4

Suppose we want to construct a function $f$ from a compact metric space $(X,\rho)$ to a Euclidean space $\mathbb{R}^n$ that is Lipschitz continuous with a constant $L$:

$$ \forall x,y \in X . ||f(x)-f(y)|| \leq L \cdot \rho(x, y) $$

Suppose that there is a sequence of unequal points $\{x_1,...x_N\}$ in $X$ such that all metrics $\rho(x_i,x_j)$ are known and $f(x_i)=a_i$ for some $a_i$ in $\mathbb{R}^n$ whereas:

$$ \forall x_i,x_j \in \{x_1,...x_N\} . ||a_i-a_j|| \leq L \cdot \rho(x_i, x_j) $$

Suppose also that $\{x_1,...x_N\}$ form a finite cover of $X$ by balls of some suitable (known) radius.

Is there any way to construct $f$ for all the points in $X$ so that it's Lipschitz continuous with a constant $L$?


My first idea was to use something like:

$$f(x):=f\left(x_{i}\right)+\left(f\left(x_{j}\right)-f\left(x_{i}\right)\right)\cdot\dfrac{\rho\left(x,x_{i}\right)}{\rho\left(x_{i},x_{j}\right)}$$

But it only works for the points "between" $x_i$ and $x_j$, and there may be other points of the net that interfere.


The question has been also posted here since there might be some research potential.

Rubi Shnol
  • 1,151
  • 1
    I haven't worked it out, but I would bet that if nothing simpler can be done, some sort of construction such as is used in the proof of Urysohn's Lemma could be made. – Paul Sinclair Oct 24 '15 at 16:27
  • To complement @PaulSinclair's suggestion: Have a look at this and the related posts: http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/926124/urysohns-lemma-with-lipschitz-functions – Martin Sleziak Oct 25 '15 at 12:02
  • The other post gives you a Lipschitz function $f$ for two closed subset $A$, $B$ of a metric space such that $f|_A=0$, $f|_B=1$. What should be worth trying is to take such functions for $A={x_i}$ and $B=$the remaining $(N-1)$ points. And add these function together. (This is just a guess. You still need to go through the details to check whether it actually works.) – Martin Sleziak Oct 25 '15 at 12:22
  • Instead of add I should have written "take a linear combination" with coefficients $a_i$. This only works for $a_i\in\mathbb R$. But still, maybe it could be possible to make such function for each coordinate and then put them together. You can see that there are still many gaps, but I though that potentially this could be something at least worth trying. (And maybe starting with $n=1$ is a good idea, before we consider the more complicated case of $\mathbb R^n$.) – Martin Sleziak Oct 25 '15 at 12:30

3 Answers3

1

Consider the functions $$g_i(x) = \prod_{j\ne i} \frac{\rho(x,x_j)}{\rho(x_i,x_j)}$$

And let $f(x) = \sum_i a_ig_i(x)$. This gives you a function with the right values. I haven't verified if it satisfies the Lipschitz condition, though.

Paul Sinclair
  • 45,932
1

I will only consider $a_i\in\mathbb R$. (So this does not answer the original question. This is reaction to the OP's request in this comment.) Things we will need to know:

  • If $A,B\subseteq X$ are closed subsets of a metric space $X$ such that $\rho(A,B)>0$, then there exists a Lipschitz function $f\colon X\to\mathbb R$ such that $f|_A=1$ and $f|_B=0$. An example of such function is $f(x)=\frac{\rho(x,B)}{\rho(x,A)+\rho(x,B)}$. See, for example: Urysohn's lemma with Lipschitz functions
  • Sum of two Lipschitz functions is Lipschitz. See: sum and product of Lipschitz functions

Using the above fact we can do the following:

Taking $A=\{x_i\}$ and $B=\{x_1,\dots,x_{i-1},x_{i+1},\dots,x_N\}$ we have a Lipschitz function such that $$f_i(x_j)=\delta_{ij}= \begin{cases} 1 & \text{if }i=j, \\ 0 & \text{if }i\ne j. \end{cases} $$

If we take the function $$f(x)=\sum_{i=1}^N a_if_i(x),$$ then the function has the required properties.

  • We have $f(x_j)= \sum_{i=1}^N a_if_i(x_j) = a_jf_j(x_j) = a_j$.
  • It is a Lipschitz function, since it is a linear combination of finitely many Lipschitz function. (And finite sums and constant multiples of Lipschitz functions are again Lipschitz.)
  • So I should understand the question in such way that the constant $L$ is given in advance and so are the points $x_1,\dots,x_n$. You are asking whether there is such a function. Is that correct interpretation? (I misunderstood the question. I thought that you are satisfied if we find such function for some $L$. Anyway, at least I clarified a bit what I meant in the comments to your question. So consider this post more as an extended comment rather than as an answer.) – Martin Sleziak Oct 25 '15 at 13:54
  • BTW I do not immediately see what will be the Lipschitz constant for the function from this answer. It seems that some estimate probably could be done based on between the points from the given sets of the points. – Martin Sleziak Oct 25 '15 at 13:57
  • There are some doubts to which extent bounties are effective, see How effective are bounties? on meta. I would not go as far as calling the problem unsolvable. (Well, if we calculate the value of $L$ for the above function, then we solved it at least for some configuration of points.) It is possible that similar problems were studied somewhere and somebody working in a related area would be able to give a good reference. – Martin Sleziak Oct 25 '15 at 16:58
  • I am hardly the correct person to say whether the question is appropriate for MO. You can try to simply post it there and you will see. (But it is common practice to indicate clearly both here and at MO, that the question was posted at the other site, too.) Or you can try to ask in their chatroom. (However, it seems to be almost always empty.) Or you can try to ask in our chatroom (which is rather active). – Martin Sleziak Oct 25 '15 at 17:33
  • @ValerySaharov We started to add here many comments which seem to be unrelated to the (mathematical content) of the question. If you wish to continue the discussion, let us do so in chat. – Martin Sleziak Oct 25 '15 at 18:36
1

This can even be done into $\Bbb{R}$. Observe $\rho(\cdot, x_1)$ is Lipschitz with constant $1$ and $a_1 + L \rho(\cdot,x_1)$ is Lipschitz with constant $L$. In fact, any suitably Lipschitz function lying in $a_1 + [-L \rho(\cdot, x_1), L \rho(\cdot, x_1)]$ works. Your second display relation says that the intersection of all these regions is nonempty. Consequently, the extremal constraint is $$ f(x) \in [\max_j a_j - L \rho(x,x_j), \min_j a_j + L \rho(x,x_j)] $$ and there are rather a lot of Lipschitz continuous functions that globally satisfy this constraint. In the multidimensional case, this becomes $f(x) \in$ the intersection of $N$ spheres, but again your second display relation and the triangle inequality shows this intersection is nonempty.

Those maxima and minima are (uniformly) continuous functions of $x$, so an easy function to write is $f(x) = \frac{1}{2} ( (\max_j a_j - L \rho(x,x_j)) + (\min_j a_j + L \rho(x,x_j) ))$, which is (uniformly) continuous.

Eric Towers
  • 70,953
  • The most straightforward generalization to $\mathbb{R}^n$ would be to replace $\frac{1}{2}( \dots )$ with the centroid of the intersection of the allowed regions. The "geometric picture" for Lipschitzness is that the centroid moves slower than the boundaries of the bounding spheres (which are moving at speed $L$). – Eric Towers Oct 26 '15 at 12:54