where we have used formulas (3.2), (3.2) and (65).
The polynom is a spherical polynomial of degree and is a spherical -design. So, an equal weight integration rule with nodes from integrates exactly, and
[TABLE]
From relations (12), (13), (15) and (3.2) we obtain
[TABLE]
Let now estimate the integral from (3.2). Substituting , in formula (17), we have
[TABLE]
Since
[TABLE]
then (3.2) yields
[TABLE]
So,
[TABLE]
where we have used (37) and (71).
Thus, if , then
[TABLE]
and the relations (3.2), (3.2) and (73) imply
[TABLE]
This implies (26).
If , then using (12) and (13) from (72) we have
[TABLE]
Formulas (3.2), (3.2) and (3.2) imply (27) and (28). Theorem 3.2 is proved. ∎
Acknowledgements.
The author is supported by the Austrian Science Fund FWF project F5503 (part of the Special Research Program (SFB) “Quasi-Monte Carlo Methods: Theory and Applications”
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1(1) G. E. Andrews, R. Askey and R. Roy. Special functions . Cambridge University Press, 1999.
- 2(2) A. Bondarenko, D. Radchenko, and M. Viazovska. Optimal asymptotic bounds for spherical designs. Ann. of Math. 178(2):443–452, 2013.
- 3(3) A. Bondarenko, D. Radchenko, and M. Viazovska. Well-separated spherical designs. Constr. Approx. 41(1):93–112, 2015.
- 4(4) P. G. Boyvalenkov, P. D. Dragnev, D. P. Hardin, E. B. Saff, and M. M. Stoyanova. Universal upper and lower bounds on energy of spherical designs. Dolomites Res. Notes Approx. 8(Special Issue):51–65, 2015.
- 5(5) J. S. Brauchart. Optimal logarithmic energy points on the unit sphere. Mathematics of Computation 77(263), 1599-1613, 2008.
- 6(6) J. S. Brauchart and P. J. Grabner Distributing many points on spheres: minimal energy and designs. J. Complexity 31(3), 293–326, 2015.
- 7(7) J. S. Brauchart and K. Hesse. Numerical integration over spheres of arbitrary dimension. Constr. Approx. 25(1):41–71, 2007.
- 8(8) P. Delsarte, J. M. Goethals, and J. J. Seidel. Spherical codes and designs. Geometriae Dedicata 6(3):363–388, 1977.
