Happy ending problem: Difference between revisions

From testwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Citation bot
Added isbn. Removed URL that duplicated identifier. Removed access-date with no URL. Removed parameters. | Use this bot. Report bugs. | Suggested by Whoop whoop pull up | Category:Quadrilaterals | #UCB_Category 8/9
 
(No difference)

Latest revision as of 23:55, 14 November 2024

Template:Short description Template:For Template:Redirect

The happy ending problem: every set of five points in general position contains the vertices of a convex quadrilateral

In mathematics, the "happy ending problem" (so named by Paul Erdős because it led to the marriage of George Szekeres and Esther Klein[1]) is the following statement:

Template:Math theorem

This was one of the original results that led to the development of Ramsey theory.

The happy ending theorem can be proven by a simple case analysis: if four or more points are vertices of the convex hull, any four such points can be chosen. If on the other hand, the convex hull has the form of a triangle with two points inside it, the two inner points and one of the triangle sides can be chosen. See Template:Harvtxt for an illustrated explanation of this proof, and Template:Harvtxt for a more detailed survey of the problem.

The Erdős–Szekeres conjecture states precisely a more general relationship between the number of points in a general-position point set and its largest subset forming a convex polygon, namely that the smallest number of points for which any general position arrangement contains a convex subset of n points is 2n2+1. It remains unproven, but less precise bounds are known.

Larger polygons

A set of eight points in general position with no convex pentagon

Template:Harvtxt proved the following generalisation:

Template:Math theorem

The proof appeared in the same paper that proves the Erdős–Szekeres theorem on monotonic subsequences in sequences of numbers.

Let Template:Math denote the minimum Template:Mvar for which any set of Template:Mvar points in general position must contain a convex N-gon. It is known that

On the basis of the known values of Template:Math for N = 3, 4 and 5, Erdős and Szekeres conjectured in their original paper that

A set of sixteen points in general position with no convex hexagon
A set of sixteen points in general position with no convex hexagon

f(N)=1+2N2for all N3. They proved later, by constructing explicit examples, that[5] f(N)1+2N2. In 2016 Andrew Suk[6] showed that for Template:Math f(N)2N+o(N).

Suk actually proves, for N sufficiently large, f(N)2N+6N2/3logN.

This was subsequently improved to:Template:Sfnp

f(N)2N+O(NlogN).

Empty convex polygons

There is also the question of whether any sufficiently large set of points in general position has an "empty" convex quadrilateral, pentagon, etc., that is, one that contains no other input point. The original solution to the happy ending problem can be adapted to show that any five points in general position have an empty convex quadrilateral, as shown in the illustration, and any ten points in general position have an empty convex pentagon.[7] However, there exist arbitrarily large sets of points in general position that contain no empty convex heptagon.[8]

For a long time the question of the existence of empty hexagons remained open, but Template:Harvtxt and Template:Harvtxt proved that every sufficiently large point set in general position contains a convex empty hexagon. More specifically, Gerken showed that the number of points needed is no more than f(9) for the same function f defined above, while Nicolás showed that the number of points needed is no more than f(25). Template:Harvtxt supplies a simplification of Gerken's proof that however requires more points, f(15) instead of f(9). At least 30 points are needed; there exists a set of 29 points in general position with no empty convex hexagon.[9] The question was finally answered by Template:Harvtxt, who showed, using a SAT solving approach, that indeed every set of 30 points in general position contains an empty hexagon.

The problem of finding sets of n points minimizing the number of convex quadrilaterals is equivalent to minimizing the crossing number in a straight-line drawing of a complete graph. The number of quadrilaterals must be proportional to the fourth power of n, but the precise constant is not known.[10]

It is straightforward to show that, in higher-dimensional Euclidean spaces, sufficiently large sets of points will have a subset of k points that forms the vertices of a convex polytope, for any k greater than the dimension: this follows immediately from existence of convex Template:Nowrap in sufficiently large planar point sets, by projecting the higher-dimensional point set into an arbitrary two-dimensional subspace. However, the number of points necessary to find k points in convex position may be smaller in higher dimensions than it is in the plane, and it is possible to find subsets that are more highly constrained. In particular, in d dimensions, every d + 3 points in general position have a subset of d + 2 points that form the vertices of a cyclic polytope.[11] More generally, for every d and k > d there exists a number m(d, k) such that every set of m(d, k) points in general position has a subset of k points that form the vertices of a neighborly polytope.[12]

Notes

Template:Reflist

References

Template:Refbegin

Template:Refend

  1. A world of teaching and numbers - times two, Michael Cowling, The Sydney Morning Herald, 2005-11-07, cited 2014-09-04
  2. This was the original problem, proved by Esther Klein.
  3. According to Template:Harvtxt, this was first proved by E. Makai; the first published proof appeared in Template:Harvtxt.
  4. This has been proved by Template:Harvtxt. They carried out a computer search which eliminated all possible configurations of 17 points without convex hexagons while examining only a tiny fraction of all configurations.
  5. Template:Harvtxt
  6. Template:Harvtxt. See binomial coefficient and big O notation for notation used here and Catalan numbers or Stirling's approximation for the asymptotic expansion.
  7. Template:Harvtxt.
  8. Template:Harvtxt
  9. Template:Harvtxt.
  10. Template:Harvtxt
  11. Template:Harvtxt, Ex. 6.5.6, p.120. Grünbaum attributes this result to a private communication of Micha A. Perles.
  12. Template:Harvtxt, Ex. 7.3.6, p. 126. This result follows by applying a Ramsey-theoretic argument similar to Szekeres's original proof together with Perles's result on the case k = d + 2.