A remark on two notions of flatness for sets in the Euclidean space
Ivan Yuri Violo

TL;DR
This paper compares two notions of measuring the flatness of sets in Euclidean space, revealing a quadratic relationship between them and applying this insight to extend a fundamental geometric theorem.
Contribution
It establishes a rigorous connection between classical and intrinsic flatness measures, showing the intrinsic measure behaves as the square of the classical one, and extends the Cheeger-Colding theorem.
Findings
The intrinsic flatness measure ${ m a}(x,r)$ behaves as the square of the classical Reifenberg-flat number $eta(x,r)$.
The main result shows ${ m a}(x,r)$ is comparable to $ig(eta(x,r)ig)^2$.
Application to extending the Cheeger-Colding intrinsic-Reifenberg theorem to biLipschitz cases.
Abstract
In this note we compare two ways of measuring the -dimensional "flatness" of a set , where and . The first one is to consider the classical Reifenberg-flat numbers (, ), which measure the minimal scaling-invariant Hausdorff distances in between and -dimensional affine subspaces of . The second is an `intrinsic' approach in which we view the same set as a metric space (endowed with the induced Euclidean distance). Then we consider numbers 's, that are the scaling-invariant Gromov-Hausdorff distances between balls centered at of radius in and the -dimensional Euclidean ball of the same radius. As main result of our analysis we make rigorous a phenomenon, first noted by David and Toro, for which the numbers 's behaves as the square of the…
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
TopicsMathematical Dynamics and Fractals
