Paper detail

Geometric complexity of embeddings in ${\mathbb R}^d$

Given a simplicial complex $K$, we consider several notions of geometric complexity of embeddings of $K$ in a Euclidean space ${\mathbb R}^d$: thickness, distortion, and refinement complexity (the minimal number of simplices needed for a PL embedding). We show that any $n$-complex with $N$ simplices which topologically embeds in ${\mathbb R}^{2n}$, $n>2$, can be PL embedded in ${\mathbb R}^{2n}$ with refinement complexity $O(e^{N^{4+ε}})$. Families of simplicial $n$-complexes $K$ are constructed such that any embedding of $K$ into ${\mathbb R}^{2n}$ has an exponential lower bound on thickness and refinement complexity as a function of the number of simplices of $K$. This contrasts embeddings in the stable range, $K\subset {\mathbb R}^{2n+k}$, $k>0$, where all known bounds on geometric complexity functions are polynomial. In addition, we give a geometric argument for a bound on distortion of expander graphs in Euclidean spaces. Several related open problems are discussed, including questions about the growth rate of complexity functions of embeddings, and about the crossing number and the ropelength of classical links.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors4 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.