VADU 2018 Open Problem Session

Bui Thi Hoa∗, Scott B. Lindstrom†and Vera Roshchina‡*

June 5, 2018

Abstract

We state the problems discussed in the open problem session atVariational Analysis Down Under (VADU2018) conference held inhonour of Prof. Asen Dontchev’s 70th birthday on 19–21 February2018 at Federation University Australia, https://sites.rmit.edu.au/asen/.

Contents

1 Existence of local calm selections 2

2 Are 6-polytopes 3-linked? 2

3 Is FFS3 polytope decomposable? 3

4 Projections onto compact convex sets 3

5 Convergence of the continuous time Douglas-Rachford algo-rithm 4

6 Minimal distance problem 5

7 Demyanov-Ryabova conjecture 6

8 Durer’s conjecture 6

∗CIAO, Federation University Australia†School of Mathematical and Physical Sciences, University of Newcastle, Australia‡School of Mathematics and Statistics, UNSW and School of Science, RMIT University,

Australia

1

arX

iv:1

806.

0116

3v1

[m

ath.

OC

] 4

Jun

201

8

1 Existence of local calm selections

This problem was proposed by Asen Dontchev. All background material,including notation, history, etc. can be found in [13]. We are grateful toAsen for providing this description.

Theorem (Bartle-Graves (1952)). Let X and Y be Banach spaces andlet f : X → Y be a function which is strictly differentiable at x and suchthat the derivative Df(x) is surjective. Then there exist a neighborhood Vof f(x) and a constant γ > 0 such that f−1 has a continuous selection s onV which is calm with constant γ; that is,

‖s(y)− x‖ ≤ γ‖y − f(x)‖ for every y ∈ V.

When X and Y are finite dimensional, even Hilbert, the proof is easy.For Banach spaces, the proof is highly nontrivial. A generalization of theBartle-Graves theorem to set-valued mappings was obtained in [12].

Here is the open problem:

Conjecture. Consider a function f : Rn → Rm which is Lipschitz con-tinuous around x and suppose that all matrices A in Clarke’s generalizedJacobian of f at x are surjective. Then f−1 has a continuous local selectionaround y for x which is calm at y = f(x).

If n = m the conjecture reduces to Clarke’s inverse function theorem. Form ≤ n, according to a theorem by Pourciau [19], under the same conditionthe function f is metrically regular. This last result was generalized recentlyto Banach spaces in [7].

2 Are 6-polytopes 3-linked?

This problem was presented by Bui Thi Hoa.A graph G is k-linked if for any selection of k pairs of all distinct vertices

Y := (s1, t1), . . . , (sk, tk), (k ≥ 1) there exist k disjoint paths, connectingthe k pairs of points in Y . If the graph of a polytope is k-linked we say thatthe polytope is also k-linked.

Recall that a d-polytope is a d-dimensional polytope, i.e. the linear spanof the polytope is a d-dimensional space. The initial question is whether ornot every d-polytope is bd/2c-linked. And the negative answer was given byGallivan (see [22]) with a construction of a d-polytope which is not b2(d +4)/5c-linked. It had been already proven that 4-polytopes and 5-polytopesare 2-linked (see [6], [8]), meanwhile not all 8-polytopes are 4-linked. Theremaining question is that if all the 6-polytopes are 3-linked.

2

3 Is FFS3 polytope decomposable?

This problem was suggested by David Yost, and communicated during theopen problem section by Scott Lindstrom and Vera Roshchina.

A polytope is called decomposable [20] if it can be represented as Minkowskisum of dis-similar convex bodies. Two polytopes are similar if one can beobtained from the other by a dilation and a translation.

David Yost in collaboration with Debra Briggs have classified all but one3-polytopes with up to 16 edges in terms of decomposability (manuscript inpreparation). The only remaining case is the (combinatorial) polytope FFS3with its graph shown in Fig. 1. It is conjectured that this polytope has no

Figure 1: Graph of the polytope FFS3

decomposable geometric realisation.All polytopes with up to 15 edges are classified in terms of their decom-

posability [5], and the resolution of the decomposability question for FFS3polytope will settle the 16-edge case. However further case-by-case decom-posability classification of polyhedra with higher number of edges presents atedious challenge, and a more interesting question is developing an algorithmto check decomposability. We note that in an overwhelming number of casesindecomposability can be checked using combinatorial conditions from [20].

4 Projections onto compact convex sets

This problem was proposed by Andrew Eberhard.Let C1 and C2 be compact convex sets in a Hilbert space H. The con-

jecture states that there always exists a point x ∈ H such that for each ofits projections pi onto Ci, i ∈ 1, 2 the relevant normals x− p1 and x− p2define the hyperplanes that strongly expose the faces p1 and p2 of C1

and C2 respectively.

3

Recall (see [15, Definition 8.27]) that a point x ∈ C is strongly exposedby a linear functional f if f(x) = supx′∈C f(x′) and xk → x for all sequencesxk ⊂ C such that lim f(xk) = supx∈C f(x).

5 Convergence of the continuous time Douglas-

Rachford algorithm

This problem was proposed by Scott Lindstrom.For the feasibility problem of finding a point in the nonempty intersection

A ∩ B 6= ∅ of proximal sets A and B, the Douglas-Rachford method for agiven starting point x0 generates a sequence

xn ∈ Txn−1 := (λ(2PB − Id)(2PA − Id) + (1− λ)Id)xn−1

where PA, PB denote the usual projection operators for A,B respectively andλ ∈ (0, 1] is usually taken to be 1/2. When A,B are also convex, the sequence(xn)n∈N converges weakly to a fixed point of the method (see [18] and [1]).

-1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5

-1.5

-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2

-0.4

-0.2

0.0

0.2

0.4

Figure 2: The flowfield (1) with a circle/line (left) and ellipse/line (right).Images courtesy of Veit Elser.

For the nonconvex case where A is a circle and B a line, Borwein andSims [4] considered the “continuous time” version of the algorithm—whoseflow field is shown at left in Figure 5 and corresponds to the solution of thedifferential equation given by

dx

dt= T (x) when λ→ 0+ (1)

4

Figure 3: Behaviour of Douglas-Rachford method with an ellipse and linevaries from the case of a circle and line.

—as a means to approaching the question of convergence in the usual case ofλ = 1/2 given subtransversality, a case Benoist [2] answered in the affirmativeby means of a Lyapunov function and which has since been extended by MinhN. Dao and Matthew K. Tam [10].

The generalization to a subtransversal ellipse and line and also to a p-sphere and a line was considered by Borwein et al.[3], who showed that localconvergence remains while global behaviour becomes far more complicated.See, for example, Figure 3. Veit Elser has suggested analysing the continuoustime version of the method in these more general settings and has generouslyfurnished the images in Figure 5.

6 Minimal distance problem

This problem was proposed by Alex Kruger.Given a finite set of points a1, . . . , am ∈ X, where X is an Euclidean

space, find the solution to the problem

minx∈X

maxi∈1,...,m

‖ai − x‖. (2)

The problem has a unique solution for which x is the centre of the minimalEuclidean sphere that contains all points. However it is unclear whetherthere exists a neat way to write this explicitly.

This is a particular case of a more general problem. The space X can bean arbitrary normed linear or even a metric space. In the latter case, thenorm of the difference in (2) should be replaced by the distance. Instead ofthe maximum in (2), it could be an arbitrary norm in Rm.

5

7 Demyanov-Ryabova conjecture

This problem was communicated by Vera Roshchina.The problem was originally stated in [11, Conjecture 1]. Recently two

different special cases were confirmed in [9, 23]. During the preparation ofthis file a counterexample was found [21].

Given a finite family Ω of convex polytopes in Rn, for each unit vectorg ∈ Sn−1 we construct a new polytope as the convex hull of all support facesof all polytopes in the family Ω, i.e. we define the function

C(g) := conv Arg maxx∈P

〈x, g〉 |P ∈ Ω.

Collecting all such polytopes, we obtain a new finite family of polytopes,

F (Ω) = C(g) g ∈ Sn−1.

Now starting from a given finite collection of polytopes Ω0 we apply thistransformation infinitely obtaining a sequence Ω0, Ω1, Ω2, . . . , where Ωi =F (Ωi−1), i ∈ N.

The original Demyanov-Ryabova conjecture claimed that this sequenceeventually reaches a two-cycle, i.e. for a sufficiently large N we have ΩN+2 =ΩN . Since we now know that the conjecture is false, the question is tofind a characterisation of such collections of polytopes that yield two-cycles,extending and generalising the results of [9, 23].

8 Durer’s conjecture

This problem was communicated by Vera Roshchina.Albrecht Durer dedicated a nontrivial part of his career to laying out

the geometric foundations of drawing and perspective. His five centuries oldwork [14] is available online via Google books. The mathematical statementknown as Durer’s conjecture was motivated by this work and proposed in1975 by Shephard [24]. A net (or unfolding) of a 3-polytope is the processof cutting it along its edges, so that the resulting connected shape can beflattened (developed) into the plane [17]. It is not difficult to find examplesof polytopes for which certain cuts result in overlapping unfoldings, such asthe truncated tetrahedron shown in Fig. 4 (see [16]).

The Durer’s conjecture is a claim that any polytope has a nonoverlap-ping net. A significant recent contribution in this direction is the work byMohammed Ghomi who showed that every polytope is combinatorially equiv-alent to an unfoldable one [16]. For more details we refer the reader to anoverview [17] by the same author.

6

Figure 4: Two different nets of the same truncated tetrahedron

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Asen Dontchev, Andrew Eberhard, Alex Kruger and DavidYost for patiently clarifying the mathematical details of their open problemsto us.

References

[1] H.H. Bauschke, P.L. Combettes, and R.D. Luke. Phase retrieval, errorreduction algorithm, and fienup variants: a view from convex optimiza-tion. Journal of the Optical Society of America A, 19:1334–1345, 2002.

[2] Joel Benoist. The douglas-rachford algorithm for the case of the sphereand line. Journal of Global Optimization, 63:363–380, 2015.

[3] Jonathan M. Borwein, Scott B. Lindstrom, Brailey Sims, Matthew Sker-ritt, and Anna Schneider. Dynamics of the douglas-rachford method forellipses and p-spheres. Set Valued and Variational Analysis.

[4] Jonathan M. Borwein and Brailey Sims. The douglas-rachford algorithmin the absence of convexity. In Heinz H. Bauschke, Regina S. Burachik,Patrick L. Combettes, Veit Elser, D. Russell Luke, and Henry Wolkow-icz, editors, Fixed Point Algorithms for Inverse Problems in Science andEngineering, volume 49. Springer Optimization and Its Applications,2011.

[5] Debra Briggs. Comprehensive catalogue of polyhedra. AMSI Report,2016.

[6] Thomassen C. 2–linked graphs. European J. Combin., 1:371–378, 1980.

7

[7] Radek Cibulka, Asen L. Dontchev, and Vladimir M. Veliov. Lyusternik-graves theorems for the sum of a lipschitz function and a set-valuedmapping. SIAM J. Control Optim., 54(6):3273–3296, 2016.

[8] Seymour P. D. Disjoint paths in graphs. Discrete Math., 29:293–309,1980.

[9] Aris Daniilidis and Colin Petitjean. A partial answer to the demyanov-ryabova conjecture. Set-Valued and Variational Analysis, Jul 2017.

[10] Minh N. Dao and Matthew .K. Tam. A lyapunov-type approach toconvergence of the douglas-rachford algorithm. 2017.

[11] Vladimir F. Demyanov and Julia A. Ryabova. Exhausters, coexhaustersand converters in nonsmooth analysis. Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst.,31(4):1273–1292, 2011.

[12] Asen L. Dontchev. A local selection theorem for metrically regular map-pings. J. Convex Anal., 11(1):81–94, 2004.

[13] Asen L. Dontchev and Terry R. Rockafellar. Implicit Functions andSolution mappings. A View From Variational Analysis. Springer, 2014.

[14] Albrecht Durer. Underweysung der Messung, mit dem Zirckel undRichtscheyt, in Linien, Ebenen unnd gantzen corporen. Nuremberg,1525.

[15] Marian Fabian, Petr Habala, Petr Hajek, Vicente Montesinos San-talucı a, Jan Pelant, and Vaclav Zizler. Functional analysis andinfinite-dimensional geometry, volume 8 of CMS Books in Mathemat-ics/Ouvrages de Mathematiques de la SMC. Springer-Verlag, New York,2001.

[16] Mohammad Ghomi. Affine unfoldings of convex polyhedra. Geom.Topol., 18(5):3055–3090, 2014.

[17] Mohammad Ghomi. Durer’s unfolding problem for convex polyhedra.Notices Amer. Math. Soc., 65(1):25–27, 2018.

[18] P.L. Lions and B. Mercier. Splitting algorithms for the sum of twononlinear operators. SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis, 16:964–979,1979.

[19] Brouce H. Pourciau. Analysis and optimization of lipschitz continuousmappings. J. Opt. Theory Appl., 22:311–351, 1977.

8

[20] Krzysztof Przes lawski and David Yost. More indecomposable polyhedra.Extracta Math., 31(2):169–188, 2016.

[21] Vera Roshchina. Demyanov-ryabova conjecture is false, 2018.

[22] Gallivan S. Disjoint edge paths between given vertices of a convex poly-tope. J. Combin.Theory Ser. A, 39:112–115, 1985.

[23] Tian Sang. On the conjecture by Demyanov-Ryabova in converting finiteexhausters. J. Optim. Theory Appl., 174(3):712–727, 2017.

[24] G. C. Shephard. Convex polytopes with convex nets. Math. Proc. Cam-bridge Philos. Soc., 78(3):389–403, 1975.

9