The Four Point Condition: An Elementary Tropicalization of Ptolemy's Inequality
Ptolemy's inequality is a classic relationship between the distances among four points in Euclidean space. Another relationship between six distances is the 4-point condition, an inequality satisfied by the lengths of the six paths that join any four points of a metric (or weighted) tree. The 4-point condition also characterizes when a finite metric space can be embedded in such a tree. The curious observer might realize that these inequalities have similar forms: if one replaces addition and multiplication in Ptolemy's inequality with maximum and addition, respectively, one obtains the 4-point condition. We show that this similarity is more than a coincidence. We identify a family of Ptolemaic inequalities in CAT-spaces parametrized by a real number and show that a certain limit involving these inequalities, as the parameter goes to negative infinity, yields the 4-point condition, giving an elementary proof that the latter is the tropicalization of Ptolemy's inequality.
\section{Introduction}
Ptolemy's inequality is a classical result in Euclidean geometry that relates the six distances between 4 points in the plane. More general metric spaces where this inequality holds are called Ptolemaic and include all Euclidean spaces and $\cat(0)$ spaces. In fact, a complete Riemannian manifold is Ptolemaic if, and only if, it is $\cat(0)$ \cite{ptolemy-and-cat0}. Spherical and hyperbolic versions of this inequality also exist \cite{ptolemy-spherical, ptolemy-hyperbolic}, and we review their proof in this paper. We then show that $\cat(\kappa)$ spaces also satisfy a $\kappa$-Ptolemaic inequality, which is a rescaling of either the spherical or hyperbolic inequality depending on whether $\kappa>0$ or $\kappa<0$. Our main contribution is an interpretation of the 4-point condition
\begin{equation*}
	d_{13}+d_{24} \leq \max(d_{12}+d_{34}, d_{23}+d_{41})
\end{equation*}
that characterizes metric trees as the $(-\infty)$-Ptolemy inequality. More precisely, we show that the 4-point condition is the limit of the $\kappa$-Ptolemy inequality when $\kappa \to -\infty$, effectively characterizing metric trees as those metric spaces where the $\kappa$-Ptolemy inequality holds for all $\kappa$.

\begin{notation}
	Let $M_\kappa^n$ be the $n$-dimensional model space with constant sectional curvature $\kappa$, i.e. the $n$-sphere with radius $1/\sqrt{\kappa}$ when $\kappa>0$, $n$-dimensional Euclidean space when $\kappa=0$, or $n$-dimensional hyperbolic space with constant curvature $\kappa<0$. These spaces come equipped with a geodesic metric and have diameter $D_\kappa = \pi/\sqrt{\kappa}$ if $\kappa>0$ and $D_\kappa = \infty$ when $\kappa \leq 0$.\\
	Throughout the paper, whenever we have points $p_1,\dots,p_m$ in a single fixed metric space (either $X$ or $M_\kappa^n$), we'll denote the distance between $p_i$ and $p_j$ as $d_{ij}$. If $X$ is a $\cat$-space, we write the points of $X$ as $p_i$ and the comparison points in the model space $M_\kappa^2$ as $\overline{p}_i$. Similarly, we use $d_{ij}$ for the distances between points in $X$ and $\overline{d}_{ij}$ for the distances in the model space $M_\kappa^2$.
\end{notation}

\section{Generalizing Ptolemy's inequality}
Generalizations of Ptolemy's inequality were shown in spherical and hyperbolic geometry in \cite{ptolemy-spherical, ptolemy-hyperbolic}, and a higher-dimensional version of Ptolemy's Theorem appears in \cite{ptolemy-higher-dim}. We reproduce the arguments here to consolidate the cases of positive and negative curvature into one proof. Define
\begin{equation*}
	c_\kappa(t) =
	\begin{cases}
		\cos\left(\sqrt{\kappa} t \right), & \text{if } \kappa>0,\\
		t, & \text{if } \kappa=0,\\
		\cosh\left(\sqrt{-\kappa} t\right), & \text{if } \kappa<0,
	\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
and
\begin{equation*}
	s_\kappa(t) =
	\begin{cases}
		\sin\left(\sqrt{\kappa} t \right), & \text{if } \kappa>0,\\
		t, & \text{if } \kappa=0,\\
		\sinh\left(\sqrt{-\kappa} t\right), & \text{if } \kappa<0.
	\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
Notice that $s_\kappa(t)$ is increasing for any $t$ when $\kappa \leq 0$, and for $t \in [0,D_\kappa/2]$ when $\kappa > 0$.\\
\indent Let $p_1,\dots,p_{m} \in M_\kappa^n$. For $\kappa \neq 0$, define the matrices
\begin{align*}
	\CM_{\kappa}(p_1,\dots,p_{m}) &= \big( c_\kappa(d_{ij}) \big)_{1 \leq i,j \leq m},\\
	P_{\kappa}(p_1,\dots,p_{m}) &= \big( s_\kappa^2(d_{ij}/2) \big)_{1 \leq i,j \leq m},
\end{align*}
and their determinants
\begin{align*}
	\Delta_\kappa(p_1,\dots,p_{m}) &= \det(\CM_{\kappa}(p_1,\dots,p_{m})),\\
	\gamma_\kappa(p_1,\dots,p_{m}) &= \det(P_{\kappa}(p_1,\dots,p_{m})).
\end{align*}
The first determinant is the spherical (resp. hyperbolic) Cayley-Menger determinant when $\kappa>0$ (resp. $\kappa<0$). The following is a classic fact found at the start of Section 67 and in Theorem 106.1 of \cite{distance-geometry}. There, $\Delta_{\kappa}(p_1,\dots,p_m)$ is denoted as $\Delta_{m}(p_1,\dots,p_{m})$ when $\kappa>0$ and $\Lambda_{m}(p_1,\dots,p_{m})$ when $\kappa<0$.

\begin{theorem}\label{thm:cm_determinant}
	The determinant $\Delta_\kappa(p_1,\dots,p_{m})$ vanishes for $m \geq n+2$. If $m \leq n+1$, $\Delta_\kappa(p_1,\dots,p_{m})$ is 0 or has sign $\sgn(\kappa)^{m+1}$.
\end{theorem}

The other fact needed for the proof is the Desnanot-Jacobi identity.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:lewis_carroll_identity}
	Let $M$ be an $n$-by-$n$ matrix. Denote by $M_{\sim i, \sim j}$ the submatrix obtained by deleting the $i$-th row and $j$-th columns of $M$. If $i<j$ and $h<k$, let $M_{\sim i,j, \sim h,k} = (M_{\sim j, \sim k})_{\sim i, \sim h}$. Then:
	\begin{equation*}
		\det(M)\det(M_{\sim 1,n, \sim 1,n}) = \det(M_{\sim 1, \sim 1}) \det(M_{\sim n, \sim n}) - \det(M_{\sim 1, \sim n}) \det(M_{\sim n, \sim 1}).
	\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}

The following is the higher dimensional generalization of Ptolemy's Theorem.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:sign_of_ptolemys_determinant}
	Let $\kappa \neq 0$ and $p_1,\dots,p_{n+2} \in M_\kappa^{n}$. The determinant $\gamma_\kappa(p_1,\dots,p_{n+2})$ vanishes or has sign $(-1)^{n+1}$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
	Consider the matrix
	\begin{equation*}
		A =
		\left(
		\begin{array}{c|c}
			-1 & 0 \\
			\hline
			0 & \CM_\kappa(p_1,\dots,p_{n+2})
		\end{array}
		\right)
		=
		\left(
		\begin{array}{c|c}
			-1 & 0 \\
			\hline
			0 & c_\kappa(d_{ij})
		\end{array}
		\right).
	\end{equation*}
	From the half-angle formulas for trigonometric and hyperbolic functions, $c_\kappa$ and $s_\kappa$ satisfy $c_\kappa(2x)-1 = -2\sgn(\kappa) s_\kappa^2(x)$. If we subtract the first row of $A$ from the other rows and the first column from the others, we get the matrix
	\begin{equation*}
		B =
		\left(
		\begin{array}{c|c}
			-1 & 1 \\
			\hline
			1 & -2\sgn(\kappa) s_\kappa^2(d_{ij}/2).
		\end{array}
		\right),
	\end{equation*}
	with determinant $\det(B) = \det(A) = -\Delta_\kappa(p_1,\dots,p_{n+2})$. If all the first minors of $\CM_{\kappa}(p_1,\dots,p_{n+2})$ are 0, then $\CM_{\kappa}(p_1,\dots,p_{n+2})$ has rank at most $n+1$. In consequence, both $A$ and $B$ have a maximum rank of $n+2$, which means that their first minors are also 0. In particular, $\gamma_\kappa(p_1,\dots,p_{n+2}) = B_{\sim 1, \sim 1} = 0$.\\
	\indent Suppose, then, that $\CM_{\kappa}(p_1,\dots,p_{n+2})$ has a non-zero minor, and relabel the points so that $\Delta_{\kappa}(p_1,\dots,p_{n+1}) \neq 0$. By Theorem \ref{thm:lewis_carroll_identity},
	\begin{equation*}
		\det(B)\det(B_{\sim 1,n, \sim 1,n}) = \det(B_{\sim 1, \sim 1})\det(B_{\sim n, \sim n}) - \det(B_{\sim 1, \sim n})\det(B_{\sim n, \sim 1}).
	\end{equation*}
	In other words,
	\begin{align*}
		0
		&= -\Delta(p_1,\dots,p_{n+2})\det(B_{\sim 1,n, \sim 1,n})\\
		&= (-2\sgn(\kappa))^{n+2} \gamma_\kappa(p_1,\dots,p_{n+2}) (-\Delta_\kappa(p_1,\dots,p_{n+1})) - (\det(B_{\sim 1, \sim n}))^2.
	\end{align*}
	The first line is 0 because $\Delta(p_1,\dots,p_{n+2}) = 0$ by Theorem \ref{thm:cm_determinant}. Likewise, the sign of $\Delta_\kappa(p_1,\dots,p_{n+1})$ is $\sgn(\kappa)^{n+2}$, so the above equation forces
	\begin{equation*}
		\sgn(\gamma_\kappa(p_1,\dots,p_{n+2})) = -(-\sgn(\kappa))^{n+2} \sgn(\kappa)^{n+2} = (-1)^{n+1}.
	\end{equation*}
\end{proof}

The previous theorem takes a familiar form when $n=2$.
\begin{corollary}[$\kappa$-Ptolemy inequality]\label{cor:ptolemy_general_curvature}
	For any $\kappa$ and $p_1,p_2,p_3,p_4 \in M_\kappa^2$,
	\begin{equation}\label{eq:ptolemy-general}
		s_\kappa(d_{13}/2)s_\kappa(d_{24}/2) \leq s_\kappa(d_{12}/2)s_\kappa(d_{34}/2) + s_\kappa(d_{23}/2)s_\kappa(d_{41}/2).
	\end{equation}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
	The case of $\kappa=0$ is the usual Ptolemaic inequality in the plane. For $\kappa \neq 0$, Theorem \ref{thm:sign_of_ptolemys_determinant} gives $\gamma_\kappa(p_1,p_2,p_3,p_4) \leq 0$. In Valentine's words, ``routine but tedious computations'' \cite{ptolemy-spherical} show that $\gamma_\kappa(p_1,p_2,p_3,p_4)$ decomposes as the product $A \cdot B \cdot C \cdot D$, where
	\begin{align*}
		A &= -[s_\kappa(d_{13}/2)s_\kappa(d_{24}/2) + s_\kappa(d_{12}/2)s_\kappa(d_{34}/2) + s_\kappa(d_{23}/2)s_\kappa(d_{41}/2)] \\
		B &= -\phantom{[}s_\kappa(d_{13}/2)s_\kappa(d_{24}/2) + s_\kappa(d_{12}/2)s_\kappa(d_{34}/2) + s_\kappa(d_{23}/2)s_\kappa(d_{41}/2) \\
		C &= \phantom{-[}s_\kappa(d_{13}/2)s_\kappa(d_{24}/2) - s_\kappa(d_{12}/2)s_\kappa(d_{34}/2) + s_\kappa(d_{23}/2)s_\kappa(d_{41}/2) \\
		D &= \phantom{-[}s_\kappa(d_{13}/2)s_\kappa(d_{24}/2) + s_\kappa(d_{12}/2)s_\kappa(d_{34}/2) - s_\kappa(d_{23}/2)s_\kappa(d_{41}/2).
	\end{align*}
	The sums $B+C, C+D, D+B$ are all non-negative, so no two of $B,C,D$ are negative. Since the product $B \cdot C \cdot D$ is also non-negative, we get that all three $B,C,D$ must be non-negative. In particular, $B \geq 0$ gives (\ref{eq:ptolemy-general}).
\end{proof}

\begin{example}
	Let $p_1 = (1,0,0), p_2 = (0,1,0), p_3 = (-1,0,0)$, and $p_4 = (0,-1,0)$ in $M_1^2$, the unit sphere in $\R^3$. Observe that $d_{12}=d_{23}=d_{34}=d_{41} = \pi/2$ and $d_{13}=d_{24}=\pi$. The set $X = \{p_1,p_2,p_3,p_4\}$ is a classic example of a non-Ptolemaic metric space, as
	\begin{equation*}
		d_{12}d_{34}+d_{23}d_{41} = \pi^2/2 < \pi^2 = d_{13}d_{24}.
	\end{equation*}
	However, since $X \subset M_1^2$, it satisfies the 1-Ptolemy inequality:
	\begin{equation*}
		s_1(d_{13}/2)s_1(d_{24}/2) = 1^2 \leq 2\left(\sqrt{2}/2\right)^2 = s_1(d_{12}/2)s_1(d_{34}/2) + s_1(d_{23}/2)s_1(d_{41}/2).
	\end{equation*}
\end{example}

\begin{remark}
	\cite{cm-determinant-irreducible} showed that the determinant $\gamma_\kappa(p_1,\dots,p_{n+2})$ is irreducible for $n \geq 3$.
\end{remark}

\section{CAT-spaces}
The generalization of Ptolemy's inequality to $\cat$-spaces is straightforward with the following 4-point characterization.
\begin{prop}[\cite{non-positive-curvature}, Proposition II.1.11] \label{prop:4pt_condition_CAT_spaces}
	Let $X$ be a $\cat(\kappa)$ space. For every 4-tuple $(p_1,p_2,p_3,p_4) \in X$ such that $d_{12}+d_{23}+d_{34}+d_{41} < 2D_\kappa$, there exists a 4-tuple $(\overline{p}_1,\overline{p}_2,\overline{p}_3,\overline{p}_4) \in M_\kappa^2$ such that (addition is done modulo 4):
	\begin{align*}
		d_{i,i+1} &= \overline{d}_{i,i+1} \text{ and }\\
		d_{i,i+2} &\leq \overline{d}_{i,i+2}.\\
	\end{align*}
\end{prop}

The following is a generalization of the classic argument, as seen in \cite{ptolemy-and-cat0}.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:ptolemy_cat_spaces}
	Let $X$ be a $\cat(\kappa)$ space and $p_1,p_2,p_3,p_4 \in X$ such that $d_{12}+d_{23}+d_{34}+d_{41} < 2D_\kappa$. Then
	\begin{equation*}\label{eq:ptolemy-cat-spaces}
		s_\kappa(d_{13}/2)s_\kappa(d_{24}/2) \leq s_\kappa(d_{12}/2)s_\kappa(d_{34}/2) + s_\kappa(d_{41}/2)s_\kappa(d_{23}/2).
	\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
	With a set $\overline{p}_1, \overline{p}_2, \overline{p}_3, \overline{p}_4 \in M_\kappa^2$ as in Proposition \ref{prop:4pt_condition_CAT_spaces}, Corollary \ref{cor:ptolemy_general_curvature} gives
	\begin{align*}
		s_\kappa(d_{13}/2)s_\kappa(d_{24}/2)
		&\leq s_\kappa(\overline{d}_{13}/2) s_\kappa(\overline{d}_{24}/2)\\
		&\leq s_\kappa(\overline{d}_{12}/2) s_\kappa(\overline{d}_{34}/2) + s_\kappa(\overline{d}_{23}/2) s_\kappa(\overline{d}_{41}/2)\\
		&= s_\kappa(d_{12}/2) s_\kappa(d_{34}/2) + s_\kappa(d_{23}/2) s_\kappa(d_{41}/2).
	\end{align*}
\end{proof}

\begin{example}\label{ex:diameter-example}
	Corollary \ref{cor:ptolemy_general_curvature} is stronger than Theorem \ref{thm:ptolemy_cat_spaces} applied to $M_\kappa^2$ because the former holds without the restriction $d_{12}+d_{23}+d_{34}+d_{41} < 2D_\kappa$. However, this condition is necessary in the latter, as shown by the following example.\\
	\indent Let $G$ be the metric graph formed by a circle $C$ of radius 1 with three edges $e_1,e_2,e_3$ of length $\pi$ attached at the points $p_1,p_2,p_3 \in C$ (see Figure \ref{fig:perimeter_condition}), where $d_G(p_i,p_j) = 2\pi/3$ for $i \neq j$. Since the cycle $C$ has length $2\pi$, $G \in \cat(1)$ \cite[Example II.1.15]{non-positive-curvature}. Let $x_i \in e_i$ such that $d_G(x_i,p_i) = \pi$, and set $x_4=p_3$. Let $d_{ij} = d_G(x_i,x_j)$. We have
	\begin{equation*}
		d_{12}+d_{23}+d_{34}+d_{41} = 8\pi > 2D_1,
	\end{equation*}
	and
	\begin{align*}
		s_1(d_{13}/2) s_1(d_{24}/2)
		&= -\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2} \cdot \frac{1}{2}\\
		&> -\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2} \cdot 1 + \left(-\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}\right) \cdot \frac{1}{2}\\
		&= s_1(d_{12}/2) s_1(d_{34}/2) + s_1(d_{23}/2) s_1(d_{41}/2).
	\end{align*}
	
	\begin{figure}
		\centering
		\input{figures/CAT0-diameter-example}
		\caption{An example of a $\cat(1)$ space $G$ and a subset $x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4$ that show that the restriction $d_{12}+d_{23}+d_{34}+d_{41} < 2D_\kappa$ is necessary in Theorem \ref{thm:ptolemy_cat_spaces}.}
		\label{fig:perimeter_condition}
	\end{figure}
\end{example}

\begin{question}{1}
	The fact that $d_{12}+d_{23}+d_{34}+d_{41}=8\pi$ is much larger than $2D_1=2\pi$ in Example \ref{ex:diameter-example} begs the question of whether the condition $d_{12}+d_{23}+d_{34}+d_{41} < 2D_1$ in Theorem \ref{thm:ptolemy_cat_spaces} is tight or even if it is necessary. We don't have an answer at this point.
\end{question}

\begin{question}{2}
	Analogously to the hyperbolicity of a metric space, we can define
	\begin{equation*}
		P_\kappa(X) = \sup\left[ s_\kappa(d_{13}/2)s_\kappa(d_{24}/2) - \big(s_\kappa(d_{12}/2)s_\kappa(d_{34}/2) + s_\kappa(d_{41}/2)s_\kappa(d_{23}/2)\big) \right],
	\end{equation*}
	where $d_{ij}=d_X(p_i,p_j)$ and the supremum is taken over all $\{p_1,p_2,p_3,p_4\} \subset X$. What properties does this constant have? In particular, is it stable under the Gromov-Hausdorff distance?
\end{question}

\section{The limiting case}
\indent Metric trees are $\cat(\kappa)$ for any $\kappa \in \R$ \cite{non-positive-curvature}, so they satisfy the $\kappa$-Ptolemy inequality for any $\kappa$ by Theorem \ref{thm:ptolemy_cat_spaces}. Now we ask the converse: what can we say about a space $X$ that satisfies the $\kappa$-Ptolemy inequality for all $\kappa$? To answer this, we calculate a certain limit as $\kappa \to -\infty$. For that, recall that $\arcsinh(x) = \ln(x+\sqrt{x^2+1})$ and observe that $\lim_{x \to \infty} \frac{\arcsinh(x)}{\ln(x)} = 1$. If the limit of either the numerator or the denominator exists, then both limits exist and are equal.\\
\indent Let $a,b,c,d \geq 0$ and suppose $c+d \leq a+b$. Then:
\begin{align*}
	\lim_{\kappa \to -\infty} &\textstyle \frac{2}{\sqrt{-\kappa}}\textstyle \arcsinh\left[\sinh\left(\frac{\sqrt{-\kappa}}{2}a\right) \cdot \sinh\left(\frac{\sqrt{-\kappa}}{2}b\right) + \sinh\left(\frac{\sqrt{-\kappa}}{2}c\right) \cdot \sinh\left(\frac{\sqrt{-\kappa}}{2}d\right)\right] \\

	&=\lim_{\kappa \to -\infty}\textstyle \frac{2}{\sqrt{-\kappa}} \ln\left[
	\frac{\exp\left(\frac{\sqrt{-\kappa}}{2}a\right)-\exp\left(-\frac{\sqrt{-\kappa}}{2}a\right)}{2} \cdot
	\frac{\exp\left(\frac{\sqrt{-\kappa}}{2}b\right)-\exp\left(-\frac{\sqrt{-\kappa}}{2}b\right)}{2}\right.\\
	&\indent \phantom{\lim_{\kappa \to -\infty}\textstyle \frac{2}{\sqrt{-\kappa}} \ln\big[\exp\left(\frac{\sqrt{-\kappa}}{2}(a+b)\right) \big(}+\left.\textstyle
	\frac{\exp\left(\frac{\sqrt{-\kappa}}{2}c\right)-\exp\left(-\frac{\sqrt{-\kappa}}{2}c\right)}{2} \cdot
	\frac{\exp\left(\frac{\sqrt{-\kappa}}{2}d\right)-\exp\left(-\frac{\sqrt{-\kappa}}{2}d\right)}{2}
	\right]\\
	%
	&= \lim_{\kappa \to -\infty}\textstyle \frac{2}{\sqrt{-\kappa}} \ln\left[
	\exp\left(\frac{\sqrt{-\kappa}}{2}(a+b)\right) \left(\frac{1-\exp(-\sqrt{-\kappa}a)}{2} \cdot
	\frac{1-\exp(-\sqrt{-\kappa}b)}{2}\right.\right.\\
	&\indent \phantom{\lim_{\kappa \to -\infty}\textstyle \frac{2}{\sqrt{-\kappa}} \ln\big[\exp\left(\frac{\sqrt{-\kappa}}{2}(a+b)\right) \big(}+\left.\left.\textstyle
	\frac{\exp\left(\frac{\sqrt{-\kappa}}{2}(c+d)\right)}{\exp\left(\frac{\sqrt{-\kappa}}{2}(a+b)\right)} \cdot
	\frac{1-\exp(-\sqrt{-\kappa}c)}{2} \cdot
	\frac{1-\exp(-\sqrt{-\kappa}d)}{2}
	\right)\right] \\
	%
	&= \lim_{\kappa \to -\infty}\textstyle \frac{2}{\sqrt{-\kappa}} \ln\left[
	\exp\left(\frac{\sqrt{-\kappa}}{2}(a+b)\right)\right]\\
	& \indent + \lim_{\kappa \to -\infty}\textstyle \frac{2}{\sqrt{-\kappa}} \ln\left[\frac{1-\exp(-\sqrt{-\kappa}a)}{2} \cdot
	\frac{1-\exp(-\sqrt{-\kappa}b)}{2} +
	\frac{\exp\left(\frac{\sqrt{-\kappa}}{2}(c+d)\right)}{\exp\left(\frac{\sqrt{-\kappa}}{2}(a+b)\right)} \cdot
	\frac{1-\exp(-\sqrt{-\kappa}c)}{2} \cdot
	\frac{1-\exp(-\sqrt{-\kappa}d)}{2}
	\right] \\
	&= a+b.
\end{align*}
Since $c+d < a+b$, we have:
\begin{align*}
	\max(a+b, &\ c+d)\\&= \lim_{\kappa \to -\infty}\textstyle \frac{2}{\sqrt{-\kappa}} \arcsinh\left[ \sinh(\frac{\sqrt{-\kappa}}{2}a) \cdot \sinh(\frac{\sqrt{-\kappa}}{2}b) + \sinh(\frac{\sqrt{-\kappa}}{2}c) \cdot \sinh(\frac{\sqrt{-\kappa}}{2}d)\right].
	\intertext{In particular, if $c=d=0$,}
	a+b &= \lim_{\kappa \to -\infty}\textstyle \frac{2}{\sqrt{-\kappa}} \arcsinh\left[ \sinh(\frac{\sqrt{-\kappa}}{2}a) \cdot \sinh(\frac{\sqrt{-\kappa}}{2}b)\right].
\end{align*}

As a result, if the inequality
$
s_\kappa(d_{13}/2)s_\kappa(d_{24}/2) \leq s_\kappa(d_{12}/2)s_\kappa(d_{34}/2) + s_\kappa(d_{41}/2)s_\kappa(d_{23}/2)
$
is satisfied for all $\kappa<0$, when we take $\frac{2}{\sqrt{-\kappa}}\arcsinh(\cdot)$, the limit above gives
\begin{equation*}
	d_{13}+d_{24} \leq \max(d_{12}+d_{34}, d_{14}+d_{23}).
\end{equation*}

In other words, if $X$ satisfies the $\kappa$-Ptolemy inequality for all $\kappa$, then it also satisfies the 4-point condition, giving the following characterization of metric trees.

\begin{theorem}
	Given a metric space $(X,d_X)$, the following are equivalent:
	\begin{enumerate}
		\item $X$ can be isometrically embedded in a metric tree.
		\item Every subset $\{x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4\} \subset X$ satisfies the 4-point condition.
		\item Every subset $\{x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4\} \subset X$ satisfies the $\kappa$-Ptolemy inequality for all $\kappa$ such that $d_{12}+d_{23}+d_{34}+d_{41} < 2D_\kappa$.
	\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}



2021-11-24T02:03:38.000
2111
2111.10328
en
https://arxiv.org/abs/2111.10328
Ptolemy's inequality is a classic relationship between the distances among four points in Euclidean space. Another relationship between six distances is the 4-point condition, an inequality satisfied by the lengths of the six paths that join any four points of a metric (or weighted) tree. The 4-point condition also characterizes when a finite metric space can be embedded in such a tree. The curious observer might realize that these inequalities have similar forms: if one replaces addition and multiplication in Ptolemy's inequality with maximum and addition, respectively, one obtains the 4-point condition. We show that this similarity is more than a coincidence. We identify a family of Ptolemaic inequalities in CAT-spaces parametrized by a real number and show that a certain limit involving these inequalities, as the parameter goes to negative infinity, yields the 4-point condition, giving an elementary proof that the latter is the tropicalization of Ptolemy's inequality.
Metric Geometry (math.MG)
The Four Point Condition: An Elementary Tropicalization of Ptolemy's Inequality
Qwen/Qwen-72B
1. YES
2. YES