7
$\begingroup$

$f:\mathbf{R}^d\to \mathbf{R}_{\ge 0}$ is log-concave if $\log(f)$ is concave (and the domain of $\log(f)$ is convex).

Theorem: For all $\sigma$ on the sphere $\Bbb S^{d-1}$ and $r\in \mathbf{R}$, $$ g_\sigma(r) := \int\limits_{\sigma\cdot x=r}f(x)\,\mathrm{d}S(x) $$ is a log-concave function of $r$. (Note: $g$, as a function of $\sigma$ and $r$, is the Radon transform of $f$.)

Question: does this characterize log-concavity? That is, if $g_\sigma(r)$ is log-concave as a function of $r$ for all $\sigma$, is $f$ log-concave?

$\endgroup$

2 Answers 2

5
$\begingroup$

If I understand the question correctly, I think the answer is no.

Start with the following : if $f$ is the indicator function of the unit ball, then the function $g_\sigma(r)$ is strictly log-concave close to 0 (this function does not depend on $\theta$).

Now, let $h$ be the indicator function of the ball of radius $r<1$. Then $f-\epsilon h$ is never log-concave for any $\epsilon>0$, and its Radon transform (which again is independent of $\theta$) remains log-concave if epsilon is small enough.

(this is especially easy to see in dimension 2, in which case the Radon transforms of both $f$ and $h$ are second-degree polynomials on their support)

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Great! Such a simple example, too. $\endgroup$ Oct 23, 2009 at 1:28
6
$\begingroup$

The following answer exploits a wider context, where non-negative functions $f$, viewed as densities of absolutely continuous measures $f(x)dx$, are replaced by non-negative measures $\mu$. Because a concave function unbounded from above is $\equiv+\infty$, a log-concave measure $\mu$ is naturally an absolutely continuous measure with log-concave density.

Therefore the Lebesgue measure over the $2$-dimensional sphere $S^2$ is not log-concave over ${\mathbb R}^3$. Nevertheless, its Radon transform in a direction $\sigma$ is $$g_\sigma=2\pi\chi_{(-1,1)},$$ which is log-concave for every $\sigma$.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ I like this example a lot, since a uniform measure on a sphere is far from log-concave. (And apparently I had never computed its Radon transform.) $\endgroup$ Sep 15, 2010 at 0:18

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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