The Petty Projection Inequality and BEYOND Franz Schuster Vienna University of Technology.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Cortona Some remarks on the girth functions of convex bodies Paolo Gronchi Dipartimento di Matematica e Applicazioni per lArchitettura Università
Advertisements

2/10/20141 DUALITY IN CONVEX GEOMETRY… Richard Gardner WELL, GEOMETRIC TOMOGRAPHY, ACTUALLY!
Chapter 4 Euclidean Vector Spaces
Characterization of rotation equivariant additive mappings Franz Schuster Technical University Vienna This work is supported by the Austrian Science Fund.
6.896: Topics in Algorithmic Game Theory Lecture 20 Yang Cai.
C&O 355 Mathematical Programming Fall 2010 Lecture 6 N. Harvey TexPoint fonts used in EMF. Read the TexPoint manual before you delete this box.: AA A A.
Invariants (continued).
ESSENTIAL CALCULUS CH11 Partial derivatives
On the monotonicity of the expected volume of a random simplex Luis Rademacher Computer Science and Engineering The Ohio State University TexPoint fonts.
Chords halving the area of a planar convex set A.Grüne, E. Martínez, C. Miori, S. Segura Gomis.
6. One-Dimensional Continuous Groups 6.1 The Rotation Group SO(2) 6.2 The Generator of SO(2) 6.3 Irreducible Representations of SO(2) 6.4 Invariant Integration.
Chebyshev Estimator Presented by: Orr Srour. References Yonina Eldar, Amir Beck and Marc Teboulle, "A Minimax Chebyshev Estimator for Bounded Error Estimation"
International Workshop on Computer Vision - Institute for Studies in Theoretical Physics and Mathematics, April , Tehran 1 I THE NATURAL PSEUDODISTANCE:
Chapter 6 Continuous Random Variables and Probability Distributions
Convex Sets (chapter 2 of Convex programming) Keyur Desai Advanced Machine Learning Seminar Michigan State University.
Area Functionals with Affinely Regular Polygons as Maximizers P.Gronchi - M.Longinetti.
1 Matching Shapes with a Reference Point Volkan Çardak.
Volume and Angle Structures on closed 3-manifolds Feng Luo Rutgers University Oct. 28, 2006 Texas Geometry/Topology conference Rice University.
(from Geometric Tomography, R.J.Gardner, 1995)
Geometric characterization of nodal domains Y. Elon, C. Joas, S. Gnutzman and U. Smilansky Non-regular surfaces and random wave ensembles General scope.
1 February 24 Matrices 3.2 Matrices; Row reduction Standard form of a set of linear equations: Chapter 3 Linear Algebra Matrix of coefficients: Augmented.
Diophantine Approximation and Basis Reduction
CHAPTER FIVE Orthogonality Why orthogonal? Least square problem Accuracy of Numerical computation.
Curvature operator and gravity coupled to a scalar field: the physical Hamiltonian operator (On going work) E. Alesci, M. Assanioussi, Jerzy Lewandowski.
Elementary Linear Algebra Anton & Rorres, 9th Edition
Chapter 6 Additional Topics in Trigonometry
Chap 3. Formalism Hilbert Space Observables
Ordered Sets. Relations. Equivalence Relations 1.
© by Kenneth H. Rosen, Discrete Mathematics & its Applications, Sixth Edition, Mc Graw-Hill, 2007 Chapter 9 (Part 2): Graphs  Graph Terminology (9.2)
Chapter 2 Mathematical preliminaries 2.1 Set, Relation and Functions 2.2 Proof Methods 2.3 Logarithms 2.4 Floor and Ceiling Functions 2.5 Factorial and.
MATH4248 Weeks Topics: review of rigid body motion, Legendre transformations, derivation of Hamilton’s equations of motion, phase space and Liouville’s.
Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof Strengths, Weaknesses and Practical Strategies (i) The role of CAS in analysis (ii) Four practical mechanisms.
Chapter 2. A lattice point is a point in R d with integer coordinates. Later we will talk about general lattice point.
Gauge Fields, Knots and Gravity Wayne Lawton Department of Mathematics National University of Singapore (65)
Franz SchusterValuations and Busemann-Petty Type Problems Valuations and Busemann-Petty Type Problems Franz Schuster Vienna University of Technology.
April 14, 2015Applied Discrete Mathematics Week 10: Equivalence Relations 1 Properties of Relations Definition: A relation R on a set A is called transitive.
MA5241 Lecture 1 TO BE COMPLETED
A. Aizenbud and D. Gourevitch Gelfand Pairs Regular pairs We call the property (2)
March 24, 2006 Fixed Point Theory in Fréchet Space D. P. Dwiggins Systems Support Office of Admissions Department of Mathematical Sciences Analysis Seminar.
I.4 Polyhedral Theory 1. Integer Programming  Objective of Study: want to know how to describe the convex hull of the solution set to the IP problem.
CS 103 Discrete Structures Lecture 13 Induction and Recursion (1)
Chapter 4 Euclidean n-Space Linear Transformations from to Properties of Linear Transformations to Linear Transformations and Polynomials.
Proving that a Valid Inequality is Facet-defining  Ref: W, p  X  Z + n. For simplicity, assume conv(X) bounded and full-dimensional. Consider.
Verification of Inequalities (i) Four practical mechanisms The role of CAS in analysis (ii) Applications Kent Pearce Texas Tech University Presentation:
Math 3121 Abstract Algebra I Lecture 14 Sections
Linear Programming Back to Cone  Motivation: From the proof of Affine Minkowski, we can see that if we know generators of a polyhedral cone, they.
Department of Statistics University of Rajshahi, Bangladesh
Majorization-subordination theorems for locally univalent functions. IV A Verification of Campbell’s Conjecture Roger W. Barnard, Kent Pearce Texas Tech.
Support Vector Machine: An Introduction. (C) by Yu Hen Hu 2 Linear Hyper-plane Classifier For x in the side of o : w T x + b  0; d = +1; For.
1 Discrete Mathematical Mathematical Induction ( الاستقراء الرياضي )
Functions of Complex Variable and Integral Transforms
The Verification of an Inequality
Advanced Algorithms Analysis and Design
Rotation Invariant Minkowski Classes Vienna University of Technology
Complex Variables. Complex Variables Open Disks or Neighborhoods Definition. The set of all points z which satisfy the inequality |z – z0|
Proving that a Valid Inequality is Facet-defining
GEOMETRIC TOMOGRAPHY Richard Gardner 11/14/2018.
Polyhedron Here, we derive a representation of polyhedron and see the properties of the generators. We also see how to identify the generators. The results.
Polyhedron Here, we derive a representation of polyhedron and see the properties of the generators. We also see how to identify the generators. The results.
Volume and Angle Structures on closed 3-manifolds
3-2 Solving Inequalities Using Addition or Subtraction
Structural Theory of Addition and Symmetrization in Convex Geometry
Gelfand Pairs A. Aizenbud and D. Gourevitch the non compact case
The Dual Brunn-Minkowski Theory and Some of Its Inequalities
Structural Theory of Addition and Symmetrization in Convex Geometry
Preliminary.
I.4 Polyhedral Theory (NW)
I.4 Polyhedral Theory.
Proving that a Valid Inequality is Facet-defining
(Convex) Cones Def: closed under nonnegative linear combinations, i.e.
Presentation transcript:

The Petty Projection Inequality and BEYOND Franz Schuster Vienna University of Technology

The Euclidean Isoperimetric Inequality: "=" only if K is a ball Petty's Projection Inequality (PPI) K |uK |u K uu Cauchy's Surface Area Formula:  vol n – 1 (K | u  ) du. 1 n – 1n – 1 S n – 1 S(K ) = If K , then V(K )V(K )  S(K )S(K ) nnnn 1 n n n – 1 n – 1 Notation S(K ) … Surface area of K V(K ) … Volume of K  n … Volume of unit ball B

The following functional on is SL(n) invariant Petty's Projection Inequality (PPI) Cauchy's Surface Area Formula:  vol n – 1 (K | u  ) du. 1 n – 1n – 1 S n – 1 S(K ) = If K , then – 1  n – 1 n nnnn  vol n – 1 (K | u  ) – n du S n – 1 Theorem [Petty, Proc. Conf. Convexity UO 1971]: K K  n – 1 V(K )V(K ) nn   S(K )S(K ) nnnn n "=" only if K is an ellipsoid If K , then

Polar Projection Bodies – The PPI Reformulated Def inition [Minkowski,  1900]: h(K,u) = max{u. x: x  K} Support Function projection body  K projection body  K of K is defined by The h(  K,u) = vol n – 1 (K | u  ) Zonoids in … zonoid L  is a zonoid if L =  K + t for some K , t .

Radial functions  (K,u) = max{  0: u  K}  (  * K,u) = vol n – 1 (K | u  ) – 1 projection body  K projection body  K of K is defined by The h(  K,u) = vol n – 1 (K | u  )  * K : = (  K ) * Polar projection bodiespolar * Def inition [Minkowski,  1900]: "=" only for ellipsoids V(K ) n – 1 V(  * K )  V(B) n – 1 V(  * B) Theorem [Petty, 1971]: If K , then Polar Projection Bodies – The PPI Reformulated

The Busemann-Petty Centroid Inequality – Class Reduction "=" only for centered ellipsoids V(K ) – (n + 1) V(  K )  V(B) – (n + 1) V(  B) Theorem [Petty, Pacific J. Math. 1961]: If K , then Def inition [Dupin,  1850]: centroid body  K centroid body  K of K is defined by The h(  K,u) =  K | x. u | dx. Remarks: Petty deduced the PPI from the BPCI! The BPCI is a reformulation of the Random-Simplex Inequality by Busemann (Pacific J. Math. 1953).

V(K + t L) – V(K ) nV 1 (K, L ) = lim t  0 + t V(K 1 t. L) – V(K ) – nV – 1 (K, L ) = lim t  0 + t polars of zonoids all convex bodies BPCI for polars of zonoids  PPI for all convex bodies zonoidsall star bodies PPI for zonoids  BPCI for all star bodies The Busemann-Petty Centroid Inequality – Class Reduction Class Reduction [Lutwak, Trans. AMS 1985]: where Harmonic Radial Addition  (K 1 t. L,. ) – 1 =  (K,. ) – 1 + t  (L,. ) – 1 Based on V 1 (K,  L ) = V – 1 (L,  * K ), 2 n + 1

A Proof of the BPCI – Campi & Gronchi, Adv. Math Let A  be compact,  a bounded function on A and let v  S n – 1. A shadow system along the direction v is a family of convex bodies K t def ined by K t = conv{x +  (x) v t: x  A}, t  [0,1]. v A Def inition [Rogers & Shephard, 1958]:

v A Proof of the BPCI – Campi & Gronchi, Adv. Math Let A  be compact,  a bounded function on A and let v  S n – 1. A shadow system along the direction v is a family of convex bodies K t def ined by K t = conv{x +  (x) v t: x  A}, t  [0,1]. Def inition [Rogers & Shephard, 1958]:

v A Proof of the BPCI – Campi & Gronchi, Adv. Math Let A  be compact,  a bounded function on A and let v  S n – 1. A shadow system along the direction v is a family of convex bodies K t def ined by K t = conv{x +  (x) v t: x  A}, t  [0,1]. Def inition [Rogers & Shephard, 1958]:

Let K t be a shadow system with speed function  and define Then K t is the projection of K o onto e n + 1 along e n + 1 – tv. K o = conv{(x,  (x)): x  A} . n + 1 KoKo  A Proof of the BPCI – Campi & Gronchi, Adv. Math Proposition [Shephard, Israel J. Math. 1964]:

KoKo Let K t be a shadow system with speed function  and define Then K t is the projection of K o onto e n + 1 along e n + 1 – tv. K o = conv{(x,  (x)): x  A} . n + 1  Proposition [Shephard, Israel J. Math. 1964]: A Proof of the BPCI – Campi & Gronchi, Adv. Math. 2002

Mixed Volumes V( 1 K 1 + … + m K m ) =  i 1 … i n V(K i 1,…,K i n ) A Proof of the BPCI – Campi & Gronchi, Adv. Math If K t, K 1, …, K n are shadow systems, then V(K 1,…,K n ) is convex in t, in particular V(K t ) is convex tt tt Properties of Shadow Systems: Steiner symmetrization is a special volume preserving shadow system

If K t, K 1, …, K n are shadow systems, then V(K 1,…,K n ) is convex in t, in particular V(K t ) is convex Steiner symmetrization is a special volume preserving shadow system tt tt A Proof of the BPCI – Campi & Gronchi, Adv. Math Properties of Shadow Systems: K v v  v

If K t, K 1, …, K n are shadow systems, then V(K 1,…,K n ) is convex in t, in particular V(K t ) is convex Steiner symmetrization is a special volume preserving shadow system tt tt A Proof of the BPCI – Campi & Gronchi, Adv. Math Properties of Shadow Systems: K v v  v S v K = K 1 2

If K t, K 1, …, K n are shadow systems, then V(K 1,…,K n ) is convex in t, in particular V(K t ) is convex Steiner symmetrization is a special volume preserving shadow system tt tt A Proof of the BPCI – Campi & Gronchi, Adv. Math Properties of Shadow Systems: KK1K1 v v  v S v K = K 1 2

 K =  K [– x,x] dx implies V(  K ) =  …  V([– x 1, x 1 ],…, [– x n, x n ]) dx 1 …dx n. KK A Proof of the BPCI – Campi & Gronchi, Adv. Math First step: dx  K t =  K [– x,x] t

implies V(  K t ) =  …  V([– x 1, x 1 ] t,…, [– x n, x n ] t ) dx 1 …dx n. KK dx  K t =  K [– x,x] t First step: Second step: V(  (S v K )) = V(  K )  V(  K 0 ) + V(  K 1 ) Since V(  K 0 ) = V(  K ) and V(  K 1 ) = V(  K ) this yields V(  (S v K ))  V(  K ) V(  (S v K ))  V(  K ). A Proof of the BPCI – Campi & Gronchi, Adv. Math. 2002

"=" only for ellipsoids V(K ) n – 1 V(  * K )  V(B) n – 1 V(  * B) Theorem [Petty, 1971]: If K , then PPI and BPCI "=" only for centered ellipsoids V(K ) – (n + 1) V(  K )  V(B) – (n + 1) V(  B) Theorem [Busemann-Petty, 1961]: If K , then Lutwak, Yang, Zhang, J. Diff. Geom & 2010 S v  * K   * (S v K ) S v  K   (S v K ) and

Valuations on Convex Bodies Def inition: valuation A function  :  is called a valuation if  (K  L) +  (K  L) =  (K ) +  (L) whenever K  L . The Theory of Valuations: Abardia, Alesker, Bernig, Fu, Goodey, Groemer, Haberl, Hadwiger, Hug, Ludwig, Klain, McMullen, Parapatits, Reitzner, Schneider, Wannerer, Weil, …  (K  L) +  (K  L) =  (K ) +  (L) Minkowski valuation A map  :  is called a Minkowski valuation if

 (K  L) +  (K  L) =  (K ) +  (L) Minkowski valuation A map  :  is called a Minkowski valuation if Valuations on Convex Bodies Def inition: whenever K  L . Trivial examples are Id and – IdExamples:  is a Minkowski valuation  is a Minkowski valuation

SL(n) contravariant A map  :  is a continuous and SL(n) contravariant Minkowski valuation if and only if Classif ication of Minkowski Valuations  = c  for some c  0. Theorem [Haberl, J. EMS 2011]: First such characterization results of  and  were obtained by Ludwig (Adv. Math. 2002; Trans. AMS 2005). oRemarks: SL(n) covariant The map  :  is the only non-trivial continuous SL(n) covariant Minkowski valuation. o SL(n) contravariance  (AK ) = A – T  (K ), A  SL(n)

The Isoperimetric and the Sobolev Inequality Sobolev Inequality: If f  C c ( ), then ||  f || 1  n  n || f ||  1 n n n – 1 n – 1 Notation f || p =  || | f (x)| p dx 1/p Isoperimetric Inequality: V(K )V(K )  S(K )S(K ) nnnn 1 n n n – 1 n – 1 [Federer & Fleming, Ann. Math. 1960] [Maz‘ya, Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 1960]

Aff ine Zhang – Sobolev Inequality Theorem [Zhang, J. Diff. Geom. 1999]: n  n || f || 1 n n n – 1 n – 1 The aff ine Zhang – Sobolev inequality is aff ine invariant and equivalent to an extended Petty projection inequality. Remarks: ||  f || 1   || D u f || – n du S n – 1 1 n – 1 2  n – 1 nnnn Notation D u f : = u.  f If f  C c ( ), then  It is stronger than the classical Sobolev inequality.

L p Sobolev Inequality If 1 < p < n and f  C c ( ), then  Theorem [Aubin, JDG; Talenti, AMPA; 1976]: ||  f || p  c n, p || f || p * Notation p* :=p* := np n – p Remarks: The proof is based on Schwarz symmetrization.

Schwarz Symmetrization Def inition: distribution function The distribution function of f  C c ( ) is def ined by  µ f (t) = V({x  : | f (x)| > t}). f (x) = sup{t > 0: µ f (t) >  n ||x||}. Schwarz symmetral The Schwarz symmetral f of f is def ined by f µ f = µ f f

L p Sobolev Inequality Theorem [Aubin, JDG; Talenti, AMPA; 1976]: ||  f || p  c n, p || f || p * Remarks: The isoperimetric inequality is the geometric core of the proof for every 1 < p < n. Notation p* :=p* := np n – p The proof is based on Schwarz symmetrization. Polya – Szegö inequality Using the Polya – Szegö inequality ||  f || p  ||  f || p the proof is reduced to a 1-dimensional problem. If 1 < p < n and f  C c ( ), then 

Sharp Aff ine L p Sobolev Inequality Theorem [Lutwak, Yang, Zhang, J. Diff. Geom. 2002]: c n, p || f || p *   || D u f || – n du S n – 1 1 n – p The aff ine L p Sobolev inequality is aff ine invariant and stronger than the classical L p Sobolev inequality. Remarks: If 1 < p < n und f  C c ( ), then  an, pan, p The normalization a n,p is chosen such that  || D u f || – n du S n – 1 1 n – p a n, p = ||  f || p.

For each p > 1 a new aff ine isoperimetric inequality is needed in the proof. Sharp Aff ine L p Sobolev Inequality Theorem [Lutwak, Yang, Zhang, J. Diff. Geom. 2002]: If 1 < p < n und f  C c ( ), then  affinePólya – Szegö inequality Proof. Based on affine version of the Pólya – Szegö inequality: Remark: For all p  1 ( * ) was established by [Cianchi, LYZ, Calc. Var. PDE 2010].  || D u f || – n du S n – 1 1 n – p If 1 ≤ p < n and f  C c ( ), then  || D u f || – n du S n – 1 1 n – p . [Zhang, JDG 1999] & [LYZ, JDG 2002]. (*)(*) c n, p || f || p *   || D u f || – n du S n – 1 1 n – p an, pan, p 

Petty's Projection Inequality Revisited "=" only for ellipsoids V(K ) n – 1 V(  * K )  V(B) n – 1 V(  * B) Theorem [Petty, 1971]: If K , then h(  K,u) = vol n – 1 (K | u  ) =  |u. v| dS(K,v). S n – Cauchy‘s Projection Formula: If K , then where the surface area measure S(K,. ) is determined by =  h(L,v) dS(K,v). S n – 1 V(K + t L) – V(K ) nV 1 (K, L ) = lim t  0 + t, p  | u. v | dS p (K,v), p p h(  p K,u) p = c n, p S n – 1 p Def inition [LYZ, 2000]: L p projection body  p K For p > 1 and K  the L p projection body  p K is def ined by o L pp where the L p surface area measure S p (K,. ) is determined by p p =  h(L,v) p dS p (K,v). S n – 1 p V(K + p t. L) – V(K ) p V p (K, L ) = lim t  0 + t n p L p Minkowski Addition h(K + p t. L,. ) p = h(K,. ) p + t h(L,. ) p

p  | u. v | dS p (K,v), p p h(  p K,u) p = c n, p S n – 1 p Def inition [LYZ, 2000]: L p projection body  p K For p > 1 and K  the L p projection body  p K is def ined by o L pp where the L p surface area measure S p (K,. ) is determined by p p =  h(L,v) p dS p (K,v). S n – 1 p V(K + p t. L) – V(K ) p V p (K, L ) = lim t  0 + t n p The L p Petty Projection Inequality "=" only for centered ellipsoids V(K ) n/p – 1 V(  p K )  V(B) n/p – 1 V(  p B) Theorem [LYZ, J. Diff. Geom. 2000]: ** If K , then o The proof is based on Steiner symmetrization:Remarks: S v  * K   * (S v K ). pp Via Class Reduction an L p BPCI was deduced from the L p PPI by LYZ (J. Diff. Geom. 2000). A direct proof of the L p BPCI using Shadow Systems was given by Campi & Gronchi (Adv. Math. 2002).

Def inition: L p Minkowski valuation, if We call  :  an L p Minkowski valuation, if  (K  L) + p  (K  L) =  K + p  L whenever K  L . L p Minkowski Valuations SL(n) contravariant A map  :  is an SL(n) contravariant L p Minkowski valuation if and only if for all P , c 1.  p P + p c 2.  p P + –  P = for some c 1, c 2  0. Theorem [Parapatits, 2011+; Ludwig, TAMS 2005]: oo o oo Notation denotes the set of convex polytopes containing the origin. o

Asymmetric L p Projection Bodies Def inition: where (u. v)  = max{  u. v, 0}..  p K + p.  p K. + – p K :=p K := (symmetric) L p projection body  p K The (symmetric) L p projection body  p K isRemark:   ( u. v )  dS p (K,v), h(  p K,u) p = a n, p S n – 1 p asymmetric L p projection body  p K For p > 1 and K  the asymmetric L p projection body  p K is def ined by o  

General L p Petty Projection Inequalities Theorem [Haberl & S., J. Diff. Geom. 2009]: If  p K is the convex body def ined by  p K = c 1.  p K + p c 2.  p K, + – then "=" only for ellipsoids centered at the origin V(K ) n/p – 1 V(  p K )  V(B) n/p – 1 V(  p B) ** Theorem [Haberl & S., J. Diff. Geom. 2009]: If  p B = B, then V(  p K )  V(  p K )  V(  p K ) * *,*, * "=" only if  p =  p 

General L p Petty Projection Inequalities Theorem [Haberl & S., J. Diff. Geom. 2009]: If  p K is the convex body def ined by  p K = c 1.  p K + p c 2.  p K, + – then "=" only for ellipsoids centered at the origin V(K ) n/p – 1 V(  p K )  * Theorem [Haberl & S., J. Diff. Geom. 2009]: If  p B = B, then V(  p K )  V(  p K )  V(  p K ) * *,*, * "=" only if  p =  p   V(B)n/p V(B)n/p V(K ) n/p – 1 V(  p K ) *,*,

Asymmetric Aff ine L p Sobolev Inequality Theorem [Haberl & S., J. Funct. Anal. 2009]: Remarks: The asymmetric aff ine L p Sobolev inequality is stronger than the aff ine L p Sobolev inequality of LYZ for p > 1. The aff ine L 2 Sobolev inequality of LYZ is equivalent via an aff ine transformation to the classiscal L 2 Sobolev inequality; the asymmetric inequality is not! c n, p || f || p *   || D u f || – n du S n – 1 1 n – p 2 1 p +   || D u f || – n du S n – 1 1 n – p Notation D u f : = max{D u f, 0} + If 1 < p < n and f  C c ( ), then 

An Asymmetric Aff ine Polya – Szegö Inequality Theorem [Haberl, S. & Xiao, Math. Ann. 2011]:  || D u f || – n du S n – 1 1 n – p + If p  1 and f  C c ( ), then   || D u f || – n du S n – 1 1 n – p + Remark: The proof uses a convexification procedure which is based on the solution of the discrete data case of the L p Minkowski problem [Chou & Wang, Adv. Math. 2006].

[Haberl, S. & Xiao, Math. Ann. 2011]: [Haberl, S. & Xiao, Math. Ann. 2011]: Sharp Affine Gagliardo-Nirenberg Inequalities If 1 0,  Theorem  d n, p,q || f || q  – 1 || f || r Remarks: These sharp Gagliardo-Nirenberg inequalities interpolate between the L p Sobolev and the L p logarithmic Sobolev inequalities (Del Pino & Dolbeault, J. Funct. Anal 2003). A proof using a mass-transportation approach was given by Cordero-Erausquin, Nazaret, Villani (Adv. Math. 2004) ||  f || p   [Del Pino & Dolbeault, JMPA 2002]: [Del Pino & Dolbeault, JMPA 2002]:  || D u f || – n du S n – 1  n – p + Other Affine Analytic Inequalities include … Affine (Asymmetric) Log-Sobolev Inequalities Haberl, Xiao, S. (Math. Ann. '11) Affine Moser-Trudinger and Morrey-Sobolev Inequalities Cianchi, LYZ (Calc. Var. PDE '10)

The Orlicz-Petty Projection Inequality   dV(K,u) ≤ 1.  h(   K,x) = inf > 0: S n – 1 Def inition [LYZ, 2010]: Orlicz projection body   K For K  the Orlicz projection body   K is def ined by o Suppose that  :  [0,  ) is convex and  (0) = 0. x. u h(K,u) Normalized Cone Measure  h(K,u) dS(K,u)  V K (  ) = 1 nV(K )

An Orlicz BPCI was also established by LYZ (J. Diff. Geom. 2010) and later by Paouris & Pivovarov. The Orlicz-Petty Projection Inequality "=" only for centered ellipsoids V(K ) – 1 V(   K )  V(B) – 1 V(   B) Theorem [LYZ, Adv. Math. 2010]: ** If K , then o Remark: For  (t) = | t | p (  (t) = max{0, t} p ) the Orlicz PPI becomes the (asymmetric) L p PPI. The proof is based on Steiner symmetrization: S v  * K   * (S v K )    dV(K,u) ≤ 1.  h(   K,x) = inf > 0: S n – 1 Def inition [LYZ, 2010]: Orlicz projection body   K For K  the Orlicz projection body   K is def ined by o Suppose that  :  [0,  ) is convex and  (0) = 0. x. u h(K,u) However, NO CLASS REDUCTION!

Open Problem – How strong is the PPI really?Question: Suppose that   MVal SO(n) has degree n – 1 and  B = B. V(K ) n – 1 V(  * K )  V(B) n ? V(K ) n – 1 V(  * K ) Is it true that MVal SO(n) : = MVal SO(n) : = {  continuous Minkowski valuation, which is translation in- and SO(n) equivariant translation in- and SO(n) equivariant}Notation: Obstacle: In general S v  * K   * (S v K ). Theorem [Haberl & S., 2011+]: If n = 2 and  is even, then this is true! Work in progress [Haberl & S., 2011+]: If n  3 and  is „generated by a zonoid“, then this is true!