Vertical perimeter versus horizontal perimeter
Abstract
The discrete Heisenberg group HZ2k+1 is the group generated by a1,b1,…,ak,bk,c, subject to the relations [a1,b1]=…=[ak,bk]=c and [ai,aj]=[bi,bj]=[ai,bj]=[ai,c]=[bi,c]=1 for every distinct i,j∈ \1,…,k\. Denote S=\a1 1,b1 1,…,ak 1,bk 1\. The horizontal boundary of ⊂ HZ2k+1, denoted ∂h, is the set of all (x,y)∈ × (HZ2k+1 ) such that x-1y∈ S. The horizontal perimeter of is |∂h|. For t∈ N, define ∂tv to be the set of all (x,y)∈ × (HZ2k+1 ) such that x-1y∈ \ct,c-t\. The vertical perimeter of is defined by |∂v|= Σt=1∞ |∂tv|2/t2. It is shown here that if k 2, then |∂v| 1k |∂h|. The proof of this "vertical versus horizontal isoperimetric inequality" uses a new structural result that decomposes sets of finite perimeter in the Heisenberg group into pieces that admit an "intrinsic corona decomposition." This allows one to deduce an endpoint W1,1 L2(L1) boundedness of a certain singular integral operator from a corresponding lower-dimensional W1,2 L2(L2) boundedness. The above inequality has several applications, including that any embedding into L1 of a ball of radius n in the word metric on HZ5 incurs bi-Lipschitz distortion that is at least a constant multiple of n. It follows that the integrality gap of the Goemans--Linial semidefinite program for the Sparsest Cut Problem on inputs of size n is at least a constant multiple of n.
Turn this paper into a lesson
ArcXiv compiles a structured reading guide from this paper's metadata: plain-English importance, contributions, prerequisite concepts, which sections to read first, flashcards, and a quiz. Grounded in the abstract, never invented.