Myers-type compactness theorem with the Bakry-Emery Ricci tensor
Seungsu Hwang, Sanghun Lee

TL;DR
This paper extends classical Myers' compactness theorem to smooth metric measure spaces with Bakry-Emery Ricci tensor bounds, providing new comparison results and relaxing conditions on the weight function derivative.
Contribution
It introduces a generalized Myers-type theorem for Bakry-Emery Ricci curvature, including a new $f$-mean curvature comparison and weaker derivative conditions.
Findings
Established $f$-mean curvature comparison under Ricci bounds
Proved a Myers-type compactness theorem for Bakry-Emery Ricci tensor
Improved previous results with weaker derivative conditions on $f'$
Abstract
In this paper, we first prove the -mean curvature comparison in a smooth metric measure space when the Bakry-Emery Ricci tensor is bounded from below and is bounded. Based on this, we define a Myers-type compactness theorem by generalizing the results of Cheeger, Gromov, and Taylor and of Wan for the Bakry-Emery Ricci tensor. Moreover, we improve a result from Soylu by using a weaker condition on a derivative .
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 · Advanced Differential Geometry Research · Geometry and complex manifolds
Myers-type compactness theorem with the Bakry-Emery Ricci tensor
Seungsu Hwang
Department of Mathematics, Chung-Ang University, 84 Heukseok-ro, Dongjak-gu, Seoul 06974, Republic of Korea
and
Sanghun Lee
Department of Mathematics, Chung-Ang University, 84 Heukseok-ro, Dongjak-gu, Seoul 06974, Republic of Korea
Abstract.
In this paper, we first prove the -mean curvature comparison in a smooth metric measure space when the Bakry–Emery Ricci tensor is bounded from below and is bounded. Based on this, we define a Myers–type compactness theorem by generalizing the results of Cheeger, Gromov, and Taylor and of Wan for the Bakry–Emery Ricci tensor. Moreover, we improve a result from Soylu by using a weaker condition on a derivative .
Key words and phrases:
Bakry–Emery Ricci curvature, Myers theorem, Mean curvature comparison theorem, Riccati inequality
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
53C20; 53C21
1. Introduction
The Myers theorem is a fundamental result in Riemannian geometry; it states that if an -dimensional complete Riemannian manifold satisfies with , then is compact and . Here, is the Ricci curvature of the metric . This result has been generalized by different approaches ([1], [4], [3], and [9]). Herein, we recall two of them. The first was derived by W. Ambrose.
Theorem 1.1** ([1]).**
Suppose there exists a point in an -dimensional complete Riemannian manifold for which every geodesic emanating from satisfies
[TABLE]
Then is compact.
The second theorem was derived by J. Cheeger, M. Gromov, and M. Taylor.
Theorem 1.2** ([3]).**
Let be an -dimensional complete Riemannian manifold. If there exists a fixed point and such that
[TABLE]
holds for all , where is a distance function defined with respect to a fixed point , i.e., , then is compact and .
Theorem 1.2 was improved by J. Wan as follows:
Theorem 1.3** ([11]).**
Let be an -dimensional complete Riemannian manifold. If there exists a fixed point , , and such that
[TABLE]
for all , where and is a constant depending on , , and , then is compact. In particular, can be chosen to be equal to for and , for .
Now, we consider the -Bakry–Emery Ricci tensor as follows:
[TABLE]
for some number , where denotes the Lie derivative in the direction of , and is the metric dual of . When ,
[TABLE]
In particular, if
[TABLE]
for some , then is a Ricci soliton, which is a self-similar solution to the Ricci flow. It is classified as expanding, steady, or shrinking when , , or , respectively. When for some , the -Bakry–Emery Ricci tensor becomes
[TABLE]
and the Ricci soliton becomes a gradient Ricci soliton
[TABLE]
where is the Hessian of .
G. Wei and W. Wylie have generalized the Myers theorem by using in [12]. Several works have attempted to generalize this result ([13], [5], [10], and [14]). Note that H. Qiu generalized Theorem 1.3 to Theorem 1.4 by using .
Theorem 1.4** ([7]).**
Let be an -dimensional complete Riemannian manifold, be a smooth vector field on , and be a continuous function. Let be the distance function from . Assume that along a minimal geodesic from each point ; here, is a constant. Suppose
[TABLE]
where is a positive constant depending only on , , and , then is compact. In particular, can be chosen as ( and are arbitrary positive constants).
In this paper, we improve Theorem 1.4 by weakening the condition in the case of (Theorem 1.5 and 1.7). Here, instead of the condition , our conditions are () for Theorem 1.5 and () for Theorem 1.7. Additionally, we prove Theorem 1.9 in the case of .
Theorem 1.5**.**
Let be an -dimensional complete Riemannian manifold and be a continuous function. If there exists and for some constant such that
[TABLE]
*where and is a positive constant depending only on , , , and , then is compact. In particular, can be chosen as
( and are arbitrary positive constants).*
As a corollary, we make the following improvement to Theorem 1.3.
Corollary 1.6**.**
Let be an -dimensional complete Riemannian manifold. If there exists , , , and for some constant such that
[TABLE]
for all , where and is a constant depending on , , , , and , then is compact. In particular, can be chosen as for , and can be chosen as for . Here, and are arbitrary positive constants.
Furthermore, we have
Theorem 1.7**.**
Let be an -dimensional complete Riemannian manifold and be a continuous function. If there exists and such that
[TABLE]
where and is a positive constant depending on , , and , then is compact. In particular, can be chosen as ( and are arbitrary positive constants).
As a corollary, we obtain the following result, similar to Corollary 1.6.
Corollary 1.8**.**
Let be an -dimensional complete Riemannian manifold. If there exists , , , and such that
[TABLE]
for all , where and is a constant depending only on , , , and , then is compact. In particular, can be chosen as for , can be chosen as for , and can be chosen as for . Here, and are arbitrary positive constants.
For the case of , we have
Theorem 1.9**.**
Let be an -dimensional complete Riemannian manifold and be a continuous function. If there exists such that
[TABLE]
*where , , and is a positive constant depending on and , then is compact. In particular, can be chosen as
( and are arbitrary positive constants).*
Corollary 1.10**.**
Let be an -dimensional complete Riemannian manifold. If there exists , , and such that
[TABLE]
*for all , where , , and is a constant depending on , , and , then is compact. In particular, can be chosen as for , can be chosen as
for , and can be chosen as for . Here, and are arbitrary positive constants.*
Remark 1.11**.**
If , then the constants , , and can be chosen as arbitrary positive real numbers.
Moreover, we obtain an Ambrose-type result. Theorem 1.1 was generalized by S. Zhang [14] using the Bakry–Emery Ricci tensor. Another generalization was derived by M.P. Cavalcate, J.Q. Oliveira, and M.S. Santos [2] with the condition : . The following is a further improvement made by Y. Soylu [8].
Theorem 1.12** ([8]).**
Let be an -dimensional complete Riemannian manifold, where . Suppose there exists a point such that every geodesic emanating from satisfies
[TABLE]
and for all . Then, is compact.
In this paper, we improve the above result by finding a weaker condition for the derivative :
Theorem 1.13**.**
Let be an -dimensional complete Riemannian manifold, where . Suppose there exists a point such that every geodesic emanating from satisfies
[TABLE]
*and for some constants , , and for all .
Then, is compact.*
This paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we prove the -mean curvature comparison theorem. In Section 3, we prove Theorems 1.5, 1.7, and 1.9. In Section 4, we prove Corollaries 1.6, 1.8, and 1.10. In the final section, we prove Theorem 1.13.
2. -Mean curvature comparison
We first recall a few definitions. Let be a smooth metric measure space on an -dimensional complete Riemannian manifold . For the measure , the -mean curvature is defined by , where is the mean curvature of the geodesic sphere with an inward-pointing normal vector. Then, the -Laplacian is defined by . Note that and , where is the distance function. Now, we prove the -mean curvature comparison theorems.
Theorem 2.1**.**
Let be an -dimensional complete Riemannian manifold with , . Fix . If for some constant and is the distance function from to , then
[TABLE]
*(when , assume t ).
Here, is the mean curvature of the geodesic sphere in . The simply connected model space of dimension has a constant curvature , and is the mean curvature of the model space of dimension .*
Proof. By the Bochner formula and Schwarz inequality, the distance function satisfies the Riccati inequality,
[TABLE]
i.e.,
[TABLE]
The equality holds if and only if the radial sectional curvatures are constant. Therefore, the mean curvature of the model space satisfies
[TABLE]
Since , we obtain
[TABLE]
Let be the solution to such that and , then
[TABLE]
We compute
[TABLE]
By inequality (2.2), we have
[TABLE]
Since , integrating the above inequality from [math] to yields
[TABLE]
By performing integration by parts on the last term, we obtain
[TABLE]
Since and , we have
[TABLE]
Conducting integration by parts on the last term again, we obtain
[TABLE]
If and when , then and . Therefore, we have
[TABLE]
From (2.3), we compute
[TABLE]
Thus, we can see that
[TABLE]
Therefore,
[TABLE]
Theorem 2.2** ([12]).**
Let be an -dimensional complete Riemannian manifold with , . Fix . If for some constant , then
[TABLE]
(when assume ).
The proof of Theorem 2.2 is similar to the above proof. For the detailed proof, see Theorem 1.1 of [12].
3. Proof of Theorems 1.5, 1.7, and 1.9
In this section, we prove Theorem 1.5, 1.7, and 1.9. The proof uses the -mean curvature comparison calculated above and Riccati inequality.
First, we prove Theorem 1.5. Suppose is non-compact. For any , there exists a unit speed ray starting from . Let be the distance function from . By the Bochner formula and Schwarz inequality, we have
[TABLE]
Integrating the above inequality from to we obtain
[TABLE]
From (1.1), the above inequality becomes
[TABLE]
Now, we claim that .
Since , holds by inequality (2.1), it suffices to show that .
Consider the excess function
[TABLE]
for . By the triangle inequality, we have
[TABLE]
Therefore,
[TABLE]
It follows that
[TABLE]
i.e.,
[TABLE]
Thus,
[TABLE]
If , then . Hence, we proved the claim that
[TABLE]
From (3.1) and (3.2), we derive
[TABLE]
Let . Then, the above inequality becomes
[TABLE]
Therefore, we obtain
[TABLE]
Choosing
[TABLE]
where . This yields a contradiction. Thus, must be compact.
Second, we prove Theorem 1.7. Its proof is similar to the previous proof; thus, the setting is identical. Suppose that is non-compact. Based on the previous proof, we know that
[TABLE]
From (1.3), we have
[TABLE]
We claim that . Based on Theorem 2.2, and hold according to the same argument as in the previous proof. Thus,
[TABLE]
Let . Then we obtain
[TABLE]
If we choose
[TABLE]
for some positive constant , then this yields a contradiction. Thus, must be compact.
Finally, we prove Theorem 1.9. The setting is identical to that of the previous proof. Suppose that is non-compact. By the Bochner formula and Schwarz inequality for the distance function , we have the following Riccati inequality (Appendix A of [12]):
[TABLE]
Integrating both sides of (3.4), we obtain
[TABLE]
From (1.5), the above inequality becomes
[TABLE]
We claim that . By Theorem A.1 in [12], and hold by the same argument as in the previous proof. Thus
[TABLE]
Let . Then, we have
[TABLE]
Choosing
[TABLE]
where . This is a contradiction. Thus, is compact.
4. Proof of Corollaries 1.6, 1.8, and 1.10
In this section, we prove Corollaries 1.6, 1.8, and 1.10. These corollaries generalize Theorem 1.3 by using the Bakry–Emery Ricci tensor. The settings of the corollaries are same as those of the previous theorems.
First, we prove Corollary 1.6. Suppose that is non-compact. We know that
[TABLE]
By assumption (1.2) and , the above inequality becomes
[TABLE]
Now, we obtain . First, when , we have
[TABLE]
If , then we obtain
[TABLE]
Choosing
[TABLE]
for any positive constant yields a contradiction.
Second, when , inequality (4.1) becomes
[TABLE]
If and , the above inequality is a contradiction.
Similarly, when , if and in inequality (4.1), we obtain a contradiction. Thus, must be compact.
Secondly, we prove Corollary 1.8. Suppose that is non-compact. By assumption (1.4) and , we have
[TABLE]
Now, we obtain . First, when , we have
[TABLE]
If , then we obtain
[TABLE]
Solving
[TABLE]
it follows that
[TABLE]
When , has a minimum value. Substituting this into (4.3), we obtain
[TABLE]
Then, we can choose . Similarly, from inequality (4.3), we can choose for . When , it is the same as Corollary 1.6. Thus, is compact.
Finally, we prove Corollary 1.10. Suppose that is a non-compact. By assumption (1.6) and , we obtain
[TABLE]
Now, we obtain . First, for , we have
[TABLE]
Let . We obtain
[TABLE]
If , then we have
[TABLE]
Similar to the above proof, when , we can choose . Similarly, from inequality (4.4) and (4.5), we can choose for and for , where is an arbitrary positive constant. Thus, is compact.
5. Ambrose-type Theorem
In this section, we prove Theorem 1.13. Suppose that is non-compact. Let be a unit speed ray starting from . For every , let be the Laplacian of the distance function from a fixed point . By applying the Bochner formula
[TABLE]
to the distance function , we obtain
[TABLE]
By the Schwarz inequality, we have the Riccati inequality
[TABLE]
By adding to both sides of this inequality, we obtain
[TABLE]
Integrating both sides of (5.1), we obtain
[TABLE]
From assumption
[TABLE]
we have
[TABLE]
By multiplying both sides of (5.2) with , we obtain
[TABLE]
Thus, for any constant , there exists such that for any , we have
[TABLE]
By assumption , we have
[TABLE]
In other words,
[TABLE]
By multiplying both sides of (5.3) by , we obtain
[TABLE]
Now, we consider the increasing sequence defined by
[TABLE]
Note that converges to as .
We claim that for all . We prove this claim through induction. If , the claim is trivially true from the inequality in (5.4). Now, for all , by the inequality in (5.4), we have
[TABLE]
proving the claim. Therefore,
[TABLE]
This contradicts the smoothness of , which completes the proof of Theorem 1.13.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] Ambrose, W.: A Theorem of Myers . Duke Math. J. 24 , 345–348 (1957)
- 2[2] Cavalcate, M. P., Oliveira, J. Q., Santos, M.S.: Compactness in weighted manifolds and applications . Results Math. 68 , 143-156 (2015)
- 3[3] Cheeger, J., Gromov, M., Taylor, M.: Finite propagation speed, kernel estimates for functions of the Laplace operator, and the geometry of complete Riemannian manifolds . J. Differ. Geom. 17 , 15-53 (1982)
- 4[4] Galloway, G. J.: A Generalization of Myers Thoerem and an application to relativistic cosmology . J. Differ. Geom. 14 , 105-116 (1979)
- 5[5] Limoncu, M.: The Bakry-Emery Ricci tensor and its applications to some compactness theorms . Math. Z. 271 , 715–722 (2012)
- 6[6] Myers, S. B.: Riemannian Manifold with Positive mean curvature . Duke Math. J. 8 , 401-404 (1941)
- 7[7] Qiu, H.: Extensions of Bonnet-Myers’ type theorems with the Bakry-Emery Ricci curvature . ar Xiv: 1905.01452, (2019)
- 8[8] Soylu, Y.: Some Remarks on the Generalized Myers Theorems . IJMM. 2 , 154-161 (2018)
