arXiv:1702.08524v1 [cs.SY] 27 Feb 2017

Local Synchronization of Sampled-Data
Systems on Lie Groups
Philip James McCarthy

Christopher Nielsen

∗†

Abstract
We present a smooth distributed nonlinear control law for local synchronization of identical driftless kinematic agents on a Cartesian product of matrix Lie groups with a connected communication graph. If the
agents are initialized sufficiently close to one another, then synchronization is achieved exponentially fast. We first analyze the special case of
commutative Lie groups and show that in exponential coordinates, the
closed-loop dynamics are linear. We characterize all equilibria of the network and, in the case of an unweighted, complete graph, characterize the
settling time and conditions for deadbeat performance. Using the BakerCampbell-Hausdorff theorem, we show that, in a neighbourhood of the
identity element, all results generalize to arbitrary matrix Lie groups.

1

Introduction

The sampled-data setup is ubiquitous in applied control. In the LTI case, the
plant may be exactly discretized, and a discrete-time controller can be designed
such that closed-loop stability is achieved for non-pathological sampling-periods.
Such stability guarantees cannot generally be enforced for nonlinear plants, as
nonlinear ODEs generally do not have closed-form solutions. The standard approach to nonlinear sampled-data control design, emulation, is to approximate
the discretized plant dynamics. If the sampling-period is sufficiently small, then
the actual closed-loop system is stable. This technique has two key shortcomings [1]: 1) it may not be possible for a given approximate discretization method,
e.g., Euler’s method; 2) it relies on fast sampling, which may not be possible
due to hardware limitations.
The limitations of emulation do not necessarily pose a problem for the class
of systems on matrix Lie groups, which are nonlinear, yet have dynamics that
yield exact closed-form solutions [2], thereby enabling direct design. To our
knowledge, sampled-data control of systems on Lie groups has not yet been
explored in the literature. However, the closely related class of bilinear systems
has been studied in the discrete-time [2] and sampled-data settings [3].
∗ This research is supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of
Canada (NSERC).
† The authors are with the Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of
Waterloo, Waterloo ON, N2L 3G1 Canada. {philip.mccarthy;cnielsen}@uwaterloo.ca

Many engineering systems are modelled on Lie groups. The motion of robots
in a plane is modelled on SE(2) [4], and their motion in space, such as that of
UAVs’, is modelled on SE(3) [5]. Quantum systems evolve on the unitary groups
U(n) [6] and SU(n) [7, 8]. Some circuits can be modelled using Lie groups [9]
while oscillator networks [10] evolve on SO(2).
Synchronization of networks on SE(3) was achieved using passivity in [11].
Synchronization under sampling was studied for a network of Kuramoto-like
oscillators in [12] and harmonic oscillators with a time-varying period in [13],
and path following nonlinear agents in [14], but the analyses in these works were
not conducted from a Lie-theoretic perspective. The Kuramoto network model
was extended from SO(2) to SO(n) in [6]. A framework for coordinated motion
on Lie groups was developed in [15], where the synchronization problem that
we consider is a special case of what the authors call bi-invariant coordination.
In [16], linear consensus algorithms were applied to systems on Lie groups in
continuous-time. The most salient difference between the current paper and [15,
16] is the consideration of the sampled-data setup. Further, in contrast to [16],
we take a global perspective, and explore the geometry of the problem to much
greater depth.
Lie groups are not vector spaces, but their structure facilitates analysis and
control design in global coordinates. The Lie structure has been leveraged, for
example, for motion tracking on SE(3) [17], and the control of UAV [18] and
spacecraft [19] orientation on SO(3). We too take a global perspective in our
control design and, when possible, analysis.
We present a control law that achieves synchronization for a network of identical agents on any matrix Lie group with driftless dynamics with a connected
communication graph. The current paper generalizes and extends the results
of [20], which considered only unweighted graphs with agents on one-parameter
Lie subgroups. The controller requires that each agent have access to its relative state with respect to each of its neighbours. For example, on SE(3), relative
position and orientation can be attained using machine vision [21]. We examine the special case where the error dynamics evolve on a Cartesian product of
one-parameter subgroups – a “generalized cylinder” – and the general case. We
prove that in both cases, that if the agents are initialized sufficiently close to
one another, that synchronization is achieved exponentially fast. For a generalized cylinder, we characterize the performance in the case of an unweighted,
complete graph.

1.1

Notation and Terminology

If N ∈ N, then NN := {1, . . . , N }. Given a matrix M ∈ Cn×n , M > is its
(non-Hermitian) transpose, and λmax (M ) and λmin (M ) are its its eigenvalues of
greatest and least magnitude, respectively. If x ∈ Cn , then kxk is its Euclidean
norm; if M ∈ Cn×n , then kM k is its induced Euclidean norm. Let 1n ∈ Rn
and 0n ∈ Rn denote the column vector of ones and zeros, respectively. Let
0m×n ∈ Rm×n denote the matrix of zeros. Let R− denote the set of nonpositive
real numbers. Given an equivalence relation ∼ on a set R, and an element

x ∈ R, let [x] ∈ R/ ∼ be the coset containing x.
Weighted, directed graphs are used to model communication constraints
between agents. A graph G is a triple (V, E, w) consisting of a finite set of vertices
V = NN , a set of edges E ⊆ V × V, and a weight function w : E → [0, 1] ⊂ R.
The weight wij := w((i, j)) is nonzero only if (i, j) ∈ E. If agent i has access
to its relative state with respect to agent j, then (i, j) ∈ E. Define vertex i’s
neighbour set as Ni := {j ∈ NN : (i, j) ∈ E}. We assume that G has no selfloops. If G is unweighted, then for all i 6= j ∈ NN , wij ∈ {0, 1}. Associated with
G is the Laplacian L ∈ RN ×N , defined elementwise as
(
−wij , i 6= j,
P
Lij =
j∈Ni wij , i = j.
The ith row of the Laplacian L is denoted `i .

2

Sampled-Data Synchronization Problem

We consider a network of N controlled agents, each modelled by the differential
equation


m
X
Ẋi = Xi 
Bi,j ui,j  ,
i ∈ NN .
(1)
j=1

Here Xi ∈ G where G ⊂ GL(n, C) is an m-dimensional connected matrix Lie
group over the complex field C which includes, as a special case, real matrix
Lie groups. The matrices Bi,j are elements of the Lie algebra g, which is a
vector space over a field F equal to either C or R, associated with G, and
ui := (ui,1 , . . . , ui,m ) ∈ Fm is the control input. Note that the Lie algebra of
a complex Lie group G may in fact be a real vector space. For example, the
Lie algebra su(2) of the complex Lie group SU(2) is a vector space over the
field of reals despite its vectors being matrices with possibly complex entries.
Equation (1) is a kinematic model of a system evolving on a matrix Lie group
G. Each agent is assumed to be fully actuated in the sense that
(∀i ∈ NN ) spanF {Bi,1 , . . . , Bi,m } = g.
Under this assumption, without loss of generality, we take the system (1) to be
driftless since the inputs ui , i ∈ NN , can be chosen to cancel any drift vector
field. We are interested in the sampled-data control of this multi-agent system
in which each agent’s control law is implemented on an embedded computer,
which we explicitly model using the setup in Figure 1. The blocks H and S in
Figure 1 are, respectively, the ideal hold and sample operators. Sample and hold
are, respectively, idealized models of A/D and D/A conversion. The following
assumption is made throughout this paper.
Assumption 1. All sample and hold blocks operate at the same period T > 0
and the blocks are synchronized for the multi-agent system (1).
J

Figure 1: Sampled-data agent on a matrix Lie group G.
Under Assumption 1, letting Xi [k] := Xi (kT ) and ui [k] := ui (kT ), the
discretized dynamics of each agent are given by


m
X
Xi+ = Xi exp T
Bi,j ui,j ,
i ∈ NN
(2)
j=1

which is an exact discretization of (1). For each i ∈ NN , define Ωi :=
g. Then the discrete-time dynamics can be compactly expressed as
Xi+ = Xi exp (T Ωi ),

2.1

i ∈ NN .

Pm

j=1

Bi,j ui,j ∈
(3)

The Synchronization Problem

Given a network of N agents with kinematic dynamics (3), we define the error
quantities Eij := Xi−1 Xj , i, j ∈ NN . Observe that Eij = I if, and only if,
Xi = Xj . The error matrix Eij is called left-invariant [22], since for all X ∈ G,
(XXi )−1 (XXj ) = Xi−1 Xj . The class of systems considered has G for its state
space, which is generally not a vector space, so we do not use Xi − Xj as a
measure of error.
Local Synchronization on Matrix Lie Groups : Given a network of N
agents with continuous-time dynamics (1), sampling period T > 0 and an unweighted, connected communication graph G = (V, E), find, if possible, distributed control laws Ωi , i ∈ NN , such that for all initial errors in a neighbourhood of the identity in GN , for all i, j ∈ NN , Eij → I as t → ∞.

By a distributed control law we mean that for each agent i, the control signal
Ωi can depend on Eij only if (i, j) ∈ E. In this paper we propose the distributed
feedback control law

 K1 
Y
1


w
Eijij  
(4)
Ωi := log 
T
j∈Ni

where K ∈ R is a gain and the matrix logarithm need not be the principal logarithm. The control law (4) does not require agent i to know agent j’s state Xj ,
nor its own state Xi , but instead requires knowledge ofQthe relative state Eij .
The expression (4) is well-defined so long as the product j∈Ni Eij has no eigenvalues in R− , as discussed in Section 3. This control law is expressed in global

coordinates but we only prove local exponential stability of the synchronized
state. When the control law (4) is well-defined, the closed-loop discrete-time
dynamics are

 K1
Y w
i ∈ NN
(5)
Xi+ = Xi 
Eijij  ,
j∈Ni

and the synchronization error dynamics are
−1 +
+
Eij
= Xi+
Xj

− K1

 K1
Y w
Y w
=
Eipip 
Xi−1 Xj 
Ejqjq 
p∈Ni

q∈Nj

− K1


=

Y

w

Eipip 

 K1


Eij 

p∈Ni

w

Y

Ejqjq 

.

(6)

q∈Nj

Remark 2.1. The order of multiplication in (4) need not be common to all
agents or even constant.
N
The control law (4) is motivated by exponential coordinates for Lie groups,
classical consensus algorithms in Rn , and the notion of Riemannian mean of
rotations on SO(3), which on a one-parameter subgroup thereof can be explicitly
1
QN
computed as i=1 RiN [23].
A key advantage of direct design over emulation, is that stability can be
guaranteed at the sampling instants. As mentioned in the Introduction, on
SE(3), the relative error Eij can be computed using machine vision, where the
speed of sampling is limited by the frame rate of the camera, for example, 25
Hz [21]. This limits the feasibility of emulation-based design. However, direct
design does not guarantee good performance between sampling instants. But
in the specific case of the plant and problem discussed in this paper, achieving
synchronization at the sampling instants implies synchronization between the
sampling instants.
Proposition 2.2. If Eij [k] = Xi [k]−1 Xj [k] asymptotically approaches I as
k → ∞, then Eij (t) = Xi (t)−1 Xj (t) asymptotically approaches I as t → ∞,
where Xi (t) and Xj (t) evolve according to (1).
Proof. If Eij [k] → I, then the proposed control law (4) satisfies Ωi [k] → 0n×n .
Let 0 < δ < T . Then
−1

lim Eij (kT + δ) = lim exp (δΩi [k])

k→∞

= lim

k→∞
3

k→∞
−1
exp (δΩi [k])

Eij [k] exp (δΩj [k])

lim Eij [k] lim exp (δΩj [k])

k→∞

= I = I.
Since δ is arbitrary, this implies that Eij (t) → I.

k→∞

Proposition 2.2 means that asymptotically stabilizing the set where Eij = I,
for all i, j ∈ NN , at the sample instances is sufficient for solving the synchronization problem. Thus, we can conduct all analysis in the discrete-time setting
and do not rely on T being sufficiently small.
Our main result is the following theorem, which we prove in Section 7.
Theorem 2.3. For any Lie group G with connected communication graph G,
if the gain K of each agent’s controller (4) satisfies (14), then the equilibrium
{Eij = I : i, j ∈ NN } is locally uniformly exponentially stable.

3
3.1

Preliminaries
Functions of matrices

For every nonsingular matrix X ∈ Cn×n there are (infinitely many) A ∈ Cn×n
such that exp (A) = X, see [24, Theorem 1.27]. Every such matrix A is a nonprimary logarithm of X, which we denote by log (X). If, in addition to being
nonsingular, the matrix X has no eigenvalues in R− , then it has a (unique)
principal logarithm.
Theorem 3.1 ([24, Theorem 1.31]). Let X ∈ Cn×n have no eigenvalues in R− .
There is a unique logarithm A ∈ Cn×n of X, all of whose eigenvalues lie in the
strip {z : −π < Im(z) < π}. If X ∈ Rn×n , then A ∈ Rn×n .
The unique matrix A from Theorem 3.1 is called the principal logarithm
of X and is denoted Log(X). Unlike complex numbers, it is not possible to
express log (X) as a function of Log (X) for arbitrary non-singular matrices. If
kX − Ik < 1, then
Log(X) =

∞
X
(−1)k−1
k=1

k

(X − I)k .

(7)

Any matrix logarithm is a right inverse of the matrix exponential, but not
necessarily a left inverse. On a matrix Lie group, the principal logarithm Log
is a left inverse, but only in a neighbourhood of the identity. Choose r > 0
such that (7) converges on {X ∈ G : X = exp (A), kAk < r}, e.g., r = Log(2) is
a valid choice with any Lie group. Larger values of r may be possible for specific
Lie groups. The set
U := {X ∈ G : X = exp (A), A ∈ g, kAk < r}
is an open neighbourhood of I in G in the group topology in which Log : U → g
provides an inverse.
Borrowing from the definition of complex powers of scalars [25, Chapter III,
§6] and the form of the square root of a matrix on a Lie group [26, Lemma 2.14],
we define the Kth root of a matrix in the following way.

Definition 3.2. Let X ∈ Cn×n have no eigenvalues in R− . Given K ∈ R, the
principal Kth root of X is


1
1
K
X := exp
Log(X) .
(8)
K
If X ∈ G, then X 1/K ∈ G, due to the Lie correspondence Log : G → g.
Remark 3.3. If X 1/K is well-defined, then for K ∈ N,
!
K
 1 K
X
1
XK
= exp
Log(X) = exp (Log(X)) = A.
K
i=1
Thus, in this case, X = X 1/K X 1/K · · · X 1/K (K times), which is the intuitive
notion of a Kth root. The somewhat indirect definition (8) allows for Kth roots
for K ∈ R.
N
Throughout this paper, we use an important algebraic property of the logarithm of a matrix power.
Theorem 3.4 ([24, Theorem 11.2]). If X ∈ Cn×n has no eigenvalues in R− ,
then for α ∈ [−1, 1], we have Log(X α ) = α Log(X).

3.2

Exponential Coordinates and One-Parameter Subgroups

Definition 3.5 (One-Parameter Subgroup). Given a Lie group G, a one-parameter
subgroup is a continuous morphism of groups φ : R → G.
Although this terminology is standard, it is technically the image of the
map φ that is a subgroup of G. The subgroup φ(R) ⊂ G is a one-dimensional
manifold and there exists a unique H ∈ g such that φ(θ) = exp(θH) for all
θ ∈ R [26, Theorem 2.13].
To generalize the concept of one-parameter subgroups to higher dimensional
manifolds, we consider generalized cylinders. A generalized cylinder is an
m-dimensional manifold that is diffeomorphic to Tk × Rm−k . Such a diffeomorphism exists if and only if there exist m commutative and everywhere-linearlyindependent vector fields on the manifold [27, pg. 274]. If the manifold is a Lie
group G, then this simplifies to its Lie algebra g having a commutative basis.
Let G be such a manifold and fix a commutative basis H := {H1 , . . . , Hm } for
its Lie algebra g. Consider the one-parameter groups φi : R → G associated with
each Hi . The image of φ(t1 , . . . , tm ) := φ1 (t1 )φ2 (t2 ) · · · φm (tm ) is G. Without
loss of generality, let φi , i ∈ Nk , 0 ≤ k ≤ m have nonzero kernel, and let φi ,
i ∈ {k + 1, . . . , m} have zero kernel.
Fixing such a basis H, the Log map induces local coordinates on G ∩ U .
Given X ∈ G, by commutativity of H1 , . . . , Hm ,
X = exp(t1 H1 ) · · · exp(tm Hm )
= exp(t1 H1 + · · · + tm Hm ).

If X ∈ G ∩ U , then Log(X) = t1 H1 + · · · + tm Hm . Then, by linear independence
of H1 , . . . , Hm , t1 , . . . , tm can be uniquely determined, yielding local coordinates (t1 , . . . , tm ) ∈ Rm . Thus, a Lie group G can be locally identified with an
open subset of the vector space Rm containing the origin. Note that, by commutativity of G, these local coordinates coincide with the familiar exponential
coordinates of both the first and second kind.

3.3

Properties of the composed flow

The map φ : Rm → G, defined in the previous section, is critical to our analysis
throughout this paper. In this section, we establish important properties of
φ when G is a generalized cylinder, we then show that these properties hold
approximately for any Lie group in a neighbourhood of the identity.
By definition, φ is surjective onto its image, but it is not necessarily injective.
Let p : Rm → Rm / Ker(φ) be the projection of Rm onto the quotient space
Rm / Ker(φ). There exists a unique isomorphism of groups φ0 such that the
following diagram commutes [28, Theorem 26, Corollary 1].
Rm

/ Rm / Ker(φ)

p

φ0

( 
G

φ

The bijection φ0 yields alternative global coordinates on the quotient group
R / Ker(φ); it will be used in our characterization of equilibria. When G is a
generalized cylinder, the map φ has several important properties.
m

Proposition 3.6. If G is a generalized cylinder, then φ : Rm → G is a morphism
of groups.
Proof. It is clear that φ(0m ) = exp(0) · · · exp(0) = I.
(1)
(m)
(1)
(m)
Let ti = (ti , . . . , ti ) ∈ Rm and tj = (tj , . . . , tj ) ∈ Rm , where φ(ti ) =
Xi and φ(tj ) = Xj . By commutativity of H1 , . . . , Hm ,




(1)
(1)
(m)
(m)
φ(ti + tj ) = exp (ti + tj )H1 · · · exp (ti + tj )Hm
(1)

(m)

= exp(ti H1 ) · · · exp(ti

(1)

(m)

Hm ) exp(tj H1 ) · · · exp(tj

Hm )

= φ(ti )φ(tj ).

Lemma 3.7. Let G be a generalized cylinder. If K > 0 and φ(t) ∈ U , then
φ(t/K) = φ(t)1/K .

Proof. By the commutativity of H1 , . . . , Hm ,
 




t
t1
tm
φ
= exp
H1 · · · exp
Hm
K
K
K


1
= exp
(t1 H1 + · · · + tm Hm )
K


1
= exp
Log(φ(t))
K
1

= φ(t) K .

4

Equilibria on Generalized Cylinders

Since we consider driftless kinematic models, the system is at equilibrium if,
and only if, every agent’s input is zero, i.e., for all i ∈ NN , Ωi = 0n×n . We show
that all equilibria are isolated and exhibit the same stability properties.


>
> >
Hereinafter, we use the notation tij := φ−1 (Eij ) and t := t>
∈
11 t12 · · · t1N
Nm
Nk
N (m−k)
R . Define tT and tR as the projections under p of t onto T
and R
,
respectively.
Proposition 4.1. If the controller (4) is well-defined,
then the equilibria of (6)
1
(L ⊗ Ik )tT = [0N k ], (L ⊗
on a generalized cylinder are characterized by K
Im−k )tR = 0N (m−k) , [t11 ] = [0m ].
Proof. The sampled dynamics of each agent are given by (5). Therefore, the
system is at equilibrium if, and only if, for all i ∈ NN , exp(T Ωi ) = I. If G is a
generalized cylinder, then, by commutativity and Definition 3.2, this condition
becomes
1

K

I = exp(T Ωi ) = 

Y

j∈Ni

w
Eijij 

=

Y

−

E1i

wij
K

wij

E1jK .

j∈Ni

In the global coordinates admitted by φ0 we have


 w 
w
X
ij
− ij
φ0−1 (I) =
φ0−1 E1i K + φ0−1 E1jK
j∈Ni

[0m ] =



X h wij i h wij i
1
t1j −
t1i = −
(`i ⊗ Im )t .
K
K
K

j∈Ni

We “stack” the inputs for all agents i, yielding the equation


1
(L ⊗ Im )t = [0N m ],
K

(9)

which can be rewritten as
" "
L ⊗ Ik
1
K 0N (m−k)×N k

0N k×N (m−k)

#"

L ⊗ Im−k

tT

##

""
=

tR

##

0N k

.

0N (m−k)

1

By assumption, Ker(φi ) = {0} for i ∈ {k+1, . . . , m}, so the condition K
(L ⊗ Im−k ) =
[0N (m−k) ] simplifies to equality on RN (m−k) , rather than congruence on a quotient space. Lastly, since t11 is the error of agent 1 with itself, [t11 ] = [0m ].
Proposition 4.2. On a generalized cylinder, all equilibria are isolated.
Proof. By assumption, Ker(φi ) = {0}, for all i ∈ {k+1, . . . , m}. Thus R/ Ker(φi ) ∼
=
(i)
(i)
R. Thus, for j ∈ NN , [t1j ] = [0] simplifies to t1j = 0.
By assumption, Ker(φi ) 6= {0}, for all i ∈ Nk . The map φi can be viewed
as a flow, thus, by [29, Theorem 2.12], there exists a di > 0 such that for every
(i) (i)
ri ∈ [0], we have ri = qi di for some qi ∈ Z. Thus, for all j ∈ NN , if t1j , t̄1j ∈ [0],
(i)

(i)

(i)

(i)

t1j 6= t̄1j , then |t1j − t̄1j | ≥ di .
Proposition 4.3. On a generalized cylinder, every equilibrium has the same
stability properties as the identity.
Proof. Let {Ξi1 , . . . , ΞiN } ∈ GN be an equilibrium. Define Ēij := Ξ−1
ij Eij . Then
Ēij = I if and only if Ēij = Ξij . The error dynamics (6) can be expressed in
terms of Ēij :
− K1


+
Ξij Ēij
=

Y

(Ξ1i Ē1i )−wip (Ξ1p Ē1p )wip 

Ξij Ēij × 

p∈Ni

+
Ēij
=

−wip

Ē1i

w

Ē1pip 

Ēij 

p∈Ni

Y

−wjq

Ē1j

w

Ē1qjq 

w

Ēipip 

Ēij 

Y

q∈Nj

w

Ējqjq 

−wip

Ξ1i



w

Ξ1pip 


q∈Nj

− K1 
Y


p∈Ni

w

Ξipip 

 K1
Y

p∈Ni

 K1 



− K1 
Y

q∈Nj

− K1
Y

(Ξ1j Ē1j )−wjq (Ξ1q Ē1q )wjq 

 K1 



p∈Ni


=

Y

q∈Nj

− K1


Y

 K1



 K1
Y



w

Ξjqjq 

q∈Nj

By (9), the Ξij product terms equal identity, thus the Ēij dynamics have the
same form as the dynamics (6) of Eij , and therefore have the same qualitative
behaviour.
Proposition 4.3 says that the dynamics near every equilibrium “look the
same”. Thus, by analyzing only the equilibrium at identity, we characterize the
behaviour near all equilibria.

.

−wjq

Ξ1j

w

Ξ1qjq 

5

Synchronization on Generalized Cylinders

In this section, we consider the case where G is a generalized cylinder. This
means that Xi ∈ G, i ∈ NN , which implies Eij ∈ G, for all i, j ∈ NN . This
is done only to simplify discussion. The results of this section hold under the
weaker assumption that the errors Eij lie on a generalized cylinder.
Proposition 5.1. Any generalized cylinder G, on which (4) is well-defined for
all forward time, is positively invariant for (6).
Proof. Let k ∈ Z be arbitrary and suppose that for all Q
i, j ∈ NN , Eij [k] ∈ G.
Let q ∈ NN be arbitrary. By elementary group theory j∈Nq Eqj [k] ∈ G and
therefore, by hypothesis, its Kth root is well-defined. Thus, by definition of log,
+
exp (T Ωq [k]) ∈ G. Since Eij
= exp(−T Ωi )Eij exp(T Ωj ), we have Eij [k + 1] ∈ G.
Induction on the time index proves positive invariance of G.
Using the exponential coordinates from Section 3.2 we identify each relative
error Eij ∈ G ∩ U with its exponential coordinates tij ∈ Rm . We henceforth
impose that the synchronization errors and their products over neighbour sets
be close to the identity.
Q
w
Assumption 2. For all i, j ∈ NN , we have Eij ∈ U and j∈Ni Eijij ∈ U . J
Let G be a generalized cylinder and suppose Eij [0] ∈ G, i, j ∈ NN . By
Proposition 5.1, for all k ≥ 0, Eij [k] ∈ G.
It follows from its definition that φ is a local diffeomorphism in a neighbourhood of the identity element. We first apply the identity that for all i, j ∈ NN ,
−1
Eij = E1i
E1j to (6):
− K1


+
Eij
=

Y

−wip

E1i

w

E1pip 

 K1


Eij 

Y

−wjq

E1j

w

E1qjq 

.

(10)

q∈Nj

p∈Ni

Applying Proposition 3.6 and Lemma 3.7 to (10), we have
1 X
1 X
wip (t1p − t1i ) +
wjq (t1q − t1j )
K
K
p∈Ni
q∈Nj
! !
X
X
X
1
1
wip t1p −
wip t1i +
wjq t1q −
= tij −
K
K

t+
ij = tij −

p∈Ni

p∈Ni

q∈Nj

!
X

wjq t1j

q∈Nj

1
1
(`i ⊗ Im )t − (`j ⊗ Im )t
K
K
1
= tij + ((`i − `j ) ⊗ Im )t.
K

= tij +

Setting i = 1 and “stacking” the last line for all j, we obtain



1
+
t =
IN + (1N `1 − L) ⊗ Im t.
K

(11)

!

Thus, the local error dynamics are linear. It is interesting to note that the
form of (11) implies that the dynamics on each one-parameter subgroup are
decoupled. The eigenvalues of the state matrix in (11) are the m-times-repeated
eigenvalues of I + (1N `1 − L)/K [30, Chapter 12, §5].The linear dynamics (11)
are (exponentially) stable if and only if the matrix I + (1N `1 − L)/K is Schur.
We must therefore establish conditions on the gain K such that all eigenvalues
of I + (1N `1 − L)/K are in the open unit disc.
The Laplacian L of the graph G is positive semidefinite, with a zero eigenvalue of algebraic multiplicity equal to the number of connected components in
G [31, Lemma 13.1.1]; the eigenvector associated with the 0 eigenvalue is 1N .
Lemma 5.2. The spectrum of 1N `1 − L equals σ(−L).
Proof. Let J be the Jordan form of L and let V ∈ CN ×N be the nonsingular
matrix such that J = V −1 LV , where the first column V1 is in the span of 1N .
We have
V −1 (1N `1 − L)V = V −1 1N `1 V − J.
(12)
Since V1 is in the span of 1N and V −1 V = I, we have (V −1 1N )i = 0 for all
i 6= 1. Also because V1 is in the span of 1N , we have (`1 V )1 = 0. Therefore,
V −1 1N `1 V is strictly upper triangular. Therefore, the eigenvalues of (12) are
its diagonal elements, which are the diagonal elements of −J, which are the
negatives of the eigenvalues of L.
Lemma 5.3. The spectrum of I + (1N `1 − L)/K is the image of 1 − σ(L)/K.
Proof. The result follows from Lemma 5.2 and applying the Spectral Mapping
Theorem [24, Theorem 1.13] using the function f : C → C, f (x) = 1 − x/K.
Since the graph is assumed to be connected, L has a simple eigenvalue at 0.
By Lemma 5.3, this eigenvalue gets mapped to 1 in the spectrum of I + (1N `1 −
L)/K.
Let λ be an eigenvalue of L and define the function f (x) = 1 − x/K as in
the proof of Lemma 5.3. Applying this function to λ we have


|λ| j]λ
|λ|
|λ|
f (λ) = 1 −
e
= 1−
cos(]λ) − j
sin(]λ)
K
K
K
For stability, we require f (λ) to be in the open unit disc. The squared
magnitude of f (λ) is

2 
2
|λ|
|λ|
2
|f (λ)| = 1 −
cos(]λ) +
sin(]λ)
K
K
 2
|λ|
|λ|
=
−2
cos(]λ) + 1
K
K
Then |f (λ)|2 < 1 if, and only if
 2
|λ|
|λ|
−2
cos(]λ) < 0.
K
K

Since we have already addressed the simple eigenvalue at 0, we assume that
λ 6= 0. Therefore, dividing by |λ| we seek conditions on K such that, for all
λ ∈ σ(L)\ {0}, 2 cos(]λ) > |λ|/K. This is equivalent to the condition
(∀λ ∈ σ(L)\ {0})

K>

|λ|
|λ|2
=
.
2 cos(]λ)
2Re(λ)

(13)

If (13) holds, then all eigenvalues of I + (1N `1 − L)/K, except the single
eigenvalue at 1, are in the open unit disc.
The next result provides a lower bound on the controller gain K, as a function of the number of agents N , using the properties of the eigenvalues of the
Laplacian of a directed graph [32].
Lemma 5.4. If K > Kmin (N ), where

N
N ≤ 9,

2

1
π
π
2
Kmin (N ) :=
csc
(
)
sec(
)
10 ≤ N ≤ 18,
8
2N
N


N − 1 N ≥ 19,

(14)

then I + (1N `1 − L)/K has a single eigenvalue at 1 and all others in the open
unit disc.
Proof. See Appendix.
The results of [32] allow us to find a tighter bound on K than the Gershgorin
Disc Theorem, which is used, for example, in [33].
Remark 5.5. If G is symmetric, then σ(L) ⊂ [0, N ]. Thus (14) in Lemma 5.4
simplifies to Kmin (N ) = N/2.
N
By Lemma 5.4, there is no K for which I + (1N `1 − L)/K is Schur. However,
this does not preclude stability of (11), because the eigenvalue of 1 corresponds
to the dynamics of t11 , the error of agent 1 with itself, which is identically zero.
Theorem 5.6. Let G be a generalized cylinder. If the gain K of each agent’s
controller (4) satisfies (14), then the equilibrium t = 0N m of (11) is locally
exponentially stable
Proof. Since E11 (t) = X1−1 (t)X1 (t) ≡ I, it follows immediately
that t11 (t) ≡

0m . Therefore the (N − 1)m dimensional subspace V := t ∈ RN m : t11 = 0m
is invariant under the dynamics (11). As a result, we have
σ((IN + (1N `1 − L)/K) ⊗ Im ) = σ((IN + (1N `1 − L)/K) ⊗ Im |V) t {1, . . . , 1},
| {z }
m times

where (IN + (1N `1 − L)/K) ⊗ Im |V is the restriction to the subspace V. If
the gain K of each agent’s controller (4) satisfies (14), then by Lemma 5.4
(IN + (1N `1 − L)/K) ⊗ Im |V is Schur.
By Proposition 4.3, analogous results hold for all equilibria. We emphasize
that Theorem 5.6 does not rely on Jacobian linearization of the nonlinear dy+
namics Eij
. The system in exponential coordinates evolves according to linear
dynamics.

6

Performance with an Unweighted Complete
Graph on a Generalized Cylinder

We define the ε settling time of error Eij to be the smallest k ∈ Z such that,
for all k ≥ k, Eij [k] = Eij [0]α , where |α| ≤ ε, 0 < ε < 1.
Proposition 6.1. If G is complete, then the ε settling time, where ε ∈ (0, 1), is


Log ε
 .

Ts = 

| 

 Log |K−N
K
Proof.
− K1


Y

+
Eij
= Eij

Ejp 

p∈NN \{i,j}

 K1


Y

= Eij

Y

−1
Eij Eij

Eip 

p∈NN \{i,j}
K−2
K

 K1



−1 
Eij


p∈NN \{i,j}

K−2
K

= Eij

− N −2
Eij K

K−N

= Eij K

(15)
k

K−N
Thus Eij [k] = Eij [0]( K ) . Therefore, the ε settling time is computed thus

K −N
K

k

= ε =⇒ k =
Log

Log ε


|K−N |
K



Since k is a time-step, we round up to the nearest integer.
The derivative of the settling time with respect to K is
∂Ts
Log(ε)(|K − N |2 + K(N − K))
=
2


∂K
|
K|K − N |2 Log |K−N
K
=

Log(ε)N (N − K)


2 .
|K−N |
2
K|K − N | Log
K

(16)

If K > N , then (16) is positive, so increasing K, i.e., reducing the gain 1/K, delays synchronization, which agrees with intuition. But, interestingly, if K < N ,
then (16) is negative, so increasing K hastens synchronization. Although (16)
is undefined at K = N , these observations suggest that K = N is the minimizer
of Ts .
Proposition 6.2. If G is complete and K = N , then synchronization is achieved
at time-step k = 1.
+
Proof. Setting K = N in (15), we have Eij
= I.

7

General Lie Groups

For our purposes, the only difference between a generalized cylinder and any
other Lie group is commutativity. Commutativity is the key property yielding
Proposition 3.6 and Lemma 3.7, from which all subsequent results follow. We
now show that in a neighbourhood of the identity of any Lie group G, commutativity holds approximately. Which has the very important implication that all
our results for generalized cylinders hold mutatis mutandis on any Lie group in
a neighbourhood of the identity. In particular, we obtain Theorem 2.3.
The Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff (BCH) formula relates the product of two
elements on the Lie group G to an analytic function of their principal logarithms.
If A, B ∈ g, then the BCH formula has the series representation:
1
1
1
Log(exp(A) exp(B)) = A + B + [A, B] + [A, [A, B]] − [B, [A, B]] + · · · ,
2
12
12
(17)
where the remaining terms are nested brackets of increasing order [26, Section
3.5]. We will use (17) to derive a linear approximation of the error dynamics on
an arbitrary Lie group G near the identity, or equivalently, near the origin on
the associated Lie algebra g.
Lemma 7.1. The linearization of the BCH formula at the origin of g is Log(exp(A) exp(B)) ≈
A + B.
Proof. All nonlinear terms in (17) are of the form [A, adkA (B)] and [B, adkB (A)],
k ∈ Z≥0 . Direct computation verifies
"
#
∂
∂adkA (B)
k
[A, adA (B)] = A,
.
∂A
∂A
Thus, if (17) is linearized at the origin, then all nonlinear terms vanish, and
Log(exp(A) exp(B)) ≈ A + B.
Corollary 7.2. Near the identity, we have exp(A + B) ≈ exp(A) exp(B) ≈
exp(B) exp(A).
Thus, commutativity is satisfied approximately in a neighbourhood of the
identity of any Lie group G. Therefore, all our results for generalized cylinders
apply mutatis mutandis to arbitrary matrix Lie groups.
Corollary 7.3. Given ti and tj in a sufficiently small neighbourhood of zero,
we have φ(ti + tj ) ≈ φ(ti )φ(tj ).
Corollary 7.4. For t sufficiently small, φ(t/K) ≈ φ(t)1/K .
We state the analogues of key results for generalized cylinders. Their proofs,
as well as the proof of Theorem 2.3, are straightforward applications of Corollaries 7.3 and 7.4.
Proposition 7.5. The equilibrium {Eij = I : i, j ∈ NN } is isolated.

Proposition 7.6. Every equilibrium has the same stability properties as the
identity.
To illustrate how the proofs of these analogues differ, we present the difference between the proofs of Propositions 4.3 and 7.6.
Proof. The proof differs from that of Proposition 4.3 in only one line of the
arithmetic. By Corollaries 7.2 and 7.4,
− K1


+
Ēij
≈

Y

−wip

Ē1i

w

Ē1pip 

p∈Ni

− K1 

 K1 


Y

Ēij 

−wjq

Ē1j

q∈Nj

w

Ē1qjq 

Y


−wip

Ξ1i

w

Ξ1pip 

p∈Ni

The rest of the proof is identical.

8
8.1

Simulations
Comparison with Kuramoto Network on SO(2)

The Lie group SO(2) is one dimensional, thus, it is a one-parameter subgroup
of SO(n) for any n ≥ 2. SO(2) is the group of rotations in the plane, which
can be interpreted locally as a position on the circumference of a circle. Given
an element R ∈ SO(2), its local coordinate t ∈ R is often called the “phase”
or “angle”. The Kuramoto oscillator is a popular model of synchronization of
networks of oscillators. We can view a Kuramoto network of N agents as a
control system, where agent i has phase θi ∈ R with dynamics
X
θ̇i = ui ,
ui = −
aij sin(θi − θj ),
(18)
j∈Ni

where aij ∈ R is the coupling strength between agents i and j. System (18) can
be modelled as a system on a Lie group in the form of (1), where
"
#
"
#
cos(θ) − sin(θ)
0 −1
Ri = φ(θ) =
, Ṙi = Ri
ui .
sin(θ) cos(θ)
1 0
We simulate using N = 3 and aij = 1 for all i, j ∈ NN . It can be shown that
with this choice of parameters, that (18) achieves phase synchronization [10].
Sampling with period T = 0.1, we see in Figure 2 that synchronization is preserved under sampling. But in Figure 3, we see that sampling with period
T = 0.8, that sampling destroys synchronization.
We simulate this network again using the proposed controller with K = 2
and T = 0.8.
As seen in Figure 4, synchronization is achieved at T = 0.8, whereas it was
lost using the naı̈vely discretized Kuramoto coupling.

 K1
Y


q∈Nj

−wjq

Ξ1j

w

Ξ1qjq 

.

0.5

0

−0.5
0

1

2
t

3

4

Figure 2: Phases of sampled Kuramoto network with T = 0.1.

1

0.5

0

−0.5

−1
0

1

2
t

3

4

Figure 3: Phases of sampled Kuramoto network with T = 0.8.

0.5

0

−0.5
0

2

4

6
t

8

10

12

Figure 4: Phases using proposed controller with T = 0.8.

8.2

Deadbeat Performance on SO(2)

To illustrate Proposition 6.2, we simulate a network with a complete connectivity graph on SO(2) with K = N = 40, T = 1 and initial phases evenly spaced
from −π/(N + 1) to π/(N + 1):
θi := −

π
2π
+i
.
41
1599

As seen in Figure 5, all error phases are driven to zero in a single time-step.

8.3

Network on SU(2)

We simulate a network on SU(2) to demonstrate Theorem 2.3 on a complex,
non-commutative Lie group. We simulate a network with N = 6, K = 3.5, and
graph Laplacian


0.5 −0.1 −0.1 −0.1 −0.1 −0.1


0.8 −0.2 −0.2 −0.2 −0.2
0


0
0
0.9 −0.3 −0.3 −0.3


L=
(19)

0
0
0.8 −0.4 −0.4
0


0
0
0
0
0.5 −0.5


0
0
0
0
0
0

0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
−0.02
−0.04
−0.06
−0.08
0

0.5

1
t

1.5

2

Figure 5: Error phases of network on SO(2) with T = 1, K = N = 40, and G
complete.
The Pauli matrices constitute the canonical basis of su(2):
"
#
"
#
"
#
0 j
0 −1
j 0
σ1 =
, σ2 =
, σ3 =
.
j 0
1 0
0 −j
We use the Pauli matrices to generate the initial conditions:
Ui (0) := exp(ai σ1 + bi σ2 + ci σ3 ),
where ai := −0.32 + i0.6/(N − 1), bi := −0.06 + i0.3/(N − 1), ci := −0.42 +
i0.6/(N − 1).
For visualization, we plot the Euclidean norms of kE1j − Ik, j ∈ {2, . . . , N }.
As seen in Figure 6, the errors tend to identity, thus synchronization is achieved.

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0

5

10

15
t

20

25

30

Figure 6: kE1j −Ik, j ∈ {2, . . . , 6} for a network on SU(2) with N = 6, K = 3.5,
T = 1, and Laplacian (19).

9

Future Research

Future work includes extending our results to agents with dynamic models and
relaxing the assumption that the agents are fully actuated. The latter could first
be addressed by assuming that the Lie algebra generated by the input vector
fields equals g. It would also be of interest to extend our results to time-varying
connectivity graphs.

References
[1] D. Nešić and A. R. Teel, “A Framework for Stabilization of Nonlinear
Sampled-Data Systems Based on Their Approximate Discrete-Time Models,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 49, no. 7, pp. 1103–
1122, 2004.
[2] D. Elliott, Bilinear Control Systems - Matrices in Action. Springer-Verlag,
2009.
[3] E. D. Sontag, “An eigenvalue condition for sampled weak controllability of
bilinear systems,” Systems & Control Letters, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 313–315,
1986.

[4] E. Justh and P. Krishnaprasad, “Equilibria and steering laws for planar
formations,” Systems & Control Letters, vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 25–38, 2004.
[5] A. Roza and M. Maggiore, “A Class of Position Controllers for Underactuated VTOL Vehicles,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 59,
no. 9, pp. 2580–2585, 2014.
[6] M. A. Lohe, “Non-Abelian Kuramoto models and synchronization,” Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, vol. 42, no. 39, 395101,
2009.
[7] C. Altafini and F. Ticozzi, “Modeling and Control of Quantum Systems:
An Introduction,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 57, no. 8,
pp. 1898–1917, 2012.
[8] F. Albertini and D. D’Alessandro, “Minimum time optimal synthesis for
two level quantum systems,” Journal of Mathematical Physics, vol. 56,
no. 1, 2015.
[9] A. S. Willsky and S. I. Marcus, “Analysis of bilinear noise models in circuits
and devices,” Journal of the Franklin Institute, vol. 301, no. 1-2, pp. 103–
122, 1976.
[10] F. Dörfler and F. Bullo, “Synchronization in complex networks of phase
oscillators: A survey,” Automatica, vol. 50, no. 6, pp. 1539–1564, 2014.
[11] Y. Igarashi, T. Hatanaka, M. Fujita, and M. W. Spong, “Passivity-based
attitude synchronization in SE(3),” IEEE Transactions on Control Systems
Technology, vol. 17, no. 5, pp. 1119–1134, 2009.
[12] J. Giraldo, E. Mojica-Nava, and N. Quijano, “Synchronization of dynamical
networks with a communication infrastructure: A smart grid application,”
in IEEE Conference on Decision and Control. Florence, Italy: IEEE,
2013, pp. 4638–4643.
[13] W. Sun, X. Yu, J. Lü, and S. Chen, “Synchronisation of directed coupled
harmonic oscillators with sampled-data,” IET Control Theory & Applications, vol. 8, no. 11, pp. 937–947, 2014.
[14] I.-A. F. Ihle, M. Arcak, and T. I. Fossen, “Passivity-based designs for
synchronized path-following,” Automatica, vol. 43, no. 9, pp. 1508–1518,
2007.
[15] A. Sarlette, S. Bonnabel, and R. Sepulchre, “Coordinated Motion Design
on Lie Groups,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 55, no. 5,
pp. 1047–1058, 2010.
[16] R. Dong and Z. Geng, “Consensus based formation control laws for systems
on Lie groups,” Systems & Control Letters, vol. 62, no. 2, pp. 104–111, 2013.

[17] J. Park and K. Kim, “Tracking on Lie group for robot manipulators,” in
International Conference on Ubiquitous Robots and Ambient Intelligence.
Kuala Lumpur: IEEE, 2014, pp. 579–584.
[18] J. R. Forbes, “Passivity-Based Attitude Control on the Special Orthogonal Group of Rigid-Body Rotations,” Journal of Guidance, Control, and
Dynamics, vol. 36, no. 6, pp. 1596–1605, 2013.
[19] O. Egeland and J.-M. Godhavn, “Passivity-based adaptive attitude control
of a rigid spacecraft,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 39,
no. 4, pp. 842–846, 1994.
[20] P. J. McCarthy and C. Nielsen, “Local Synchronization of Sampled-Data
Systems on One-Parameter Lie Subgroups,” in American Control Conference, Seattle, WA, 2017, accepted.
[21] Z. Mahboubi, Z. Kolter, T. Wang, and G. Bower, “Camera Based Localization for Autonomous UAV Formation Flight,” in Infotech@Aerospace.
St. Louis, Missouri: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
2011.
[22] C. Lageman, J. Trumpf, and R. Mahony, “Gradient-like observers for invariant dynamics on a Lie group,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control,
vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 367 –377, 2010.
[23] M. Moakher, “Means and Averaging in the Group of Rotations,” SIAM
Journal on Matrix Analysis and Applications, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 1–16,
2002.
[24] N. J. Higham, Functions of Matrices.
Mathematics, 2008.
[25] S. Lang, Complex Analysis.
103.

Society for Industrial and Applied

New York, NY: Springer-Verlag, 1999, vol.

[26] B. C. Hall, Lie Groups, Lie Algebras, and Representations.
ternational Publishing, 2015, vol. 222.

Springer In-

[27] V. I. Arnold, Mathematical Methods of Classical Mechanics, 2nd ed., ser.
Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer New York, 1989.
[28] S. MacLane and G. Birkhoff, Algebra, 3rd ed.
Society, 1999.

American Mathematical

[29] N. Bhatia and G. Szegö, Stability Theory of Dynamical Systems, 1st ed.
Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 1970.
[30] R. Bellman, Introduction to Matrix Analysis.

McGraw Hill, 1960.

[31] C. Godsil and G. Royle, Algebraic Graph Theory.

Springer-Verlag, 2001.

[32] R. Agaev and P. Chebotarev, “On the spectra of nonsymmetric Laplacian
matrices,” Linear Algebra and its Applications, vol. 399, no. 1-3, pp. 157–
168, 2005.
[33] R. Olfati-Saber and R. Murray, “Consensus Problems in Networks of
Agents With Switching Topology and Time-Delays,” IEEE Transactions
on Automatic Control, vol. 49, no. 9, pp. 1520–1533, 2004.

Appendix
Proof of Lemma 5.4. Write λ ∈ C in Cartesian form λ := σ + jω, σ, ω ∈ R.
The eigenvalues of the Laplacian of a directed graph lie in the closed interior of
the region in C, whose boundary is defined the parametrized curves: ci (σ) :=
σ + jωi (σ), i ∈ N5 , and their complex conjugates c̄i , i ∈ {2, 3, 4} [32], where the
ωi are defined by the loci:
1. (σ − 1)2 + ω1 (σ)2 = (N − 1)2 ,

π
σ,
2. ω2 (σ) = cot N

π
3. ω3 (σ) = 12 cot 2N
,

π
(N − σ),
4. ω4 (σ) = cot N
5. (σ + 1 − N )2 + ω5 (σ)2 = (N − 1)2 .
If N = 2, then this region reduces to the interval [0, N ], so K > N/2 implies
|f (λ)| < 1 for all λ ∈ σ(L) \ {0}. If N = 3, then this region reduces to the
√ . For 4 ≤ N ≤ 18, the region is a
rhombus with vertices 0, N , and ±j 2N
3
hexagon, as illustrated in Figure 7. If N ≥ 19, then the region appears as in
Figure 8.
To lower bound K using only the number of agents N , we maximize the
lower bound on K in (13), denoted by g = 0.5|λ|2 /Re(λ) = 0.5(σ 2 + ω 2 )/σ, over
this region. Since the region is a compact set, the maximum of g is attained at
either a critical point or at a point on the boundary of this set. The differential
of g is
 ∂g ∂g 
dg = ∂σ
h 2 ∂ω2 2
i
+ω )
ω
= 4σ −2(σ
2
4σ
σ
h 

i
1
ω2
ω
= 2 1 − σ2
σ ,
which vanishes nowhere, thus g has no critical points. Therefore, g attains its
maximum at a point on the boundary. We parametrize the boundary of the
region by σ, and maximize g on this compact, one-dimensional set. Since the
Laplacian is a real matrix, its eigenvalues appear in complex conjugate pairs, so
it suffices to consider the upper half complex plane.
Let σij denote the value of σ at which locus i intersects locus j. Solving
ωi (σ) = ωj (σ) for σ, we find:

Figure 7: Region containing the spectrum of the Laplacian for 4 ≤ N ≤ 18.
Figure is drawn for N = 7.

Figure 8: Region containing the spectrum of the Laplacian for N ≥ 19. Figure
is drawn for N = 30.

• σ35 = N − 1 −
• σ13 = 1 +

q

π
(N − 1)2 − ( 21 cot( 2N
))2 ,

q
π
(N − 1)2 − ( 21 cot( 2N
))2 ,

• σ14 = (N − 1) cos( 2π
N ) + 1 or N ,
• σ25 = (N − 1)(1 − cos( 2π
N )) or 0,

π
• σ23 = 12 1 + sec N
,

π
,
• σ34 = N − 12 1 + sec N
• σ24 = N/2.
This boundary is illustrated for 4 ≤ N ≤ 18 in Figure 9, and N ≥ 19 in
Figure 10.

Figure 9: Boundary of the region containing the eigenvalues of the Laplacian
for 4 ≤ N ≤ 18, ω ≥ 0.
The Lie derivatives of g in the direction of ci are:
−2)
• Lc1 g(σ) = − N (N
,
2σ 2
π
• Lc2 g(σ) = 21 (1 + cot2 ( N
)),
π
cot2 ( 2N
)
),
8σ 2

• Lc3 g(σ) =

1
2

• Lc4 g(σ) =

π
csc2 ( N
)
2

−

−

π
N 2 cot2 ( N
)
,
2
2σ

• Lc5 g(σ) = 0.
Let σi? denote the value of σ at which Lci g vanishes, which are the critical
points of the restriction of g to the boundary. We have
• Lc1 g(σ) = 0 if and only if N = 0 or N = 2,
• Lc2 g(σ) 6= 0 for all σ ∈ R, N ∈ N,

Figure 10: Boundary of the region containing the eigenvalues of the Laplacian
for N ≥ 19, ω ≥ 0.
• σ3? =

1
2

π
cot( 2N
),

π
),
• σ4? = N cos( N

• Lc5 g(σ) = 0 identically.
We determine whether σi? is a local maximum or minimum by examining
the second Lie derivative of g evaluated at σi? :
L2ci g(σ) = dLci g(σ)
=
=

h

∂2g
∂σ 2

+

dci
dσ

∂ 2 g dωi
∂ω∂σ dσ

+

∂g d2 ωi
∂ω dσ 2

ω dωi
1
ω2
ω d2 ωi
−
2
+
+
3
2
2
σ
σ dσ
σ dσ
σ

∂2g
∂σ∂ω



+

dωi
dσ

∂ 2 g dωi
∂ω 2 dσ

i

"

1

#

dωi
dσ

2
.

For i = 3 and i = 4 we have
π
)/(4σ 3 ) > 0 for all σ ≥ 0, N ≥ 2,
• L2c3 g(σ) = cot2 ( 2N

• L2c4 g(σ) = N 2 cot2 ( π2 )/σ 3 > 0 for all σ ≥ 0, N ≥ 2.
Thus, the critical points on loci 3 and 4 are minima, thus the maxima of g
on these loci restricted to the boundary are attained at the intersection points,
which we now characterize.
Let gi ∈ R≥0 be the value of g at ci (σi? ), let gij ∈ R≥0 be the value of g at
ci (σij ) = cj (σij ), and let gN be the value of g at σ = N , ω = 0. Since the value
of g is constant on locus 5, we do not consider the intersection points of locus 5
with loci 2 or 3. We have:
• g5 = N − 1,

• g13 = 1 +
• g14 = 1 +
• g23 =
• g34 =

1
8

√

2(1+

N (N −2)
π
(N −1)2 −( 12 cot( N
))2 )

,

N (N −2)
,
2(1+(N −1) cos( 2π
N ))

π
π
csc2 ( 2N
) sec( N
),

π
cot2 ( 2N
)+(2N −1−sec( Nπ ))

4(2N −1−sec(

π
N

2

))

,

π
• g24 = N (cot2 ( N
) + 1)/4,

• gN = N/2.
Finally, we identify the maximum value of g on the boundary. For N = 3,
the boundary is defined by only loci 2 and 4. N = 3 is also the only case in
which loci 2 and 4 intersect. In can be shown numerically that for N = 3, that
gN maximizes g. It can be verified numerically that if 4 ≤ N ≤ 9, then gN is
the maximum of g, and if 10 ≤ N ≤ 18, then g23 is the maximum of g, which
proves the first two cases in (14).

5

4

3

g23
g34
gN

2

1
4

5

6

7

8

9

N
Figure 11: Values of g(N ) for 4 ≤ N ≤ 9.
For N ≥ 19, we now establish that max{g5 , g13 , g14 } = g5 . Notice that g13
and g14 can be expressed:
g13 = 1 +

N (N − 2)
,
2σ13

g14 = 1 +

N (N − 2)
.
2σ14

20

g23
g34
gN

15

10

5
10

12

14
N

16

18

Figure 12: Values of g(N ) for 10 ≤ N ≤ 18.
From their definitions, g5 ≥ g13 if and only if
N −1≥1+

N (N − 2)
N
=⇒ σ13 ≥ .
2σ13
2

Similarly, we find that g5 ≥ g14 if and only if σ14 > N/2. By the geometry of
the region as discussed in [32] and illustrated in Figure 8, these inequalities hold
for all N ≥ 19.

