In $R^n$ (the real space) we have an open connected set $D$, such that $\partial D$ is triangulable. Can we prove the closure $\bar{D}$ is triangulable or any counterexample?

Furthermore, the $\partial D$ are piecewise algebraic in the question I am considering, I do not know whether this would be helpful for the above statement.

Thanks for any help.

  • $\begingroup$ If $\partial D$ is piecewise algebraic, then there seem to be an obvious way to proceed: find a homeomorphism of $\mathbb R^n$ taking $\partial D$ to a locally finite union of affine simplices, and extend the latter to a triangulation of $\mathbb R^n$, which in particular, should triangulate $\bar D$. $\endgroup$ Oct 6 '16 at 1:55
  • $\begingroup$ Is there any standard way to build the homeomorphism, or how to find this kind of homeomorphism? Is it by gluing? Thanks a lot. $\endgroup$
    – lun zhang
    Oct 6 '16 at 15:37
  • $\begingroup$ If I had all the references I would post it as an answer. Even the case when $\partial D$ is smooth is nontrivial (but course classical). I would search online for "extending a triangulation real algebraic". Once this is done take a regular neigborhood of the subcomplex. Its boundary would be a PL submanifold and you can then extend a triangulation as in Igor Rivin's answer. $\endgroup$ Oct 6 '16 at 20:41
  • $\begingroup$ Here is a reference: see theorem 4.1 in deepblue.lib.umich.edu/handle/2027.42/63851, "Triangulation of Locally Semi-Algebraic Spaces", by Kyle Hofmann (The result is not proved there; rather it points original references). $\endgroup$ Oct 6 '16 at 21:30

In many categories, the answer is known to be yes, see

Emil Saucan, MR 2184196 Note on a theorem of Munkres, Mediterr. J. Math. 2 (2005), no. 2, 215--229.

  • $\begingroup$ I have read the note, and find they are all applied to $C^r$ manifold with boundary. But in my question, the boundary is only piecewise smooth (algebraic), i.e. no $C^r$ structure on the boundary. Will those results still be true (by approximation)? $\endgroup$
    – lun zhang
    Oct 6 '16 at 19:27
  • $\begingroup$ If the boundary is algebraic, the whole set must be semi-algebraic, and Hironaka's result should apply. $\endgroup$ Oct 6 '16 at 19:47
  • $\begingroup$ That would be cool for algebraic part. But which Hironaka's result are you pointing to? Can you kindly offer some reference? Thanks a lot. $\endgroup$
    – lun zhang
    Oct 6 '16 at 21:07
  • $\begingroup$ @lunzhang this one? evernote.com/shard/s24/sh/3a549739-3274-4640-901b-40d9e58e9a71/… $\endgroup$
    – Igor Rivin
    Oct 6 '16 at 21:51
  • $\begingroup$ Good. That seems to be what I try to find. $\endgroup$
    – lun zhang
    Oct 7 '16 at 1:35

Although you do not seem to require that the triangulation of the closure to be compatible with the triangulation of the boundary, it is true in $\mathbb{R}^3$ that a triangulated polyhedron $P$ has a compatible interior tetrahedralization. Bern proved that, if $P$ has $n$ vertices, such a tetrahedralization by $O(n^2)$ tetrahedra exists (and can be found quickly):

Bern, Marshall. "Compatible tetrahedralizations." Fundamenta Informaticae 22.4 (1995): 371-384. (ACM link.)

In fact, he proved all of $\mathbb{R}^3$ can be tetrahedralized compatible with $P$'s surface triangulation (with some tetrahedra having a vertex at $\infty$).

It is interesting that if you change "triangulable" to "hexahedral-able," and ask if the surface mesh can be extended compatibly to an interior mesh, the answer is unknown:

"No algorithm is known to construct hexahedral meshes compatible with an arbitrary given quadrilateral mesh, or even to determine when a compatible hex mesh exists, even for the simple examples shown in Figure 1"


Erickson, Jeff. "Efficiently hex-meshing things with topology." Discrete & Computational Geometry 52.3 (2014): 427-449. (PDF download.)

  • $\begingroup$ So all the above statement for the $\mathbb{R}^3$ space, right? Indeed, I do not require compatibility of triangulation, but want result in $\mathbb{R}^n$ in general $\endgroup$
    – lun zhang
    Oct 6 '16 at 15:40
  • $\begingroup$ @lunzhang: Yes, my references are only to $\mathbb{R}^3$. $\endgroup$ Oct 6 '16 at 16:53

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.