Timeline for Notion of smoothness for set-valued functions
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 9, 2010 at 13:09 | vote | accept | Willie Wong | ||
| Sep 9, 2010 at 13:09 | comment | added | Willie Wong | I'm accepting this one since it is probably the easiest to implement in the case I am considering; also because Deane and Sergei both gave essentially the same answer in their comments. Thanks to everyone who helped out. Cheers. | |
| Sep 8, 2010 at 21:49 | comment | added | Tom LaGatta | Willie, I'm certain that the full Levi-Civita connection is unnecessary-- it's just the one that most readily came to mind. I would not at all be surprised if this is equivalent to a Finsler-geometry notion of smoothness. | |
| Sep 8, 2010 at 18:33 | comment | added | Willie Wong | If I pare this down a bit, it seems to be equivalent to what Sergei Ivanov proposed in the comments above. | |
| Sep 8, 2010 at 18:25 | comment | added | Willie Wong | I rather like this idea. I am wondering if perhaps the use of the Levi-Civita connection is unnecessary. It seems to me that a change to a different torsion-free connection should only introduce an O(t) error term. Ideally the notion of smoothness should be independent of the actual choice of connection. | |
| Sep 8, 2010 at 17:33 | history | edited | Tom LaGatta | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added summary
|
| Sep 8, 2010 at 16:32 | history | answered | Tom LaGatta | CC BY-SA 2.5 |