In this section, we consider two piecewise quadratic functions, whose pieces define the Voronoi tessellation and its dual Delaunay mosaic. While the main message of this paper is that the two are of the same kind, we use the words ‘tessellation’ and ‘mosaic’ to verbally break the symmetry. The main result is that these two functions and their piecewise linear average have the same critical points.
Piecewise Quadratic and Piecewise Linear Functions
Recall that \({{\,\mathrm{env}\,}}, {{\,\mathrm{end}\,}}:{{{\mathbb {R}}}}^d \rightarrow {{{\mathbb {R}}}}\) are piecewise linear convex functions. Comparing them with \({\varpi }\), we get two piecewise quadratic functions, \({{\,\mathrm{vor}\,}}, {{\,\mathrm{del}\,}}:{{{\mathbb {R}}}}^d \rightarrow {{{\mathbb {R}}}}\), and one piecewise linear function, \({{\,\mathrm{sd}\,}}:{{{\mathbb {R}}}}^d \rightarrow {{{\mathbb {R}}}}\), defined by
$$\begin{aligned} {{\,\mathrm{vor}\,}}(x)&= {\varpi }(x) - {{\,\mathrm{env}\,}}(x) , \end{aligned}$$
(5)
$$\begin{aligned} {{\,\mathrm{del}\,}}(x)&= {{\,\mathrm{end}\,}}(x) - {\varpi }(x) , \end{aligned}$$
(6)
$$\begin{aligned} {{\,\mathrm{sd}\,}}(x)&= \frac{{{\,\mathrm{end}\,}}(x) - {{\,\mathrm{env}\,}}(x)}{2}= \frac{{{\,\mathrm{del}\,}}(x) + {{\,\mathrm{vor}\,}}(x)}{2} . \end{aligned}$$
(7)
As illustrated in Fig. 3, \({{\,\mathrm{del}\,}}\) dominates \({{\,\mathrm{vor}\,}}\), which implies that their average, \({{\,\mathrm{sd}\,}}\), is sandwiched between them.
To prove this formally, we introduce the common subdivision of the tessellation and the mosaic, denoted \({\mathrm{Sd}{({B})}}\), which consists of all cells \(\gamma = \tau \cap \sigma ^*\) with \(\tau \in {\mathrm{Vor}^{}{({B})}}\) and \(\sigma ^* \in {\mathrm{Del}_{}{({B})}}\). Since \(\tau \) and \(\sigma ^*\) are convex, so is \(\gamma \). The restrictions of \({{\,\mathrm{del}\,}}\) and \({{\,\mathrm{vor}\,}}\) to \(\gamma \) are quadratic, while the restriction of \({{\,\mathrm{sd}\,}}\) to \(\gamma \) is linear.
Lemma 3.1
(sandwich) Let \(B \subseteq {{{\mathbb {R}}}}^d \times {{{\mathbb {R}}}}\) be a Delone set of weighted points. Then \({{\,\mathrm{del}\,}}(x) \ge {{\,\mathrm{sd}\,}}(x) \ge {{\,\mathrm{vor}\,}}(x)\) for every \(x \in {{{\mathbb {R}}}}^d\).
Proof
Let \(a \in {{{\mathbb {R}}}}^d \times {{{\mathbb {R}}}}\) such that \({f_{a}} ({p_{a}}) = {{\,\mathrm{env}\,}}({p_{a}})\). The lifted point of a lies above the hyperplane of b, which implies \({f_{a}} ({p_{a}}) \ge {g_{b}} ({p_{a}})\) for all \(b \in B\), with equality at least once. Since the polarity transform preserve sidedness, we have \({f_{b}} ({p_{b}}) \ge {g_{a}} ({p_{b}})\), for all \(b \in B\), and therefore \({{\,\mathrm{end}\,}}(y) \ge {g_{a}} (y)\) for all \(y \in {{{\mathbb {R}}}}^d\), which includes \(y = {p_{a}}\). Writing \(x = {p_{a}}\), this implies
$$\begin{aligned} {{\,\mathrm{del}\,}}(x) - {{\,\mathrm{vor}\,}}(x) = {{\,\mathrm{end}\,}}(x) + {{\,\mathrm{env}\,}}(x) - 2 {\varpi }(x)\ge {g_{a}} (x) + {f_{a}} (x) - 2 {\varpi }(x) , \end{aligned}$$
in which the right-hand side vanishes because of (3). This implies the claimed inequalities. \(\square \)
The inequalities in Lemma 3.1 imply that the sublevel sets and the superlevel sets of the three functions are nested:
$$\begin{aligned} {{\,\mathrm{del}\,}}^{-1} (-\infty , t]\subseteq {{\,\mathrm{sd}\,}}^{-1} (- \infty , t]\subseteq {{\,\mathrm{vor}\,}}^{-1} (-\infty , t] , \end{aligned}$$
(8)
$$\begin{aligned} {{\,\mathrm{del}\,}}^{-1} [t, \infty )\supseteq {{\,\mathrm{sd}\,}}^{-1} [t, \infty )\supseteq {{\,\mathrm{vor}\,}}^{-1} [t, \infty ) . \end{aligned}$$
(9)
Figure 4 illustrates the sublevel set of \({{\,\mathrm{del}\,}}\) and the superlevel set of \({{\,\mathrm{vor}\,}}\), for a common value t, together with the channel between these two sets. We will see shortly that the three functions share the critical points, at which they all agree.
Three Auxiliary Results
We need auxiliary results to prove that the functions defined in (5)–(7) share the critical points and values, three of which will be presented in this subsection. The first is a new combinatorial statement about Voronoi tessellations and Delaunay mosaics, which is interesting in its own right.
Theorem 3.2
(excluded crossing) Let \(B \subseteq {{{\mathbb {R}}}}^d \times {{{\mathbb {R}}}}\) be a Delone set of weighted points, let \(\mu \ne \nu \) be cells in \({\mathrm{Vor}^{}{({B})}}\) and recall that \(\mu ^*, \nu ^*\) are their dual cells in \({\mathrm{Del}_{}{({B})}}\). If \(\mathrm{int\,}{\mu } \cap \nu ^* \ne \emptyset \), then \(\mathrm{int\,}{\nu } \cap \mu ^* = \emptyset \).
Proof
To reach a contradiction, assume that both intersections are non-empty, so we can choose points \(x \in \mathrm{int\,}{\mu } \cap \nu ^*\) and \(y \in \mathrm{int\,}{\nu } \cap \mu ^*\). Since the interiors of \(\mu \) and \(\nu \) are disjoint, we have \(x \ne y\). Let \(M, N \subseteq B\) be such that \(\mu = {\mathrm{cell}{({M})}}\) and \(\nu = {\mathrm{cell}{({N})}}\). By definition of a cell, x has the same power distance from all \(a \in M\), and a strictly larger power distance from all \(b \in B \setminus M\). Write \(R_M = {{\pi }_{a}}(x)\) with \(a \in M\), and write \(R_N = {{\pi }_{c}}(y)\) with \(c \in N\). Assume without loss of generality that \(R_N \ge R_M\). Then every weighted point \(a \in M\) satisfies \({{\pi }_{a}}(y) \ge R_N \ge R_M = {{\pi }_{a}}(x)\), so \({\Vert {y}-{{p_{a}}}\Vert } \ge {\Vert {x}-{{p_{a}}}\Vert }\). Drawing the perpendicular bisector of x and y, this implies that all \({p_{a}}\) with \(a \in M\) lie in the closed half-space that contains x. Since y lies outside this half-space, it is not contained in the convex hull of the \({p_{a}}\) with \(a \in M\), but this contradicts \(y \in \mu ^*\). \(\square \)
We remark that we take the interiors of \(\mu \) and \(\nu \) so that the two hypothesized intersection points are different. This detail is a crucial aspect of the proof. Indeed, it is possible to have \(\mu \cap \nu ^* \ne \emptyset \) and \(\nu \cap \mu ^* \ne \emptyset \): let \(\nu ^*\) be a right-angled triangle in \({{{\mathbb {R}}}}^2\) and \(\mu ^*\) its longest edge. Then \(\nu \) is the circumcenter of the triangle, which lies on \(\mu ^*\), and \(\mu \) has \(\nu \) as an endpoint.
Write \({{{\mathbb {S}}}}^{d-1}\) for the unit sphere in \({{{\mathbb {R}}}}^d\). The second result is a geometric statement about the common intersection of hemispheres, which are closed subsets of \({{{\mathbb {S}}}}^{d-1}\) bounded by great-spheres of dimension \(d-2\). Note that a unit vector, \(e \in {{{\mathbb {S}}}}^{d-1}\), defines both a point as well as a hemisphere, namely the one whose points \(y \in {{{\mathbb {S}}}}^{d-1}\) satisfy \({\langle e , y \rangle } \le 0\).
Lemma 3.3
(hemispheres) The common intersection of a collection of hemispheres of \({{{\mathbb {S}}}}^{d-1}\) is either contractible or a \((p-1)\)-dimensional great-sphere with \(0 \le p \le d\).
Proof
Let \(E \subseteq {{{\mathbb {S}}}}^{d-1}\) be the set of vectors defining the hemispheres in the given collection. If \(E \ne \emptyset \) and there is a point \(x\in {{{\mathbb {S}}}}^{d-1}\) with \({\langle e , x \rangle } < 0\) for all \(e \in E\), then the hemispheres have a non-empty and contractible common intersection. Otherwise, let \(x \in {{{\mathbb {S}}}}^{d-1}\) such that \({\langle e , x \rangle } \le 0\), for all \(e \in E\), with equality for a minimum number of vectors. If x does not exist, then the intersection of hemispheres is empty, which is the case \(p = 0\) in the claimed statement. When x exists, it may not be unique, but the vectors e for which the scalar product vanishes are unique. Similarly, the linear span of these vectors is unique, and letting \(0 \le d-p\le d\) be its dimension, the common intersection of the hemispheres is a \((p-1)\)-dimensional great-sphere. The case \(p = d\) corresponds to an empty collection of hemispheres so that the common intersection is the entire \({{{\mathbb {S}}}}^{d-1}\). \(\square \)
The third result is an elementary fact in linear algebra. For \(1 \le i \le k\), let \(g_i :{{{\mathbb {R}}}}^d \rightarrow {{{\mathbb {R}}}}\) be a linear function with gradient \(\nabla g_i \in {{{\mathbb {R}}}}^d\); that is: \(g_i(x) = {\langle x , \nabla g_i \rangle }\) for all \(x \in {{{\mathbb {R}}}}^d\). Note that the gradient of a linear combination of the \(g_i\) is the linear combination of the gradients with the same coefficients. Indeed,
$$\begin{aligned} \sum _{i=1}^k \alpha _i g_i(x)= \sum _{i=1}^k \alpha _i {\langle x , \nabla g_i \rangle }= \left\langle x,\sum _{i=1}^k \alpha _i \nabla g_i\right\rangle . \end{aligned}$$
The linear combination is an affine combination if \(\sum _{i=1}^k \alpha _i = 1\). The gradients of the family of affine combinations of the \(g_i\) are thus the affine combinations of the \(\nabla g_i\). This is a plane of some dimension between 0 and d. Whatever its dimension, this plane contains a unique point at minimum distance from the origin. In other words, there is a unique affine combination of the \(g_i\) with shortest gradient.
Lemma 3.4
(shortest gradient) Let \(g_i :{{{\mathbb {R}}}}^d \rightarrow {{{\mathbb {R}}}}\) be linear functions for \(1 \le i \le k\), and let \(g :L \rightarrow {{{\mathbb {R}}}}\) be the largest common restriction of the \(g_i\) to a linear subspace. Then the affine combination of the \(g_i\) that minimizes the length of the gradient satisfies \(\nabla \bigl (\sum _{i=1}^k \alpha _i g_i\bigr ) = \nabla g\).
Proof
Since g is the restriction of \(g_i\) to L, we have \({\langle \nabla g_i , \nabla g \rangle } = {\langle \nabla g , \nabla g \rangle }\); that is: \(\nabla g\) is the projection of \(\nabla g_i\) onto the line spanned by \(\nabla g\). This is true for all \(1 \le i \le k\) and therefore also for any affine combination of the \(g_i\):
$$\begin{aligned} \left\langle \nabla \! \left( \sum _{i=1}^k \alpha _i g_i\right) ,\nabla g\right\rangle = \sum _{i=1}^k \alpha _i {\langle \nabla g_i , \nabla g \rangle }= {\langle \nabla g , \nabla g \rangle } . \end{aligned}$$
It follows that the gradient of any affine combination has length at least \({\Vert {\nabla g}\Vert }\), and the affine combination whose gradient agrees with the gradient of g minimizes the length of the gradient. \(\square \)
In- and Out-Links
This subsection presents two topological results about vector fields defined by convex polytopes, \(P, Q \subseteq {{{\mathbb {R}}}}^d\), whose dimensions are complementary, \(p = \mathrm{dim\,}{P}\) and \(q = \mathrm{dim\,}{Q}\) with \(p+q = d\), and whose affine hulls intersect in a single point. We write \(P \times Q\) for the Minkowski sum, which is a convex polytope of dimension d. Its boundary is a topological \((d-1)\)-sphere, which can be seen as the union of a thickened \((p-1)\)-sphere and a thickened \((q-1)\)-sphere: \(\partial (P \times Q) = ( \partial P \times Q) \cup (P \times \partial Q)\). Indeed, for every \(s \in \partial (P \times Q)\), there are unique points \(y \in P\) and \(z \in Q\) such that \(s = y + z\), and at least one of y and z belongs to the respective boundary. We are interested in \(\psi :\partial (P \times Q) \rightarrow {{{\mathbb {S}}}}^{d-1}\) defined by mapping \(s = y+z\) to \(\psi (s) = (y-z) / {\Vert {y}-{z}\Vert }\); see Fig. 5 for an illustration.
The significance of this choice of vector field will become clear shortly. To study \(\psi \), we consider the normal cone of a point \(s \in \partial (P \times Q)\), denoted \(\mathbf{n}(s)\), which is the collection of vectors \(v \in {{{\mathbb {S}}}}^{d-1}\) such that \({\langle v , x-s \rangle } \le 0\) for all \(x \in P \times Q\). Using this notion, we introduce the in-link and out-link of P and Q:
$$\begin{aligned} {{\mathrm{inLk}}{({P},{Q})}}&= \{s \in \partial (P \times Q) \mid \exists v \in \mathbf{n}(s)\ \text {with}\ {\langle \psi (s) , v \rangle } \le 0 \},\\ {{\mathrm{outLk}}{({P},{Q})}}&= \{ s \in \partial (P \times Q) \mid \exists v \in \mathbf{n}(s)\ \text {with}\ {\langle \psi (s) , v \rangle } \ge 0 \}. \end{aligned}$$
By construction of \(\psi \), a facet of \(P \times Q\) either belongs to the in-link in its entirety, or none of the points in its interior belong to the in-link. Furthermore, a face of \(P \times Q\) belongs to the in-link iff it is a face of a facet in the in-link. This implies that the in-link is a union of (closed) facets. By symmetry, so is the out-link. In the left panel of Fig. 5, the in-link consists of the left edge and the right edge of the product, while the out-link consists of the remaining two edges. Both have the homotopy type of the 0-sphere. In the right panel, the in-link is the union of three edges, with the out-link containing the remaining, top edge. Both links are contractible. The important difference is that P and Q intersect in the left panel while they are disjoint in the right panel.
Lemma 3.5
(in- and out-link) Let \(P, Q \subseteq {{{\mathbb {R}}}}^d\) be convex polytopes with affine hulls of complementary dimensions, \(p = \mathrm{dim\,}{P}\), \(q = \mathrm{dim\,}{Q}\), and \(p+q = d\), that intersect in a single point. Then
$$\begin{aligned}&\mathrm{int\,}{P}\cap \mathrm{int\,}{Q} \ne \emptyset \implies {{\mathrm{inLk}}{({P},{Q})}} \simeq {{{\mathbb {S}}}}^{q-1},\ {{\mathrm{outLk}}{({P},{Q})}} \simeq {{{\mathbb {S}}}}^{p-1}, \end{aligned}$$
(10)
$$\begin{aligned}&\quad \quad \quad P \cap Q = \emptyset \implies {{\mathrm{inLk}}{({P},{Q})}}\ \text {and}\ {{\mathrm{outLk}}{({P},{Q})}}\ \text {contractible}, \end{aligned}$$
(11)
$$\begin{aligned}&\begin{aligned}&\mathrm{int\,}{P} \cap \mathrm{int\,}{Q} = \emptyset \ \text {and}\ P \cap Q \ne \emptyset \\&\quad \quad \quad \implies {{\mathrm{inLk}}{({P},{Q})}}\ \text {or}\ {{\mathrm{outLk}}{({P},{Q})}}\ \text {contractible}. \end{aligned} \end{aligned}$$
(12)
Proof
Assume without loss of generality that the affine hulls of P and Q intersect at \(0 \in {{{\mathbb {R}}}}^d\). Every facet E of \(R = P \times Q\) is either of the form \(F\times Q\) or \(P \times G\), in which F and G are facets of P and Q, respectively. Whether or not E belongs to the in-link or the out-link depends on the relative position of E and 0, and the rule is opposite for the two forms. To explain, we let v the unit normal of E and call E visible or invisible (from 0) if \({\langle v , s \rangle }\) is non-positive or non-negative, respectively, for every \(s \in E\). We observe that \({{\mathrm{inLk}}{({P},{Q})}}\) contains all visible facets of the form \(E = F \times Q\) and all invisible facets of the form \(E=P\times G\), while \({{\mathrm{outLk}}{({P},{Q})}}\) contains all invisible facets of the first type and all visible facets of the second type.
In the first case, when \(\mathrm{int\,}{P} \cap \mathrm{int\,}{Q} \ne \emptyset \), 0 belongs to the interior of R. Hence none of the facets of R are visible and all facets are invisible, which implies that the in-link is \(P \times \partial {Q}\), which has the homotopy type of a \((q-1)\)-sphere. Symmetrically, the out-link is \(\partial P \times Q\), which has the homotopy type of the \((p-1)\)-sphere. This proves (10).
To prepare the second case, consider a q-dimensional convex polytope Q in \({{{\mathbb {R}}}}^q\). Letting H be a hyperplane (in \({{{\mathbb {R}}}}^q\)) that separates 0 from Q, we can apply a projective transformation that maps H to infinity, 0 to another point \(0'\), and Q to another convex polytope \(Q'\), all in \({{{\mathbb {R}}}}^q\). We may imagine this transform moves H to infinity, pushing 0 in front of it to disappear to infinity and then return from the other side. Importantly, a facet of Q is visible (invisible) from 0 iff the corresponding facet of \(Q'\) is invisible (visible) from \(0'\). We will make use of this construction shortly.
In the second case, when \(P \cap Q = \emptyset \), not all facets of R are invisible. Since \(0\notin R\), it is outside at least one of P and Q, and we assume without loss of generality \(0 \notin Q\). To distinguish the two types of facets of R, we consider P and Q within their respective affine hulls. Specifically, there is a bijection between the visible facets of R, on the one side, and the visible facets of P inside \(\mathrm{aff\,}{P}\) and of Q inside \(\mathrm{aff\,}{Q}\), on the other side. For the in-link, we need the visible facets of P and the invisible facets of Q, so we apply a projective transformation that maps Q to \(Q'\) and 0 to \(0'\)—all still in \(\mathrm{aff\,}{Q}\)—such that a facet of Q is invisible from 0 iff the corresponding facet of \(Q'\) is visible from \(0'\). We do the transformation within \(\mathrm{aff\,}{Q}\), so it does not affect P. We get a new product, \(R' = P\times Q'\) and we are interested in the part of the boundary that is visible from \(0'\). Since \(R'\) is convex and \(0'\notin R'\), this part of \(\partial R'\) is contractible, which implies that the corresponding part of \(\partial R\), which is \({{\mathrm{inLk}}{({P},{Q})}}\), is also contractible. Symmetrically, the invisible part of \(\partial R'\) is contractible, which implies that \({{\mathrm{outLk}}{({P},{Q})}}\) is also contractible. This proves (11).
In the third case, when \(\mathrm{int\,}{P} \cap \mathrm{int\,}{Q}=\emptyset \) and \(P \cap Q \ne \emptyset \), 0 belongs to \(\partial R\). The facets that contain 0 are both visible and invisible (from 0). Assume without loss of generality that \(0 \in \partial Q\). Then we can move 0 to some point \(0'\), still within \(\mathrm{aff\,}{Q}\) but slightly outside Q, in such a way that a facet of Q is visible from 0 iff it is visible from \(0'\). Now we are in the second case as far as the visible facets of Q are concerned, which implies that the out-link of P and Q is contractible. This proves (12). Note that this construction is not symmetric, as moving 0 to \(0''\) inside Q preserves the invisible facets of Q but does not imply a contractible in-link. However, we need only one contractible link, which completes the proof. \(\square \)
In the application of Lemma 3.5, \(P \times Q\) will be dual to the local neighborhood of a vertex \(u\in {\mathrm{Sd}{({B})}}\). In Fig. 6, the local neighborhood of u is drawn as the dual polytope of \(P\times Q\), denoted \(D = D(P,Q)\), whose \((p-1)\)-dimensional faces correspond to the p-dimensional cells of \({\mathrm{Sd}{({B})}}\) that share u. The d-cells among them correspond to the vertices of \(P \times Q\), and letting \(\gamma \) be such a d-cell and s the corresponding vertex, we will see that \(\psi (x) \in {{{\mathbb {S}}}}^{d-1}\) is the normalized gradient of \({{\,\mathrm{sd}\,}}\) restricted to \(\gamma \). The edges of \({\mathrm{Sd}{({B})}}\) that share u correspond to the facets of \(P \times Q\), and as discussed in Lemma 3.4, the gradient of \({{\,\mathrm{sd}\,}}\) restricted to such an edge is an affine combination of the gradients of \({{\,\mathrm{sd}\,}}\) restricted to the d-cells that share the edge. The gradient either points from u to the other endpoint of the edge, or from that endpoint to u. We can therefore label the vertices of D as having a larger or smaller value of \({{\,\mathrm{sd}\,}}\) than u. In the generic case, this splits the vertices into \(V \sqcup W\). Write F(V) for the full subcomplex of \(\partial D\) with vertices V, which consists of all faces of D whose vertices all belong to V. Symmetrically, F(W) is the full subcomplex of \(\partial D\) with vertices W.
Lemma 3.6
(full subcomplexes) Let \(P \times Q\) be a d-dimensional polytope in \({{{\mathbb {R}}}}^d\), in which P and Q are a p- and a q-dimensional convex polytope with \(p+q = d\), and let \(D = D(P,Q)\) be the dual polytope. After assigning vectors to the surface points as explained above, we have
$$\begin{aligned} {{\mathrm{inLk}}{({P},{Q})}} \simeq F(W)\quad \text {and}\quad {{\mathrm{outLk}}{({P},{Q})}} \simeq F(V) . \end{aligned}$$
Proof
It suffices to prove the first homotopy equivalence. A facet of \(P \times Q\) belongs to the in-link iff the corresponding vertex of D belongs to W. The full subcomplex of \(\partial D\) with vertices W is the nerve of the covering of \({{\mathrm{inLk}}{({P},{Q})}}\) by its facets. The nerve lemma implies that the two have same homotopy type. \(\square \)
Up- and Down-Links
Since the continuous functions we study are not smooth, it is necessary to define what we mean by a critical point. We need a definition that is general enough to apply to piecewise linear and to piecewise quadratic functions. Letting \(f :{{{\mathbb {R}}}}^d \rightarrow {{{\mathbb {R}}}}\) be such a function and \(x \in {{{\mathbb {R}}}}^d\), we write \(S_r = S_r (x)\) for the \((d-1)\)-sphere with radius \(r > 0\) and center x. Letting \(S_r^-\) contain all \(y \in S_r\) with \(f(y) \le 0\), we note that its homotopy type is the same for all sufficiently small radii. Fixing a sufficiently small \({\varepsilon }>0\), we call \(S_{\varepsilon }^-\) the down-link of x and f, denoted \({{\mathrm{dnLk}}{({x},{f})}}\). Symmetrically, \(S_r^+\) contains all points \(y\in S_r\) with \(f(y)\ge 0\), and we call \(S_{\varepsilon }^+\) the up-link of x and f, denoted \({{\mathrm{upLk}}{({x},{f})}}\). We call x a non-critical point of f if at least one of the two links is contractible. All points with topologically more complicated up- and down-links are critical points of f, where we note that the empty link is not contractible. See Fig. 7 for the local pictures that arise for a 2-dimensional piecewise linear function. In the generic case, the down-link is contractible iff the up-link is contractible. The “at least one” rule is used to classify borderline cases as non-critical. An example is the southern hemisphere as the down-link and the northern hemisphere together with the south-pole as the up-link.
To study the critical points of \(f = {{\,\mathrm{vor}\,}}\), we fix \(x \in {{{\mathbb {R}}}}^d\) and let \(A \subseteq B\) be the subset of weighted points such that \(x \in \mathrm{int\,}{{\mathrm{cell}{({A})}}}\). Setting \(h^2 = {{\,\mathrm{vor}\,}}(x)\), x lies on the boundary of \({{\,\mathrm{vor}\,}}^{-1} (- \infty , h^2]\), which is a union of closed balls, namely the balls with centers \({p_{a}}\) and squared radii \({w_{a}} + h^2\), for \(a \in B\). Specifically, by definition of \({\mathrm{cell}{({A})}}\), x lies on the boundary of such a ball if \(a \in A\), and it lies outside the ball if \(a \in B \setminus A\). We get the two links by intersecting the union and its closed complement with a sphere of sufficiently small radius \({\varepsilon }\):
$$\begin{aligned} {{\mathrm{dnLk}}{({x},{{{\,\mathrm{vor}\,}}})}}&= {S_{{\varepsilon }}{({x})}} \cap {{\,\mathrm{vor}\,}}^{-1} (- \infty , h^2] , \\ {{\mathrm{upLk}}{({x},{{{\,\mathrm{vor}\,}}})}}&= {S_{{\varepsilon }}{({x})}} \cap {{\,\mathrm{vor}\,}}^{-1} [h^2, \infty ) . \end{aligned}$$
For each \(a \in A\), the intersection of \({S_{{\varepsilon }}{({x})}}\) with the ball defined by a and \(h^2\) is a closed cap that approximates the complement of a hemisphere arbitrarily closely. The down-link is then the union of the caps defined by the points in A. By Lemma 3.3, there are only \(d+2\) homotopy types for \({{\mathrm{dnLk}}{({x},{{{\,\mathrm{vor}\,}}})}}\), namely either contractible or a (thickened) \((q-1)\)-dimensional great sphere for \(0 \le q \le d\). Symmetrically, there are only \(d+2\) homotopy types for \({{\mathrm{upLk}}{({x},{{{\,\mathrm{vor}\,}}})}}\), namely either contractible or a (thickened) \((p-1)\)-dimensional great sphere with \(p=d-q\). If at least one of the two links is contractible, then x is a non-critical point of \({{\,\mathrm{vor}\,}}\), and otherwise, it is a critical point with index q. The symmetric argument applies to \({{\,\mathrm{del}\,}}\), so x can be either a non-critical point of \({{\,\mathrm{del}\,}}\) or a critical point. In this particular case, we have only \(d+1\) types of critical points, characterized by \(p+q = d\). In these few cases, we call q the index of the critical point.
Coincidental Critical Points
Recall that \({{\,\mathrm{del}\,}}(x) \ge {{\,\mathrm{sd}\,}}(x) \ge {{\,\mathrm{vor}\,}}(x)\) by Lemma 3.1. We strengthen this result by proving further connections between the three functions. Specifically, we prove that every point \(x \in {{{\mathbb {R}}}}^d\) is of the same type for \({{\,\mathrm{vor}\,}}\), \({{\,\mathrm{del}\,}}\), and their average, \({{\,\mathrm{sd}\,}}\). Let \(\gamma = \tau \cap \sigma ^*\) be a d-dimensional cell, with \(b \in B\) and \(c \in C\) such that \(\tau = {\mathrm{cell}{({b})}}\) and \(\sigma ^* = {\mathrm{cell}{({c})}}\). The restriction of \({{\,\mathrm{sd}\,}}\) to \(\gamma \) satisfies
$$\begin{aligned} \begin{aligned} {{\,\mathrm{sd}\,}}(x)&=\frac{{{\,\mathrm{del}\,}}(x) + {{\,\mathrm{vor}\,}}(x)}{2} \\&=\frac{-{{\pi }_{c}}(x)/2+{{\pi }_{b}}(x)/2}{2}=\frac{{\langle x , {p_{c}}-{p_{b}} \rangle }}{2} + \mathrm{const}. \end{aligned} \end{aligned}$$
(13)
Hence, \({p_{c}} - {p_{b}}\) is twice the gradient of \({{\,\mathrm{sd}\,}}\) at every point in \(\mathrm{int\,}{\gamma }\). We use this insight together with Lemma 3.4 to prove the main result of this section.
Theorem 3.7
(coincidental critical points) Let \(B \subseteq {{{\mathbb {R}}}}^d \times {{{\mathbb {R}}}}\) be a Delone set of weighted points. Then \(x \in {{{\mathbb {R}}}}^d\) is a critical point of \({{\,\mathrm{vor}\,}}:{{{\mathbb {R}}}}^d \rightarrow {{{\mathbb {R}}}}\) iff it is a critical point of \({{\,\mathrm{del}\,}}:{{{\mathbb {R}}}}^d \rightarrow {{{\mathbb {R}}}}\) iff it is a critical point of \({{\,\mathrm{sd}\,}}:{{{\mathbb {R}}}}^d \rightarrow {{{\mathbb {R}}}}\), and in this case \({{\,\mathrm{del}\,}}(x) = {{\,\mathrm{sd}\,}}(x) = {{\,\mathrm{vor}\,}}(x)\) and the index of x is defined and the same for all three functions.
Proof
We prove that \(x \in {{{\mathbb {R}}}}^d\) is a critical point (of \({{\,\mathrm{vor}\,}}\), \({{\,\mathrm{del}\,}}\), and \({{\,\mathrm{sd}\,}}\)) iff \(x = \mathrm{int\,}{\nu } \cap \mathrm{int\,}{\nu ^*}\) for a cell \(\nu \in {\mathrm{Vor}^{}{({B})}}\) and its dual cell \(\nu ^* \in {\mathrm{Del}_{}{({B})}}\), and that the index of such a critical point is \(q = \mathrm{dim\,}{\nu ^*}\). Furthermore, \({{\,\mathrm{del}\,}}(x) = {{\,\mathrm{sd}\,}}(x) = {{\,\mathrm{vor}\,}}(x)\) in this case by Lemma 2.1.
We begin with \(f = {{\,\mathrm{vor}\,}}\), which maps every \(x \in {{{\mathbb {R}}}}^d\) to half the smallest power distance to a weighted point in B. The restriction of \({{\,\mathrm{vor}\,}}\) to a Voronoi cell \(\nu \) is also the restriction of a quadratic function on \(\mathrm{aff\,}{\nu }\) to \(\nu \). This quadratic function has a unique minimum, namely at \(y = \mathrm{aff\,}{\nu } \cap \mathrm{aff\,}{\nu ^*}\). The only possibility for a point \(x \in \mathrm{int\,}{\nu }\) to be a critical point of \({{\,\mathrm{vor}\,}}\) is therefore \(x = y\). This implies that \(\mathrm{int\,}{\nu } \cap \mathrm{aff\,}{\nu ^*} \ne \emptyset \) is necessary for x to be critical. Symmetrically, \(\mathrm{aff\,}{\nu } \cap \mathrm{int\,}{\nu ^*} \ne \emptyset \) is necessary, which implies that \(\mathrm{int\,}{\nu } \cap \mathrm{int\,}{\nu ^*} \ne \emptyset \) is necessary. It is easy to see that the latter condition is also sufficient because \({{\,\mathrm{vor}\,}}\) increases along all directions within \(\mathrm{aff\,}{\nu }\) and it decreases in all other directions. The index is the dimension of the affine subspace within which x is a maximum of f, which is \(q=\mathrm{dim\,}{\nu ^*}\), as claimed. The argument for \(f = {{\,\mathrm{del}\,}}\) is symmetric and therefore omitted. The index is still q, and not p as suggested by symmetry, because \({{\,\mathrm{del}\,}}\) maps every \(x \in {{{\mathbb {R}}}}^d\) to the negative of the smallest power distance to a weighted point in C.
The argument for \(f = {{\,\mathrm{sd}\,}}\) is more involved. Since this function is piecewise linear, the only possible critical points are the vertices of \({\mathrm{Sd}{({B})}}\). We assume that cells \(\nu \) and \(\mu ^*\) with complementary dimensions have interiors that are either disjoint or intersect in a single point, which is therefore a vertex of \({\mathrm{Sd}{({B})}}\). Writing \(u = \mathrm{int\,}{\nu } \cap \mathrm{int\,}{\mu ^*}\), we let \(S_{\varepsilon }(u)\) be a sufficiently small sphere centered at u. It intersects a cell of dimension at least 1 of \({\mathrm{Sd}{({B})}}\) iff that cell contains u as one of its vertices. The intersections of these cells with \(S_{\varepsilon }(u)\) define a cell complex dual to the boundary complex of \(P \times Q\), in which \(P = \mu \) and \(Q = \nu ^*\). For every \(v \in {{{\mathbb {S}}}}^{d-1}\), we write \({{\,\mathrm{sd}\,}}_v (u)\) for the slope of \({{\,\mathrm{sd}\,}}\) at u in the direction v. The goal is to prove that the down- and up-links of u and \({{\,\mathrm{sd}\,}}\) are closely related to the in- and out-links of P and Q, namely
$$\begin{aligned} {{\mathrm{dnLk}}{({u},{{{\,\mathrm{sd}\,}}})}} \simeq {{\mathrm{inLk}}{({P},{Q})}} \quad \text {and}\quad {{\mathrm{upLk}}{({u},{{{\,\mathrm{sd}\,}}})}} \simeq {{\mathrm{outLk}}{({P},{Q})}} . \end{aligned}$$
(14)
By Lemma 3.5, the in- and out-links of P and Q either have the homotopy types of \({{{\mathbb {S}}}}^{q-1}\) and \({{{\mathbb {S}}}}^{p-1}\), if \(\mathrm{int\,}{P} \cap \mathrm{int\,}{Q} \ne \emptyset \), or at least one link is contractible, if \(\mathrm{int\,}{P}\cap \mathrm{int\,}{Q}=\emptyset \). Assuming (14), this implies that the down- and up-links of u and \({{\,\mathrm{sd}\,}}\) have the homotopy types of \({{{\mathbb {S}}}}^{q-1}\) and \({{{\mathbb {S}}}}^{p-1}\), if \(\nu = \mu \), and at least one is contractible, if \(\nu \ne \mu \). Indeed, \(\nu \ne \mu \) together with \(\mathrm{int\,}{\nu } \cap \mathrm{int\,}{\mu ^*} \ne \emptyset \) implies \(\mathrm{int\,}{P} \cap \mathrm{int\,}{Q} = \emptyset \) by Theorem 3.2.
We finally prove (14). Recall that every vertex of \(P \times Q\) corresponds to a d-cell of \({\mathrm{Sd}{({B})}}\) incident to u, and every facet corresponds to an edge incident to u. Recall also that the map \(\psi :\partial (P \times Q) \rightarrow {{{\mathbb {S}}}}^{d-1}\) introduced in Sect. 3.3 sends every vertex \(s = y + z\) of \(P \times Q\) to \(\psi (s) = (y-z) / {\Vert {y}-{z}\Vert }\). In the notation of (13), \(y = {p_{c}}\) and \(z = {p_{b}}\), so \(\psi (s)\) is a positive multiple of the gradient of \({{\,\mathrm{sd}\,}}\) restricted to the d-cell in \({\mathrm{Sd}{({B})}}\) that corresponds to s. To continue, we assume without loss of generality that u is the origin of \({{{\mathbb {R}}}}^d\), we consider a facet E of \(P \times Q\), and we let e be the corresponding edge of \({\mathrm{Sd}{({B})}}\) emanating from u. Observe that the gradient of the restriction of \({{\,\mathrm{sd}\,}}\) to the edge e is a constant multiple of the unit normal of E. This puts us in the setting Lemma 3.6, which implies the claimed homotopy equivalence. \(\square \)