Paper detail

Quantitative isoperimetric inequalities for log-convex probability measures on the line

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the isoperimetric inequality for symmetric log-convex probability measures on the line. Using geometric arguments we first re-prove that extremal sets in the isoperimetric inequality are intervals or complement of intervals (a result due to Bobkov and Houdré). Then we give a quantitative form of the isoperimetric inequality, leading to a somehow anomalous behavior. Indeed, it could be that a set is very close to be optimal, in the sense that the isoperimetric inequality is almost an equality, but at the same time is very far (in the sense of the symmetric difference between sets) to any extremal sets! From the results on sets we derive quantitative functional inequalities of weak Cheeger type.

preprint2014arXivOpen 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.