Paper detail

Estimating perimeter using graph cuts

We investigate the estimation of the perimeter of a set by a graph cut of a random geometric graph. For $Ω\subset D = (0,1)^d$, with $d \geq 2$, we are given $n$ random i.i.d. points on $D$ whose membership in $Ω$ is known. We consider the sample as a random geometric graph with connection distance $\varepsilon>0$. We estimate the perimeter of $Ω$ (relative to $D$) by the, appropriately rescaled, graph cut between the vertices in $Ω$ and the vertices in $D \backslash Ω$. We obtain bias and variance estimates on the error, which are optimal in scaling with respect to $n$ and $\varepsilon$. We consider two scaling regimes: the dense (when the average degree of the vertices goes to $\infty$) and the sparse one (when the degree goes to $0$). In the dense regime there is a crossover in the nature of approximation at dimension $d=5$: we show that in low dimensions $d=2,3,4$ one can obtain confidence intervals for the approximation error, while in higher dimensions one can only obtain error estimates for testing the hypothesis that the perimeter is less than a given number.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors2 topics

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 map preview

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.