Paper detail

Sharp L^1 Poincare inequalities correspond to optimal hypersurface cuts

Let $Ω\subset \mathbb{R}^n$ be a convex. If $u: Ω\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ has mean 0, then we have the classical Poincaré inequality $$ \|u \|_{L^p} \leq c_p \mbox{diam}(Ω) \| \nabla u \|_{L^p}$$ with sharp constants $c_2 = 1/π$ (Payne \& Weinberger, 1960) and $c_1 = 1/2$ (Acosta \& Duran, 2005) independent of the dimension. The sharp constants $c_p$ for $1 < p < 2$ have recently been found by Ferone, Nitsch \& Trombetti (2012). The purpose of this short paper is to prove a much stronger inequality in the endpoint $L^1$: we combine results of Cianchi and Kannan, Lovász \& Simonovits to show that $$\left\|u\right\|_{L^{1}(Ω)} \leq \frac{2}{\log{2}} M_{}(Ω) \left\|\nabla u\right\|_{L^{1}(Ω)}$$ where $M_{}(Ω)$ is the average distance between a point in $Ω$ and the center of gravity of $Ω$. If $Ω$ is a simplex, this yields an improvement by a factor of $\sim \sqrt{n}$ in $n$ dimensions. By interpolation, this implies that that for every convex $Ω\subset \mathbb{R}^n$ and every $u:Ω\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ with mean 0 $$ \left\|u\right\|_{L^{p}(Ω)}\leq \left(\frac{2}{\log{2}} M_{}(Ω) \right)^{\frac{1}{p}}\mbox{diam}(Ω)^{1-\frac{1}{p}}\left\|\nabla u\right\|_{L^{p}(Ω)}. $$

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author3 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.