Paper detail

Bounding the interleaving distance on concrete categories using a loss function

The interleaving distance is arguably the most widely used metric in topological data analysis (TDA) due to its applicability to a wide array of inputs of interest, such as (multiparameter) persistence modules, Reeb graphs, merge trees, and zigzag modules. However, computation of the interleaving distance in the vast majority of this settings is known to be NP-hard, limiting its use in practical settings. Inspired by the work of Chambers et al. on the interleaving distance for mapper graphs, we solve a more general problem bounding the interleaving distance between generalized persistence modules on concrete categories via a loss function. This loss function measures how far an assignment, which can be thought of as an interleaving that might not commute, is from defining a true interleaving. We give settings for which the loss can be computed in polynomial time, including for certain assumptions on $k$-parameter persistence modules.

preprint2026arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.