5
$\begingroup$

For a $n$-polygon in $\mathbb{R}^3$ the set of distances between all pairs of vertices is given. (How) is it possible to reconstruct the geometric structure of the polygone?

Symbolically: For a set of coordinates $(x_i,y_i,z_i)$ with $i=1,...,n$ we have given $r_{k} = (x_i -x_j)^2 + (y_i - y_j)^2 + (z_i - z_j)^2$, for $k = 1,...,n(n-1)/2$ without knowing the map $k\rightarrow (i,j)$ and want to know the set of $(x_i,y_i,z_i)$.

It seems clear, that the distances between the points determine the polygon only up to translations and rotations. So we are seeking to determine only 3$n$-6 degrees of freedom and we have $n(n-1)/2$ equations. As well the coordinates are at most determined up to an arbitrary permutation. The question of the assignment of the distances to actual vertices seems a key in the solution.

I have absolutely now clue as to how address the question, I guess the answer will somehow involve group theory.

It is motivated by the determination of molecular structures using diffraction
methods. Its a kind of toy-version (all elements the same) of the so called inverse structure problem. I am doing experimental research on this subject. It is usually solved using model structures (you just assume the type of polygon including the mapping between $k$ and $(i,j)$ and fit the structure parameters (coordinates) to the diffraction data).

(I am also clueless about the correct tags for the disciplines that involves, so sorry for wrong guesses in case).

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ It seems to me that you can construct the triangle $p_1,p_2,p_3$ in whatever orientation you like pretty easily. Then for any other point $p_k$, you have one or two choices for where it must land depending on which side of the initial plane you are looking at. So it does not seem that hard? $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 11, 2015 at 18:23
  • $\begingroup$ Maybe it should be added that one does know the distances only up to a arbitrary permutation of the indices and that an analytic solution of the equations is sought. $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 11, 2015 at 18:46
  • $\begingroup$ The question you asked does not indicate anything about "arbitrary permutations". Can you make that more precise? Do you mean that you have a set of distances between vertices, without knowing which distances go with which vertices? $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 11, 2015 at 18:51
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ See the earlier MO question on "Difference sets," and the beltway reconstruction problem for several references, and this even earlier MO question, "Feasibility of a list of prescribed distances in R^3" on distance geometry. You'll see there is an entire book on Distance geometry and molecular conformation. $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 11, 2015 at 19:33

2 Answers 2

1
$\begingroup$

A related question is as follows: Let $P$ be a polytope in $\mathbb{R}^n$, with say integer vertices.

Consider the new Laurent generating function $$F(x) = \sum_{p,q \in P} x^{p-q}$$, where the sum ranges over all vertices of $P$ (or maybe lattice points of $P$), with the convention $x^a = x_1^{a_1} \dotsm x_n^{a_n}$. Note that $F(x)$ encodes all information you are given, and a bit more.

Is it always possible to recover $P$ from $F(x)$? If no, then your question also has no as an answer.

This might be related to Minkovski sums of polytopes.

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

Check out this quite recent paper of Dokmanic et al (arxiv 1502.07541v2)

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ This is not directly related since in the Euclidian distance matrix you know already the map $k \rightarrow (i,j)$. $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 15, 2015 at 15:34

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .