Angle sums of random simplices in dimensions $3$ and $4$
Zakhar Kabluchko

TL;DR
This paper derives exact formulas for the expected sum of solid angles at vertices of random simplices in dimensions 3 and 4, with vertices sampled uniformly from the sphere or ball, extending to beta simplices.
Contribution
It provides explicit expected angle-sum formulas for random simplices in dimensions 3 and 4, including cases with vertices in the sphere or ball, generalizing to beta simplices.
Findings
Expected angle sum in 3D is 1/8.
Expected angle sum in 4D is 539/(288π^2) - 1/6.
Results extend to beta simplices in these dimensions.
Abstract
Consider a random -dimensional simplex whose vertices are random points sampled independently and uniformly from the unit sphere in . We show that the expected sum of solid angles at the vertices of this random simplex equals if and if . The angles are measured as proportions of the full solid angle which is normalized to be . Similar formulae are obtained if the vertices of the simplex are uniformly distributed in the unit ball. These results are special cases of general formulae for the expected angle-sums of random beta simplices in dimensions and .
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.
Angle sums of random simplices in dimensions and
Zakhar Kabluchko
Zakhar Kabluchko: Institut für Mathematische Stochastik, Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster, Orléans-Ring 10, 48149 Münster, Germany
Abstract.
Consider a random -dimensional simplex whose vertices are random points sampled independently and uniformly from the unit sphere in . We show that the expected sum of solid angles at the vertices of this random simplex equals if and if . The angles are measured as proportions of the full solid angle which is normalized to be . Similar formulae are obtained if the vertices of the simplex are uniformly distributed in the unit ball. These results are special cases of general formulae for the expected angle-sums of random beta simplices in dimensions and .
Key words and phrases:
Random polytopes, random simplices, solid angles, sum of angles, beta distributions
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
Primary: 52A22, 60D05; Secondary: 52B11.
1. Main results
1.1. Introduction and notation
The sum of the measures of angles in any plane triangle is constant and equals of the full plane angle. For a tetrahedron in a three-dimensional space, neither the sum of the solid three-dimensional angles at its vertices, nor the sum of the solid dihedral angles at its edges is constant. In fact, the former can take any value between [math] and of the full angle, whereas the latter can take any value between and . The range of all possible values of angle sums, for simplices of arbitrary dimension and for angles taken at faces of arbitrary dimension, was completely identified by Perles and Shephard [12, (24) on pp. 208–209].
The aim of the present paper is to prove an explicit formula for expected angle-sums of random simplices whose vertices are independent and identically distributed random points sampled according to the uniform distribution on the unit sphere or the unit ball in dimensions and . These two distributions are special cases of a general family of beta distributions for which we shall also provide an explicit formula.
Let us first introduce the necessary notation, referring to the book by Schneider and Weil [14] for an extensive account of stochastic geometry. Let be the Euclidean norm of the vector and denote the unit ball and the unit sphere in by
[TABLE]
Let be a -dimensional convex polytope. Denote by the set of vertices of . The internal angle of at its vertex is defined as
[TABLE]
where is a random vector having the uniform distribution on the unit sphere . Finally, denote the sum of angles of at its vertices by
[TABLE]
Note that the units of measurement for solid angles were chosen such that the full solid angle has measure .
Consider random points in drawn independently according to some probability distribution . Define the random simplex as their convex hull:
[TABLE]
We are interested in determining the expected value of the angle sum . One special case is already known: If is the standard Gaussian distribution on , then coincides with the sum of angles of the regular -dimensional simplex at its vertices; see [8]. In fact, the same conclusion applies if is any Gaussian distribution with non-singular covariance matrix [7].
1.2. Main results
The aim of the present paper is to prove the following theorems.
Theorem 1.1** (Points sampled on the sphere).**
Let be independent random points sampled uniformly on the unit sphere . Then, for and , the expected angle-sum of the simplex is given by
[TABLE]
Theorem 1.2** (Points sampled in the ball).**
Let be independent random points sampled uniformly in the unit ball . Then, for and , the expected angle-sums of the simplex are given by
[TABLE]
These theorems are particular cases of Theorems 1.3 and 1.4 which we shall state below. The proofs of the latter theorems will be given in Section 2. As we shall explain at the end of Section 2, the proofs do not carry over to dimensions . Using different methods, it is possible to build an algorithm computing the expected angle-sums in higher dimensions. This problem will be studied in a separate paper. The advantage of the method used in the present paper is its simplicity.
For the sake of brevity, we considered only angle sums at vertices of the simplex. More generally, we can denote by the sum of the internal angles of at all faces of dimension . Luckily, in dimensions and , all quantities can be expressed through and the trivial value . In dimension , the Gram–Euler relation states that ; see [6, Section 14.1]. In dimension , we have the Gram–Euler relation and a Dehn–Sommerville relation ; see [6, Section 14.2 and p. 307]. If the vertices are sampled uniformly on the sphere, we obtain the values
[TABLE]
For vertices sampled uniformly in the ball, we have
[TABLE]
The formulae remain valid if the uniform distribution on the ball is replaced by the uniform distribution on the interior of any -dimensional ellipsoid [7].
1.3. Angle-sums of beta simplices
In order to prove Theorems 1.3 and 1.4 it is necessary to pass to a more general family of distributions including the uniform distributions on the ball and on the sphere as special cases. We say that a random vector in has a -dimensional beta distribution with parameter if its Lebesgue density is
[TABLE]
Taking , we recover the uniform distribution on the unit ball . The uniform distribution on the unit sphere appears as the weak limit of the beta distribution as ; see [10, Proof of Corollary 3.9]. These distributions were introduced by Ruben and Miles [13] and Miles [11].
Let be independent random points in distributed according to the beta distribution , where . Their convex hull is called the -dimensional beta simplex. We allow the value , in which case are uniformly distributed on the unit sphere . Beta simplices and, more generally, beta polytopes were studied in [13, 11, 10, 2, 3, 5, 9]. In particular, it was demonstrated in [9] that many quantities appearing in stochastic geometry can be expressed through the expected internal angles of beta simplices, but no formula for the latter was obtained in [9] except for some trivial cases.
Now we are ready to state the results on the expected angle-sums of beta simplices in dimensions and .
Theorem 1.3** ().**
Let be i.i.d. points in the three-dimensional unit ball sampled from the distribution , . Then, the expected sum of solid angles of the tetrahedron at its vertices is given by
[TABLE]
Theorem 1.4** ().**
Let be i.i.d. points in the four-dimensional unit ball with density , . Then, the expected sum of solid angles of the -dimensional simplex at its vertices is given by
[TABLE]
Theorems 1.1 and 1.2 follow from Theorems 1.3 and 1.4 by taking or and evaluating the integrals. The inner integrals are given by
[TABLE]
Then, the computation of and reduces to evaluating standard trigonometric integrals.
2. Proofs of Theorems 1.3 and 1.4
We start by recalling some facts that will be needed in the proofs of Theorems 1.3 and 1.4.
2.1. Angles as probabilities
The first ingredient in our proofs is the following elegant observation of Feldman and Klain [4]. It can be viewed a special case of a more general result that has been obtained earlier by Affentranger and Schneider [1].
Theorem 2.1** (Feldman and Klain).**
Let be a -dimensional simplex. Let be a random vector uniformly distributed on the unit sphere and denote by the orthogonal projection onto the orthogonal complement of . Then, the sum of solid angles at all vertices of satisfies
[TABLE]
Indeed, if we ignore degenerate cases of probability [math], then the projection is a -dimensional simplex if and only if the projection of one of the vertices of falls into the convex hull of the projections of the other vertices. Such vertex is unique, if it exists. Consider, for concreteness, the random event . It occurs if and only if or belongs to the tangent cone of at the vertex defined by
[TABLE]
The probability of this event is twice the solid angle of at . Taking the sum over all vertices , Feldman and Klain arrived at their formula.
2.2. Number of facets of the beta polytope
The second ingredient is the following formula for the expected number of facets of the beta polytope essentially obtained in [10]. The convex hull of independent random points in distributed according to the law with is called the beta polytope and denoted by
[TABLE]
Let be the number of -dimensional faces of the polytope .
Theorem 2.2** (Facets of the beta polytope).**
The expected number of facets of is given by
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
Proof.
By Remark 2.14 and Theorem 2.11 of [10] we have (using the notation of that paper)
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
The value of is given by Proposition 2.8 (a) of [10] as follows:
[TABLE]
Taking everything together, we obtain the required formula for . ∎
2.3. Projections of beta distributions
Denote by the orthogonal projection on a -dimensional linear subspace which is allowed to be random. The next result, see [10, Lemma 4.4], states essentially that the projection of the -distribution to is the -distribution. There is, however, one technical subtlety to take care of. The projected distribution is a probability measure on (which is random) rather than on , hence we need to fix some way of identifying with the standard Euclidean space . To this end, we fix for each linear hyperplane an isometry identifying with such that . The only requirement we impose on this family of isometries is the Borel-measurability of the map .
Lemma 2.3** (Orthogonal projections).**
Let be a random (not necessarily uniformly distributed) -dimensional linear subspace of . If the random point has distribution for some and is independent of , then has density .
In [10, Lemma 4.4], the lemma was proved for the hyperplane spanned by the first standard basis vectors. By rotational invariance of the beta distribution, it is true for an arbitrary deterministic hyperplane . To prove it for random , condition on all possible realizations of and integrate.
2.4. Proof of Theorem 1.3
Recall that are independent random points in the three-dimensional unit ball sampled from the distribution , . Independently of the ’s, let be uniformly distributed on the unit sphere . Consider an orthogonal projection of the tetrahedron onto the random, uniformly distributed, two-dimensional plane . By the projection property of the beta densities stated in Lemma 2.3, the four projected points (or, to be more precise, the points , ) have the density . It follows that
[TABLE]
Disregarding degenerate cases (that have probability [math]), we have two possibilities: either the projection is a triangle, or the projection is a quadrilateral. Denote the probability that the projection is a triangle by . Then, by Theorem 2.1,
[TABLE]
On the other hand, we can compute the expected number of edges of the projection as follows:
[TABLE]
It follows that
[TABLE]
By Theorem 2.2, we have
[TABLE]
Here, is the constant given by (4). After some algebra, we obtain
[TABLE]
Taking everything together, we arrive at
[TABLE]
Recall from (1) that
[TABLE]
The change of variables and with transforms (5) into
[TABLE]
This completes the proof.
2.5. Proof of Theorem 1.4
Recall that are independent random points in the four-dimensional unit ball sampled from the probability distribution , . Independently of the ’s, let be uniformly distributed on the unit sphere . Let denote the orthogonal projection on the random, uniformly distributed, three-dimensional linear subspace . By the projection property of the beta densities stated in Lemma 2.3, the points , , have the density on . It follows that
[TABLE]
Denote by the probability that the projection is a -dimensional simplex. Then, by Theorem 2.1,
[TABLE]
Disregarding degenerate cases of probability [math], there are two possible combinatorial types of the projected polytope: the -dimensional tetrahedron with facets, and the -dimensional polytope with facets obtained by gluing together two tetrahedra at a common facet; see [6, Chapter 6.1]. Since the probabilities of these combinatorial types are and , respectively, we have
[TABLE]
It follows that
[TABLE]
The expected number of facets of can be computed with the help of Theorem 2.2 as follows:
[TABLE]
The value of the constant is given by (4). After some simplifications we arrive at
[TABLE]
Taking everything together leads to
[TABLE]
Recall from (1) that
[TABLE]
The change of variables and transforms (6) into
[TABLE]
The proof is complete.
2.6. Remark on higher dimensions
The method that we used in the cases and breaks down for for the following reason. If , then the projection of the beta-simplex on a random hyperplane is a -dimensional simplicial polytope with at most vertices. It is known [6, Chapter 6.1] that there are three different combinatorial types of such polytopes: the simplex and two polytopes denoted by and . The method used in the present paper is based on the fact that for there are just two possible combinatorial types (or a weaker statement that all combinatorial types except the simplex have the same number of facets). Even the latter weaker statement breaks down for since and have and facets, respectively. For general , the situation gets even worse since the number of different combinatorial types is then ; see [6, Chapter 6.1].
Acknowledgement
Supported by the German Research Foundation under Germany’s Excellence Strategy EXC 2044 – 390685587, Mathematics Münster: Dynamics - Geometry - Structure.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1Affentranger and Schneider [1992] F. Affentranger and R. Schneider. Random projections of regular simplices. Discrete Comput. Geom. , 7(1):219–226, 1992. doi: 10.1007/BF 02187839 .
- 2Bonnet et al. [2017] G. Bonnet, J. Grote, D. Temesvari, C. Thäle, N. Turchi, and F. Wespi. Monotonicity of facet numbers of random convex hulls. J. Math. Anal. Appl. , 455(2):1351–1364, 2017.
- 3Bonnet et al. [2018] G. Bonnet, G. Chasapis, J. Grote, D. Temesvari, and N. Turchi. Threshold phenomena for high-dimensional random polytopes. Ar Xiv e-prints , February 2018.
- 4Feldman and Klain [2009] D. V. Feldman and D. A. Klain. Angles as probabilities. Amer. Math. Monthly , 116(8):732–735, 2009. doi: 10.4169/193009709 X 460868 . URL https://doi.org/10.4169/193009709 X 460868 . · doi ↗
- 5Grote et al. [2019] J. Grote, Z. Kabluchko, and C. Thäle. Limit theorems for random simplices in high dimensions. ALEA Lat. Am. J. Probab. Math. Stat. , 16(1):141–177, 2019.
- 6Grünbaum [2003] B. Grünbaum. Convex Polytopes , volume 221 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics . Springer-Verlag, New York, second edition, 2003. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4613-0019-9 . Prepared and with a preface by V. Kaibel, V. Klee and G. M. Ziegler.
- 7[7] Z. Kabluchko and D. Zaporozhets. Work in progress.
- 8Kabluchko and Zaporozhets [2018] Z. Kabluchko and D. Zaporozhets. Angles of the Gaussian simplex. Zap. Nauchn. Sem. POMI , 476:79–91, 2018. Preprint at ar Xiv: 1801.08008.
