Source author record

Meir Katchalski

Meir Katchalski appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

3works
5topics
3close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2012arXiv

Upper bounds for the piercing number of families of pairwise intersecting convex polygons

A convex polygon $A$ is related to a convex $m$-gon $K= \bigcap_{i=1}^m k_i^+$, where $k_1^+,..., k_m^+$ are the $m$ halfplanes whose intersection is equal to $K$, if $A$ is the intersection of halfplanes $a_1^+,...,a_l$, each of which is a translate of one of the $k_i^+$-s. The planar family ${\cal A}$ is related to $K$ if each $A \in {\cal A}$ is related to $K$. We prove that any family of pairwise intersecting convex sets related to a given $n$-gon has a finite piercing number which depends on $n$. In the general case we show $O(3^{n^3})$, while for a certain class of families, we decrease the bound to $4(n-2)$, and for $n=3,4$ the bound is 3 and 6 respectively.

preprint2011arXiv

No O(N) queries for checking if N intervals cover everything or for piercing N pairs of intervals. An O(N log N)-steps algorithm for piercing

The complexity of two related geometrical (indeed, combinatorial) problems is considered, measured by the number of queries needed to determine the solution. It is proved that one cannot check in a linear in N number of queries whether N intervals cover a whole interval, or whether for N pairs of intervals on two lines there is a pair of points intersecting each of these pairs of intervals ("piercing all pairs of intervals"). The proofs are related to examples which show that there is no "Helly property" here - the whole set of N may cover the whole interval (resp. may have no pair of points piercing all pairs of intervals) while any proper subset does not. Also, for the piercing problem we outline an algorithm, taking O(N log N) steps, to check whether there is a pair of points piercing all pairs of intervals and if there is, to find it.