Convex fair partitions into an arbitrary number of pieces

Abstract: We prove that any convex body in the plane can be partitioned into $m$ convex parts of equal areas and perimeters for any integer $m\ge 2$; this result was previously known for prime powers $m=p^k$. We also discuss possible higher-dimensional generalizations and difficulties of extending our technique to equalizing more than one non-additive function.

\section{Introduction}

In \cite{nandakumar2008} a very natural problem was posed: Given a positive integer $m$ and a convex body $K$ in the plane, cut it into $m$	convex pieces of equal areas and perimeters. Here we do not discuss any algorithm to provide such a cut, we only concentrate on the existence result.

The case $m=2$ of the problem is done with a simple continuity argument. The case $m=2^k$ could be done similarly using the Borsuk--Ulam-type lemma by Gromov~\cite{grom2003} (see also \cite{klartag2016}), which was used to prove another result, the waist theorem for the Gaussian measure (and the sphere). In \cite{barblsz2010} the case $m=3$ was done.

Further cases, $m=p^k$ for a prime $p$, were established in \cite{ahk2014} and \cite{bz2014} independently (and a~similar but weaker fact was established in \cite{bespamyatnikh2000,soberon2012}). In both papers higher-dimensional analogues of the problem were stated and proved. This time we establish a new series of results:

\begin{theorem}
\label{theorem:main}
Any convex body $K\subset\mathbb R^2$ can be partitioned into~$m$ parts of equal area and perimeter, for any integer $m\ge 2$.
\end{theorem}

As in the previous work \cite{ahk2014} and \cite{bz2014}, a ``perimeter'' here may mean any continuous function of a convex body in the plane. More precisely, this real-valued function must be defined on convex bodies (convex compacta with non-empty interior) continuously in the Hausdorff metric; in particular, we never apply this function to degenerate convex compacta with empty interior.

An ``area'' may be measured with any finite Borel measure with non-negative density in $K$; for a positive density the proof passes literally and the non-negative density is obtained with the standard compactness argument.

The rest of the text delivers the proof of the theorem. In Appendices \ref{section:higher-pos} and \ref{section:higher-neg} we present a higher-dimensional result that does not fully generalize the two-dimensional case, and an explanation of the difficulties of applying our tools to the true higher-dimensional generalization of the two-dimensional problem when $m$ is not a prime power.

Compared to the previous work on this and similar problems, this time we have found a way to go beyond the usual equivariant (co)homological argument that restricts the possible result to the prime power case. Our proof builds a solution recursively. To prove its validity we argue by induction and use a certain separation lemma that allows us to use the standard homological arguments modulo different primes at different stages of the induction.

\subsection*{Acknowledgments} We thank Alfredo Hubard and Sergey Melikhov for helpful discussions on the problem, Pavle Blagojevi\'c and Peter Landweber for numerous remarks on the text.

\section{How the proof for $m=p^k$ works}
\label{section:bz}

We will essentially use the mechanism of the proof for the $m=p^k$ case; thus we recall the corresponding construction. Let $F_m(\mathbb R^2)$ be the configuration space of $m$-tuples $(x_1,\ldots, x_m)$ of pairwise distinct points in the plane. To every such $m$-tuple we uniquely associate (following~\cite{aurenhammer1998}) the weighted Voronoi partition of the plane,
\[
\mathbb R^2 = V_1\cup \dots \cup V_m,
\]
with centers at $x_1,\ldots,x_m$ such that the areas of the intersections $V_i\cap K$ are all equal. This can be done continuously in the configuration $F_m(\mathbb R^2)$. Then we produce the map ($f$ is for perimeter here)
\[
\sigma : F_m(\mathbb R^2) \to \mathbb R^m,\quad \sigma(x_1,\ldots,x_m) \mapsto \left( f(V_1\cap K),\ldots, f(V_m\cap K) \right),
\]
and then compose it with the quotient by the diagonal
\[
\Delta = \{(t,t,\ldots, t) : t\in\mathbb R\} \subset\mathbb R^m
\]
to obtain
\[
\tau : F_m(\mathbb R^2) \to \mathbb R^m/\Delta =: W_m.
\]
The space $W_m$ here can be interpreted as the $(m-1)$-dimensional irreducible representation of the permutation group $\mathfrak S_m$; with the natural action of $\mathfrak S_m$ of $F_m(\mathbb R^2)$ this map $\tau$ becomes $\mathfrak S_m$-equivariant.

The proof of the case $m=p^k$ is done by applying a Borsuk--Ulam-type theorem (essentially established in \cite{vassiliev1988}) showing that any equivariant map $F_m(\mathbb R^2) \to W_m$ must hit the origin, this corresponds to equal perimeters in our partition. This is already good, but to move further we need more details.

For the case $m=2^k$ (essentially in \cite{grom2003}) a subspace $T^{m-1}\subset F_m()$ was exhibited, this is a product of $m-1$ circles in one-to-one correspondence with all vertices of a binary tree with $m/2$ leaves. By choosing a sufficiently small $\varepsilon>0$, for any leaf of this tree we consider the uniquely defined chain of its vertices (considered here as the corresponding unit vectors in the plane) $v_1,\ldots,v_k$ from the root to this leaf, and add the two vectors
\begin{equation}
\label{equation:epicycles}
v_1 + \varepsilon v_2 + \dots + \varepsilon^{k-1} v_k,\quad v_1 + \varepsilon v_2 + \dots - \varepsilon^{k-1} v_k
\end{equation}
to the list of points that totally makes $m$ distinct points in the plane. This provides an embedding $T^{m-1}\subset F_m(\mathbb R^2)$, which is equivariant with respect to the action of $\mathfrak S_m^{(2)}$, the $2$-Sylow subgroup of the permutation group, whose action on $T^{m-1}$ is generated by sending $v_i\mapsto -v_i$ at one of the vertices and interchanging the two subtrees of this vertex. The map $\tau$ then restricts to a $\mathfrak S_m^{(2)}$-equivariant map
\[
\tau_1 : T^{m-1} \to W_m.
\]
It is easy to produce a particular case $\tau_0$ of such an equivariant map by taking the first coordinates of the vectors in \eqref{equation:epicycles} and see that $\tau_0$ is transverse to zero and $\tau_0^{-1}(0)$ consists of a single $\mathfrak S_m^{(2)}$ orbit (all vectors $v_i$ pointing either either up or down). Hence $\tau_0^{-1}$ is nonzero in the $0$-dimensional $\mathfrak S_m^{(2)}$-equivariant homology modulo $2$ of $T^{m-1}$, and therefore for another equivariant map $\tau_1$ transverse to zero the set $\tau_1^{-1}(0)$ is nonempty since it is homologous to $\tau_0^{-1}$ through $\chi^{-1}(0)$ for an appropriately perturbed equivariant homotopy
\[
\chi : T^{m-1}\times [0,1] \to W_m,\quad \chi(t,s) = (1-s)\tau_0 + s \tau_1.
\]
A more detailed explanation of this can be found in \cite[Theorem 2.1]{klartag2016}.

For the odd prime power case, in \cite{bz2014} it was shown that there exists a polyhedron $P_m\subset F_m(\mathbb R^2)$ of dimension $m-1$, which is $\mathfrak S_m$-equivariantly homotopy equivalent to the whole $F_m(\mathbb R^2)$. This is useful because when we restrict the map to $P_m$, the solution set $\tau^{-1}(0)$ becomes generically (for a slightly equivariantly permuted $\tau$) a finite set of points, so the proof can be interpreted as a statement about how many points are in $\tau^{-1}(0)$ for generic $\tau$.

In \cite[Section 4.1]{bz2014} it was shown that the top-dimensional and $1$-codimensional cells of $P_m$ can be oriented so that the action of $\mathfrak S_m$ changes the orientation according to the sign of the permutation, and with this orientation the top-dimensional cells produce a nontrivial cohomology class in the $\mathfrak S_m$-equivariant cohomology with coefficients in the sheaf $\pm\mathbb Z$, on which $\mathfrak S_m$ acts by its permutation sign.

In order to avoid orientation issues and twisted coefficients in a sheaf, we pass to the subgroup $G\subset\mathfrak S_m$ of even permutations. The above mentioned facts mean that the quotient $P_m/G$ is a modulo $p$ pseudomanifold, that is its two top-dimensional cells can be oriented so that the boundary of the corresponding chain is equal to zero modulo $p$. It is also shown in \cite[Section~4.1]{bz2014} that a specially chosen test map $\tau_0 : P_m \to W_m$ has $\tau_0^{-1}(0)$ consisting of a single $\mathfrak S_m$-orbit, that corresponds to a pair of points in $P_m/G$ with equal signs. The $G$-invariant orientations of $P_m$ and $W_m$ allow one to consider the solution points with signs.

Since $P_m/G$ is a pseudomanifold modulo $p$, the quotient of the zero set $\tau^{-1}(0)/G$ of an equivariant map $\tau : T^{m-1} \to W_m$, considered as a $0$-dimensional modulo $p$ chain in $P_m/G$, changes homologously to itself (modulo $p$, since $P_m/G$ is a modulo $p$ pseudomanifold) when we change the map $\tau$ in a generic (transverse to zero) homotopy of equivariant maps. Since the test zero set $\tau_0^{-1}(0)$ has two points of $P_m/G$ of the same sign, it is not homologous to a zero cycle, hence $\tau^{-1}(0)$ is generically a $0$-cycle modulo $p$ not homologous to zero and hence it is never empty.

It will be important for us to extract the following observation from the above exposition of the proof. If the problem (e.g. the set $K$) depends on a parameter $t\in [a,b]$ then we obtain a family of zero sets $\tau_t^{-1}(0)$. This can be naturally viewed as a preimage of zero under an~$\mathfrak S_m$-equivariant map
\[
\chi : P_m\times [a,b] \to W_m.
\]
For a generic (transverse to zero) homotopy $\chi$ this preimage of zero $Z\subset P_m/G\times [a,b]$ will be a one-dimensional polyhedron. Since any continuous map can be approximated with a piece-wise linear map, the reader may assume all maps we consider piece-wise linear; in this case the transversality to zero is simply defined by the transversality to zero of the restriction of the map to any face of the triangulation of the polyhedron, for which the map is linear on faces of the triangulation.

From the orientation of $W_m$ and the pseudomanifold modulo $p$ structure of $P_m/G\times [a,b]$ it follows that $Z$ is naturally a one-dimensional pseudomanifold modulo $p$ with boundary. This means $Z$ is an oriented graph with some vertices on $P_m/G\times \{a\}$ or $P_m/G\times \{b\}$, whose vertices lying in $P_m/G\times (a,b)$ have the number of incoming edges equal to the number of outgoing edges modulo~~$p$, similar to the structure of the pseudomanifold, where every condimension one face has zero modulo $p$ attached top-dimensional faces counted with orientation. In particular, $Z$ represents a modulo $p$ cycle in $P_m/G\times [a,b]$ relative to $P_m/G\times \{a,b\}$, whose intersection with a generic subset $P_m/G\times \{t\}$ is a nontrivial $0$-dimensional cycle modulo $p$. This is what we need to move further.

\section{Proof for $m=2p^k$}

Let us start by considering the simplest particular case of our result, still exhibiting the main technique that we utilize. We consider an odd prime $p$ and $m=2p^k$. The full proof will be somewhat technical and is postponed to the next section.

Now we essentially use the last observation of the previous exposition of the case $m=p^k$. Take a parameter $t\in [0,\pi]$ and cut $K$ by a straight line directed along $(\cos t, \sin t)$ into equal area halves, it is uniquely done given the direction $t$. $K$ will be cut into $L_t$ and $M_t$. Note that (see Figure~\ref{fig:halfing-plane})
\begin{equation}
\label{interchange}
L_\pi = M_0,\quad M_\pi = L_0.
\end{equation}

Consider the problem of partitioning $L_t$ and $M_t$ into equal parts. They produce two families of problems with two solution sets $Z_L, Z_M\subset P_{p^k}/G\times [0,\pi]$. Perturbing the test map $\tau$ generically we make it transverse to zero and assume $Z_L$ and $Z_M$ are $1$-cycles modulo $p$, as described above. Now for any solution, say, $(z,t)\in Z_L$ assign a point $(f(z), t)\in \mathbb R\times [0,\pi]$, where $f(z)$ is the common perimeter in the corresponding partition of $L_t$ into $m$ equal parts. This is a continuous map, hence we may view its image $G_L$ as a $1$-dimensional cycle modulo $p$ in the strip $S = \mathbb R\times [0,\pi]$ relative to its boundary. This means that generically $G_L$ is an oriented graph drawing all of whose vertices in the interior of the strip have the number of incoming edges equal to the number of outgoing edges modulo $p$; and a generic vertical line $S_t = \mathbb R\times \{t\}$ intersects $G_L$ a nonzero number of times modulo $p$, when counted with signs and multiplicities.

In a similar fashion we produce the $1$-dimensional cycle $G_M$, coming from perimeters of the partitions of $M_t$. From \eqref{interchange} it follows that $G_L\cap S_0$ equals $G_M\cap S_\pi$ up to a horizontal shift and $G_M\cap \ell_0$ equals $G_L\cap \ell_\pi$ up to a horizontal shift, as zero-dimensional cycles. The crucial observation is:

	\parbox[b]{0.4\textwidth}{
		\begin{center}
			\includegraphics{fig-nandakumar-1}\\
		\refstepcounter{fig} Fig. \arabic{fig}.  \label{fig:halfing-plane}
		\end{center}
	}
	\hskip 0.6cm
	\parbox[b]{0.5\textwidth}{
		\begin{center}
			\includegraphics{fig-nandakumar-2}\\
		\refstepcounter{fig} Fig. \arabic{fig}.  \label{fig:cylinder}
		\end{center}
	}

\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:cylinder-twodim}
The assumptions described above on the cycles $G_L$ and $G_M$ guarantee that their supports intersect.
\end{lemma}

The theorem follows from this lemma since a common point of the supports of $G_L$ and $G_M$ corresponds to a pair of partitions of $L_t$ and $M_t$ into $m$ parts each such that the all areas in both partitions are equal to $\frac{\area K}{2m}$, and all the perimeters on both partitions coincide because the corresponding points of $G_L$ and $G_M$ are the same.

\begin{proof}[Proof of the Lemma]
Double the strip $S$ to have $C = \mathbb R\times [0,2\pi]$, and consider it a cylinder by identifying $t=0$ and $t=2\pi$. Let $R$ be the translation by $\pi$ to the right modulo $2\pi$, the half-rotation of the cylinder. The description of the boundary shows that the chains
\[
G'_L = G_L + R(G_M),\quad G'_M = G_M + R(G_L)
\]
are cycles modulo $p$ with disjoint supports, intersecting a generic vertical line nonzero modulo~$p$ number of times, and such that $R(G'_L) = G'_M$ (see Figure~\ref{fig:cylinder} for an example of two such cycles, they are drawn with solid and dashed lines respectively). Those cycles are just full versions of the original cycles defined for arbitrary rotation angle $t$.

Since the modulo $p$ cycle $G'_L$ intersects a generic vertical line a nonzero modulo~$p$ number of times, it must also intersect any curve going from the infinite bottom to the infinite top of the cylinder by the homological invariance of the intersection (this curve is considered as a modulo $p$ chain in the homology of the cylinder relative to its top and bottom). Hence $G'_L$ splits the cylinder $C$ into connected parts, one of which is infinite at the top and bounded at the bottom, call it $A$. The half-rotated $G'_M=R(G'_L)$ has the corresponding component of the complement $R(A)$. The strict inclusion $A\subset R(A)$ is impossible since it would follow that $R(A) \subset R(R(A)) = A$; the opposite strict inclusion $R(A)\subset A$ is also impossible. Since $A$ and $R(A)$ evidently intersect somewhere at the top, this means that the boundaries of $A$ and $R(A)$ must intersect, hence $G'_L$ intersects $G'_M$.

\end{proof}

\section{Proof for arbitrary $m$}

In our proof of the general case of Theorem \ref{theorem:main}, we are going to use induction, which also resembles the proof of a particular case of the Knaster problem by induction in \cite{yamabe1950}.

First, for an odd prime $p$ let $P_p$ be the polyhedron used in the proof of \cite{bz2014}; it is a subset of the configuration space of distinct $p$-tuples of points in $\mathbb R^2$ and it therefore has a natural action of $\mathfrak S_p$, which we restrict to the group of even permutations $G_p\subset\mathfrak S_p$. The group $G_p$ acts freely on $P_p$ and preserves a certain orientation of its top-dimensional faces of dimension $p-1$, splitting those faces into two $G_p$-orbits. For $p=2$, let $P_2$ be a circle with the antipodal action of $G_2 := \mathbb Z/2$. What we need is that, as in the proof of the prime power case, $P_p$ will parameterize certain partitions of a planar convex body into $p$ parts of equal area.

It turns out helpful to use the language of multivalued functions on the space of convex bodies $\mathcal K$. In fact, in our argument we will only use finite-dimensional subspaces of $\mathcal K$ build of the above-mentioned polyhedra $P_p$, hence we may always assume that $\mathcal K$ is a polyhendron, thus avoiding topological difficulties.

\begin{definition}
A \emph{nice} multivalued function $\mathcal K\to (-1,1)$ is determined by its closed graph in $\mathcal K\times [-1,1]$, that is given by the equation
\[
\phi(C, y) = 0,
\]
where $\phi: \mathcal K\times [-1,1]\to\mathbb R$ is a continuous single-valued function satisfying
\[
\phi(C, -1) < 0,\quad \phi(C, 1) > 0
\]
for all $C\in \mathcal K$.
\end{definition}

Evidently, a nice multivalued function attains at least one value on every $C\in\mathcal K$, that is for every $C\in\mathcal K$ there exists $y$ such that the pair $(C,y)$ is on the graph of the multivalued function. This follows from the intermediate value theorem for the continuous function $\phi$.

Here we restrict the values of a multivalued function to $(-1,1)$, which in practice may be assumed after an appropriate scaling of its values, if the values were in a larger interval $(-L, L)$. Any continuous single-valued function $f : \mathcal K\to (-1,1)$ may be considered as a nice multivalued function by putting
\[
\phi(C,y) = f(C) - y.
\]

We will identify a nice multivalued function on $\mathcal K$ with the equation of its graph $\phi(C,y)$, when we need to refer to this function by a name. Theorem \ref{theorem:main} will follow from iterations of the following claim:

\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:function-to-function}
Assume $\phi$ is a nice multivalued function of $\mathcal K$ and $p$ is a prime. Then there exists another nice multivalued function $\psi$ of $\mathcal K$ such that whenever $C\in\mathcal K$ satisfies
\[
\psi(C, y) = 0
\]
then there exists a partition $C = C_1\cup \dots \cup C_p$ into convex bodies of equal area, such that
\begin{equation}
\label{equation:equalized-p}
\phi(C_1, y) = \dots = \phi(C_p, y) = 0.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{theorem:main} assuming the lemma]
Let $\phi_1$ be the perimeter single-valued function. Apply the lemma to $\phi_1$ and $p_1$ to obtain $\phi_2$. Then apply the lemma to $\phi_2$ and $p_2$ and so on, where $m=p_1\cdots p_n$ is the decomposition of our given $m$ into primes. The final function $\phi_{n+1}$ will be a nice mutlivalued function of a convex body.

From the intermediate value theorem, there exists $y\in (-1,1)$ such that
\[
\phi_{n+1}(C, y) = 0
\]
for the convex body $C$ we are interested in. In means that $C$ may be partitioned into $p_n$ convex bodies of equal area and the same value $y$ of the multivalued function $\phi_n$. Each of these bodies may in turn be partitioned into $p_{n-1}$ parts of equal area and the same value $y$ of the multivalued function $\phi_{n-1}$, and so on. Eventually, we obtain a partition of $C$ into $m=p_1\cdots p_n$ parts of equal area and the same value $y$ of the multivalued function $\phi_1$, which is in fact the single-valued perimeter function.
\end{proof}

\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{lemma:function-to-function}]
Parametrize some of the partitions of $C\in\mathcal K$ into $p$ convex parts of equal area with the space $P_p$, as in \cite{bz2014}. Equations \eqref{equation:equalized-p} then define a closed subset $S\subset \mathcal K\times P_p\times [-1,1]$.

The set $S$ is $G_p$-invariant, where $G_p$ acts on $P_p$ as in \cite{bz2014} ($P_p$ is a subset of the configuration space of $p$-tuples of pairwise distinct points in $\mathbb R^2$ and $G_p$ permutes those points) and trivially acts on $\mathcal K$ and $[-1,1]$. To be more precise, the set $S$ is the preimage of zero under the $G_p$-equivariant continuous map
\[
\Phi : \mathcal K\times P_p \times [-1,1]\to \mathbb R^p,\quad \Phi(C, x, y) = \left( \phi(C_1(x), y), \phi(C_2(x), y), \ldots, \phi(C_p(x), y) \right),
\]
where $C_i(x)$ denotes the $i$th part of the convex partition of $C$ corresponding to the configuration $x\in P_p$. This map is $G_p$-equivariant if $\mathbb R^p$ is acted on by $G_p$ by permutation of coordinates.

Fix a body $C$ and study the structure of the fiber set
\[
S_C = S\cap \left( \{C\}\times P_p \times [-1,1] \right).
\]
When the $G_p$-equivariant map
\[
\Phi_C = \Phi|_{\{C\}\times P_p \times [-1,1]}
\]
is transverse to zero, the solution set $S_C$ is a finite number of points from the dimension considerations.

If we make a homotopy of $\Phi_C$ as a $G_p$-equivariant map with the boundary conditions on its components $\phi(C_i, y)$ then the solution set $S_C$ changes, but it changes in a definite way. If the homotopy $H : P_p\times [-1,1]\times [0,1]\to \mathbb R$ is transverse to zero (this can be achieved by a small perturbation) then $H^{-1}(0)$ represents a $G_p$-equivariant $1$-dimensional cycle modulo $p$ relative to $P_p\times [-1,1]\times \{0,1\}$. Indeed, under the transversality assumption $H^{-1}(0)$ consists of smooth oriented segments in the top-dimensional faces of the domain $P_p\times [-1,1]\times [0,1]$ and isolated points of intersection with the $1$-codimensional skeleton of the domain. Since the domain is a pseudomanifold, the segments are attached to every point $0$ modulo $p$ times, unless we are at the boundary pieces $P_p\times [-1,1]\times \{0\}$ and $P_p\times [-1,1]\times \{1\}$ of the domain, where the chain $H^{-1}(0)$ has the boundary modulo $p$ coinciding with the zero sets of the initial $\Phi_C(\cdot, \cdot) = H(\cdot, \cdot, 0)$ and the final $\Phi_C(\cdot, \cdot) = H(\cdot, \cdot, 1)$. Hence the zero set of a transverse to zero $\Phi_C$ changes equivariantly homologously to itself under $G_p$-equivariant homotopies of the map $\Phi_C$.

Let us present an instance of a transverse to zero map $\Phi_0 : P_p\times [-1,1] \to \mathbb R^p$ (a test map), which is $G_p$-equivariant and satisfies the boundary conditions that we impose on $\Phi_C$, and for which the set $\Phi_0^{-1}(0)$ is homologically nontrivial. By the above homotopy consideration (connecting $\Phi_0$ to $\Phi_C$ by convexly combining their coordinates), the existence of such a test map implies the homological nontriviality of $S_C$ for any transverse to zero map $\Phi_C$. In order to produce the needed test map, we may take the $\mathfrak S_p$-equivariant test map
\[
\Psi_0 : P_p \to W_p
\]
considered in \cite{bz2014}. Here it is convenient to consider $W_p\subset\mathbb R^p$ as the linear subspace of $p$-tuples with zero sum. The transverse preimage of zero $\Psi_0^{-1}(0)$ consists of the unique $\mathfrak S_p$-orbit of a point in the relative interior of a top-dimensional face of $P_p$. This solution set $\Psi_0^{-1}(0)$ is either a single $G_p$-orbit (for $p=2$) or splits into two $G_p$-orbits (for odd $p$), but both with the same sign. This verifies the homological nontriviality of $\Psi_0^{-1}(0)$ as a $0$-dimensional $G_p$-equivariant cycle.

We augment $\Psi_0$ to the map (assuming the coordinates of $\Psi_0$ are in the interval $(-1,1)$)
\[
\Phi_0(x,y) = \Psi_0(x) + \left(y,\ldots,y\right).
\]
Then $\Phi_0^{-1}(0) = \Psi_0^{-1}(0)\times \{0\}$ and this preimage is still a nontrivial $G_p$-equivariant $0$-cycle modulo $p$. Hence, we obtain:

\begin{claim}
\label{claim-nonzero-cycle}
For transverse to zero $\Phi_C$, the set $S_C$ is a nontrivial $G_p$-equivariant $0$-cycle modulo $p$. Its projection to the segment $[-1,1]$ is a nontrivial $0$-cycle modulo $p$.
\end{claim}

Note that the set $S_C$ is always non-empty, since were it empty, the map $\Phi_C$ would be transverse to zero by definition and $S_C$ would have to be non-empty by the claim. Assume now we change the convex body $C$ in a continuous one-parameteric family $\{C(s)\ |\ s\in [a,b]\}$ and obtain a $G_p$-equivariant map with one more parameter
\[
\widetilde\Phi : P_p \times [a,b] \times [-1,1] \to \mathbb R^p,\quad \widetilde\Phi (x, s, y) = \left( \phi(C_1(x, s), y), \phi(C_2(x, s), y), \ldots, \phi(C_1(x, s), y) \right),
\]
where $C_i(x,s)$ is the $i$th part of the partition of $C(s)$ corresponding to $P_p$.

The solution set $\widetilde\Phi^{-1}(0)$ now generically (when $\widetilde\Phi$ is transverse to zero) represents a $G_p$-equivariant $1$-dimensional cycle modulo $p$ relative to $P_p \times \{a,b\} \times [-1,1]$. As in the above argument, under the transversality assumption $\widetilde\Phi^{-1}(0)$ consists of smooth oriented segments in the top-dimensional faces of the domain $P_p \times [a,b] \times [-1,1]$ and isolated points of intersection with the $1$-codimensional skeleton of the domain; since the domain is a pseudomanifold, the segments are attached to every point $0$ modulo $p$ times, unless $s=a$ or $s=b$.

Projecting $\widetilde\Phi^{-1}(0)$ to the rectangle $[a,b]\times [-1,1]$ (every $G_p$-orbit goes to a single point), we get a $1$-dimensional cycle modulo $p$ relative to $\{a,b\}\times [-1,1]$, intersecting a generic line $s = c$ nontrivially modulo $p$ by the previous claim, since this is the solution set of a generic problem without a parameter. It is crucial that any curve connecting the bottom $[a,b]\times \{-1\}$ to the top $[a,b]\times \{1\}$ of the rectangle is homologous to such a line, and it must intersect the cycle by the homological invariance of the intersection number. Hence we obtain:

\begin{claim}
For a family of convex bodies $C(s)$, the set
\[
S_{C(s)} = S\cap \left( \{C(s)\ |\ s\in [a,b]\} \times P_p\times [-1,1]\right)
\]
separates top from the bottom when projected to $[a,b]\times [-1,1]$.
\end{claim}

We have proved this for a transverse to zero $\widetilde\Phi$, but the transversality assumption is not necessary. Once we have a curve from  $[a,b]\times \{-1\}$ to $[a,b]\times \{1\}$ not touching the projection of the solution set for an arbitrary $G_p$-equivariant $\widetilde\Phi$, satisfying the boundary conditions, this curve will not touch the projection of the solution set for a small generic (and therefore transverse to zero) perturbation of $\widetilde\Phi$; but the latter is already shown to be impossible.

Now we consider the ``big cylinder'' $\mathcal K\times [-1,1]$, where the graphs of multivalued functions live. Assume we have a continuous curve
\[
\gamma : [a,b] \to \mathcal K\times [-1,1]
\]
passing from the bottom $\mathcal K\times \{-1\}$ to the top $\mathcal K\times \{1\}$ in the cylinder and parametrized by a segment $[a,b]$. Its first coordinate may be considered as a one-parametric family of convex bodies $C(s)$. Hence applying the previous claim, we obtain:

\begin{claim}
The projection $Z$ of $S$ to $\mathcal K\times [-1,1]$ separates the top $\mathcal K\times \{1\}$ from the bottom $\mathcal K \times \{-1\}$.
\end{claim}

This is the crucial separation property of $Z\subset \mathcal K\times [-1,1]$, considered as a graph of a multivalued function. We show that the separation property implies that this multivalued function is nice.

Take the distance to the set $Z$ function, $\dist(\cdot, Z)$,  under some metrization of $\mathcal K\times [-1,1]$, it is continuous and positive on the complement of $Z$. Since the top and the bottom of $\mathcal K\times [-1,1]$ belong to different connected components of the complement, we can flip the sign of this function on the bottom component to make it satisfy the signed boundary conditions of nice multivalued functions. In effect, we obtain a function
\[
\psi : \mathcal K\times [-1,1] \to \mathbb R,
\]
satisfying the boundary condition sufficient to call its corresponding multivalued function with the graph $\{\psi(C,y)=0\}$ nice. Our construction ensures that whenever $\psi(C, y) = 0$, the pair $(C,y)$ is in $Z$ and corresponds to $(C,x,y)\in S$. The latter triple, in turn, provides a partition of $C$ into $p$ convex bodies $C_1,\ldots, C_p$ satisfying
\[
\phi(C_1, y) = \dots = \phi(C_p, y).
\]
\end{proof}

\section{Appendix: A weaker higher-dimensional result}
\label{section:higher-pos}

Now we are going to consider the case when we work in $\mathbb R^d$, have $d-1$ measures $\mu_1,\ldots, \mu_{d-1}$ in a convex body $K$ and want to partition $K$ into $m$ convex parts of equal $\mu_j$ measure (for every $j$) and equal surface area. As with the perimeter, the ``surface area'' may be any continuous function of a convex body in $\mathbb R^d$.

In Appendix \ref{section:higher-neg} we explain why our approach is not suitable when we want to equalize two arbitrary functions and $d-2$ measures of parts, which is why we only dare to handle one arbitrary function here. Let us state the result:

\begin{theorem}
\label{theorem:main-d}
Assume $d-1$ finite non-zero Borel measures $\mu_1,\ldots,\mu_{d-1}$ with non-negative density are given in a convex body $K\subset\mathbb R^d$ and $f$ is a continuous function of a convex body. If $m\ge 2$ is an integer then it is possible to partition $K$ into $m$ convex parts $V_1,\ldots, V_m$ so that for every $i$
\[
\mu_i(V_1) = \mu_i(V_2) = \dots = \mu_i(V_m)
\]
and
\[
f(V_1) = f(V_2) = \dots = f(V_m).
\]
\end{theorem}

In \cite{soberon2012} a similar result was proved, in the case of $d$ measures and no arbitrary function. In terms of the previous section this is explained as follows: In the induction step we equalize $d$ measures in $p_1$-tuples of parts of the bottom level of the hierarchical partition, but we do not need to work with ``multivalued functions'' because the measures are additive and once we equalize the measures we know the common value.

As for the proof, our $d$-dimensional theorem follows from the following analogue of Lemma \ref{lemma:function-to-function}. Let $\mathcal K^d$ be the space of $d$-dimensional convex bodies:

\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:function-to-function-d}
Assume $\phi$ is a nice multivalued function of $\mathcal K^d$ and $p$ is a prime. Then there exists another nice multivalued function $\psi$ of $\mathcal K^d$ such that whenever $C\in\mathcal K^d$ satisfies
\[
\psi(C, y) = 0
\]
then there exists a partition $C = C_1\cup \dots \cup C_p$ into convex bodies of equal measure $\mu_i$, for every $i=1,\ldots, d-1$, and such that
\begin{equation}
\label{equation:equalized-p-d}
\phi(C_1, y) = \dots = \phi(C_p, y) = 0.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}

The proof follows by considering the more general $(d-1)(p-1)$-dimensional pseudomanifolds modulo a prime $p$, $P_{p;d}$, introduced in \cite{bz2014}, with the group of symmetry $G_p$ as in the previous section. The map $\Phi_C : P_{p;d}\times [-1,1] \to \mathbb R^{(d-1)p}$ is then build from a configuration $x\in P_{p;d}$ of $p$ points in $\mathbb R^d$, considered as Voronoi centers. The measure $\mu_{d-1}$ is equalized by finding appropriate Voronoi weights and establishing a partition $C=C_1\cup\dots\cup C_p$, the functions $\mu_i(C_j)$ ($i=1,\ldots, d-2$) and $\phi(C_i, y)$ then constitute the coordinates of $\Phi_C$. Whenever such $\Phi_C$ is transverse to zero, the preimage of zero is a nontrivial $0$-cycle modulo $p$; this is a version of Claim \ref{claim-nonzero-cycle} in this more general situation.

The rest of the proof of Lemma \ref{lemma:function-to-function-d} is essentially the same as the proof of Lemma \ref{lemma:function-to-function}. Theorem \ref{theorem:main-d} follows as in the two-dimensional case, the measures are equalized since on every prime number stage the partition is a partition into parts of equal measures, the function $\phi$ is equalized as guaranteed by the lemma.

\begin{remark}
Of course, we were trying to find a generalization of this argument in order, for example, to equalize two arbitrary functions of the convex parts in $\mathbb R^3$ together with their volumes. A crucial obstacle, in our opinion, is that when we make an induction step and consider a ``subfunction'' of a multivalued function with a separation argument, then the procedure of restoring the subpartition (of a part in the hierarchy) corresponding to the chosen common value of this equalized function of the subpartition is not continuous. In particular the other function we want to equalize may not depend continuously (or be a nice multivalued function) on the first one after this choice.
\end{remark}

\section{Appendix: Difficulty of equalizing two arbitrary functions}
\label{section:higher-neg}

In this section we point out some essential difficulties in the attempt to generalize our technique to the case when we need to equalize at least two arbitrary continuous functions of convex parts. We thank Sergey Melikhov for sharing with us his ideas that developed into the argument of this section.

Assume we have a convex body $K\subset\mathbb R^3$ and want to partition it into $m=2p^s$ ($p$ is an odd prime) convex parts with equal volumes, and equal values of two other continuous in Hausdorff metric functions $F_1, F_2$ of the parts. We would naturally start by partitioning $K$ into two parts of equal volume; such partitions are parametrized by the normal of the oriented partitioning plane, that is by the sphere $S^2$. Then in the part of $K$ the normal points to, we would apply the Blagojevi\'c--Ziegler result for $m=p^s$ to have a nonzero modulo $p$ number of solutions for this half of the problem. Looking at the possible pairs of common values of $F_1,F_2$ we would obtain, as in the proof of the  main result of this paper, a multivalued function $S^2\to \mathbb R^2$, whose graph in $S^2\times \mathbb R^2$, under certain genericity assumptions, could be viewed as a $2$-dimensional cycle modulo $p$, which we denote by $Z$, homologous modulo $p$ to $k[S^2\times \{(0,0)\}]$ for some $k\neq 0\mod p$.

The problem would be solved this way if we could prove that under the antipodal map $\sigma : S^2\to S^2$, extended to $S^2\times \mathbb R^2$ by the trivial action of $\sigma$ on $\mathbb R^2$, some point of the support of $Z$ would go to some other point of the support of $Z$. But below we build an example of a modulo $p$ cycle $Z$ that satisfies all the assumptions that we know it must satisfy in the problem, but has disjoint $Z$ and $\sigma(Z)$.

Let us build $Z$ inside $S^2\times D$, where $D$ is the unit disk in the plane $\mathbb R^2$. Let us split $S^2$ by its equator $S^1$ into closed hemispheres $D_+$ and $D_-$. Start by building the part of $Z$ that lies over $S^1$: Let $L$ be the graph of
\[
z\mapsto z^n,
\]
where we identify $D$ with the unit disk in the complex plane and $S^1$ with the unit complex numbers. For odd $n$ the circles $L$ and $\sigma L$ do not intersect and their linking number (if we consider the solid torus $S^1\times D$ lying standardly in $\mathbb R^3$) is $\lk (L, \sigma L) = n$, since for odd $n$ the circle $\sigma L$ is the graph of
\[
z\mapsto - z^n,
\]
and the linking number of two circles, close to each other, equals the winding number of their difference vector when we pass along the circles.

Letting this $n$ be equal to the prime number $p$ from the formula $m=2p^s$, we thus have that $L$ and $\sigma L$ are non-linked $1$-dimensional modulo $p$ cycles. Now we pass from the torus $S^1\times D$ to the topological $4$-dimensional ball $B^4 = D_+\times D$. The torus $S^1\times D$ is a part of its boundary $S^3=\partial B^4$ and the cycles $L$ and $\sigma L$ are non-linked modulo $p$ cycles in $S^3$, since the torus embeds into $S^3$ without a twist. It follows that we may choose two $2$-dimensional modulo $p$ cycles in $B^4$ relative to $S^3$, $M$ and $N$, so that $\partial M = L$, $\partial N = \sigma L$, and the supports of $M$ and $N$ are disjoint.

Indeed, choose $M$ as any topologycally embedded disk in $B^4$, whose boundary maps homeomorphically to the circle $L$. By Alexander duality for the pair $(B^4, S^3)$, we have
\[
H_1(B^4\setminus M; \mathbb Z/p\mathbb Z) = H^2(M, L; \mathbb Z/p\mathbb Z) = \mathbb Z/p\mathbb Z.
\]
Hence the homology class $[\sigma(L)]\in H_1(B^4\setminus M; \mathbb Z/p\mathbb Z)$ is fully determined by an element of $\mathbb Z/p\mathbb Z$, which is in fact the linking number $\lk(L, \sigma L)$. Having this linking number $0$ modulo $p$, we may conclude that $\sigma L$ is a modulo $p$ boundary of a $2$-dimensional modulo $p$ chain $N$ in $B^4\setminus M$. The chains $N$ and $M$ thus have disjoint supports.

Now we pass to $S^2\times D$ from $D_+\times D$ and take the $2$-dimensional modulo $p$ cycle $Z = M - \sigma(N)$, this is indeed a cycle, since
\[
\partial Z = \partial M - \sigma(\partial N) = L - \sigma(\sigma(L)) = 0.
\]
From the construction of $M$ and $N$ we may conclude that $Z$ and $\sigma Z$ are disjoint. At the same time, $Z$ is homologous modulo $p$ to $[S^2\times \{(0,0)\}]$, which is equivalent to saying that it intersects $\{x\}\times D$, for generic $x\in S^2$, $1$ modulo $p$ number of times, counted with signs. The last claim is evidently true for $x\in S^1$, where
\[
(\{x\}\times D) \cap Z = (\{x\}\times D)\cap L.
\]
Our construction of $M$ and $N$ allows them to have collars near $S^3\subset B^4$ that allows us to keep the uniqueness of such an intersection for $x$ in a neighborhood of $S^1$ in $S^2$. If we want $Z$ to be homologous to a multiple $k[S^2\times \{(0,0)\}]$ modulo $p$ then we may just repeat this construction in $k$ smaller disks $D_1,\ldots,D_s$ embedded in $D$ and take the sum of the obtained cycles.

Thus we have checked that $Z$ has the properties that a graph of the multivalued function from our attempted proof must have, but does not allow to make the final step of the proof.

\begin{remark}
Using several circles $L_i$, given by $z\mapsto c_i + \epsilon z^{n_i}$ for different $c_i\in D$, odd integers $n_i$, and sufficiently small $\epsilon>0$, it is possible to replace $L$ in the above argument with an algebraic combination $L' = \sum_i L_i$, such that
\[
\lk (L', \sigma L') = \sum_i n_i = 0
\]
as an integer. We may also make $L'$ modulo $p$ (but not integrally!) homologous to $k[S^1\times \{(0,0)\}]$, by choosing the number of the $L_i$ to equal $k$ modulo $p$. Then we choose $M$ as an oriented surface in $B^4 = D_+\times D$ with boundary $L'$, $N$ as a integral chain in $B^4\setminus M$ with boundary $\sigma(L')$. The integral chain $Z = M - \sigma(N)$ then becomes an integral cycle, modulo $p$ (but not integrally!) equivalent to $k[S^2\times \{(0,0)\}]$. And $Z$ is disjoint from $\sigma(Z)$, that is the Borsuk--Ulam theorem cannot be generalized to the corresponding multivalued map $S^2\to\mathbb R^2$.
\end{remark}

Metric Geometry (math.MG); Algebraic Topology (math.AT); Combinatorics (math.CO)


On the cohomology rings of Hamiltonian T-spaces

Abstract: Let $M$ be a symplectic manifold equipped with a Hamiltonian action of a torus $T$. Let $F$ denote the fixed point set of the $T$-action and let $i:F\hookrightarrow M$ denote the inclusion. By a theorem of F. Kirwan \cite{K} the induced map $i^*:H_T^*(M) \to H_T^*(F)$ in equivariant cohomology is an injection. We give a simple proof of a formula of Goresky-Kottwitz-MacPherson \cite{GKM} for the image of the map $i^*$.

\section{Introduction}

The classification of manifolds equipped with group actions presents
difficulties beyond those inherent in the study of manifolds per se.
Even the basic questions---What is the equivariant cohomology ring of
the manifold? What can be said about the fixed manifolds of the group
action?  What is the cohomology ring of the quotient?---turn out to be
delicate and involved.

Much more is known in the case of a symplectic manifold $(M^{2m},\omega)$ equipped
with a Hamiltonian action of a  torus $T$.  Let $H_T^*(M)$  denote
the rational equivariant cohomology ring of $M$.

The following theorem of F. Kirwan relates
the equivariant cohomology of $M$  with the equivariant
cohomology of its fixed point set:

\begin{RefTheorem}
\label{injectivity}(Kirwan)\cite{K}
Let a  torus $T$
act on a compact symplectic manifold $(M,\omega)$
in a Hamiltonian fashion.
Denote the fixed point set of the  action by $F$.
The natural inclusion
$i:F\longrightarrow M$
of the fixed point set in the
manifold   induces an  injection
$i^*:H^*_T(M)\hookrightarrow H^*_T(F)$.
\end{RefTheorem}

A related result, also due to Kirwan, relates the equivariant
cohomology of $M$ and the cohomology
of the  symplectic quotient of $M$.

\begin{RefTheorem}
\label{surjectivity}
(Kirwan)\cite{K}
Let a  torus $T$
act on a compact symplectic manifold $(M,\omega)$
with moment map $\mu: M \longrightarrow {\frak t}^*=\rm Lie(T)^*$.
Suppose that $\xi \in {\frak t}^*$ is a regular value of $\mu$
and let $M_\xi := \mu^{-1}(\xi) /T$ be the
symplectic quotient of $M$.
The inclusion map $K:\mu^{-1} (\xi) \longrightarrow M$ induces a surjection
$K^*: H^*_T(M) \longrightarrow H^*_T(\mu^{-1}(\xi))=H^*(M_\xi)$.
\end{RefTheorem}

These two results give rise to two natural questions.  What is the image of
$i^*$?  And what is the kernel of $K^*$?  The purpose of this paper is to
address the first question.  In a companion paper \cite{TW},
we answer the second.

The description we give of the image of the injective map $i^*$ is due to
Goresky, Kottwitz, and MacPherson \cite{GKM}, using the work of Chang
and Skjelbred (\cite{CS}; see also \cite{AP,BV,H}).

\begin{Definition}
\label{1-skel}
Let $N \subset M$ denote the subset of $M$ consisting of points whose
$T$-orbits are one-dimensional; i.e.,

$$N := \{p\in M \mid T \cdot p \sim S^1\}$$
\end{Definition}

By the local normal form theorem, each connected component $N_\alpha$ of $N$
is an open symplectic manifold whose closure $\overline{N_\alpha}$ is a
compact, symplectic submanifold of $M$. The restriction of $\mu$ to
$\overline{N_\alpha}$ is a moment map for the restricted torus action.
Furthermore the closure of $ N$ is given by
$\overline{N} = N \cup F$;
this is referred to as the {\bf one-skeleton} of $M$.

\begin{Example}
Consider the case where $M^{2m}$ is a $2m$ dimensional toric
variety, equipped with the appropriate Hamiltonian action of a
torus $T$ of rank $m$.
The image of the moment map is the moment polytope $\Delta=\mu(M)$.
Let $v(\Delta)$ denote the union of of the vertices
of $\Delta$, and $ e(\Delta)$
the union of the interior of the edges.  Then $F= \mu^{-1}(v(\Delta))$, while
$N= \mu^{-1}(e(\Delta))$.
\end{Example}

The main result of this paper is the following

\begin{Theorem}\label{main}
Let $(M,\omega)$ be a compact symplectic manifold equipped with a Hamiltonian
action of a  torus $T$.
Let $F$ be the fixed point set and let $\overline{N}$ be the one-skeleton.
Let $i: F \longrightarrow M$ and $ j:  F \longrightarrow \overline{N} $  be the  natural
inclusions, and
$ H^*_T(M) \stackrel{i^*}{\longrightarrow}  H^*_T(F) $  and
$ H^*_T(\overline{N}) \stackrel{j^*}{\longrightarrow}  H^*_T(F) $
be the pull-back maps in equivariant cohomology.
Then the images of $i^*$ and $j^*$ are the same.
\end{Theorem}

This theorem is proved in considerable generality in \cite{GKM}.  The purpose
of this paper is to give a simple proof of this result in the symplectic
setting, which will enable us to obtain a description of the cohomology
ring of $M$ in a form that will make the structure of the map $K^*$ to the
cohomology ring of the symplectic quotient transparent.
Our methods
should yield similar statements in integral cohomology.  Additionally,
our methods give an algorithm for turning this description of the
cohomology ring into an explicit set of generators and relations.

Before outlining the proof of Theorem \ref{main},  let us consider
a few special examples.

\begin{Example}
If the torus $T$ is one-dimensional, $\overline{N}=M$, so
the theorem is obviously true but trivial.
\end{Example}

\begin{Example}
Suppose
that the closure $\overline{N_i}$ of each of the components of $N$ is a copy
of the two-sphere $P^1$.  For each such component there exists a
corank-one subgroup $K_i \subset T$ which acts trivially on $\overline{N_i}$.
The quotient $T/K_i$ is  isomorphic to $S^1$, and the corresponding action
on $P^1$ must be the usual action, so that $H^*_T(\overline{N_i})$ is
given as follows.  Let $\gamma_i:K_i\longrightarrow T$ denote the inclusion, and let
$\gamma_i^*:H^*_T({\rm pt}) \longrightarrow H^*_{K_i}({\rm pt})$ denote the
induced map in equivariant cohomology.  For each $i$, the set $\overline{N_i}
\cap F$ consists of two points
$n_i, s_i$; and the image of $H^*_T(\overline{N_i})$ in $H^*_T(\overline{N_i}
\cap F)=H^*_T(n_i) \oplus H^*_T(s_i)$ consists of those elements
$(a,b) \in H^*_T(n_i) \oplus H^*_T(s_i)$ such that $\gamma_i^*a=\gamma_i^*b$.
Let the fixed points of the $T$-action be given by $F_i$, $i=1,\dots,N$.  Then the
image of $H^*_T(M)$ in $H^*_T(F)= \bigoplus H^*_T(F_i)$ consists of
\begin{equation}\label{gkmcase}
(a_1,\dots, a_N) \in H^*_T(F_1)\oplus\dots H^*_T(F_N)
\end{equation}
such that, for each $\overline{N_i}$,
$$\gamma_i^*a_{n_i} = \gamma_i^*a_{s_i}$$
(See \cite{GKM}, \cite{GSbook}).
This gives a completely combinatorial algorithm for computing $H^*_T(M)$.
\end{Example}

The main tool needed to prove Theorem 1, as well as the injectivity and
surjectivity theorems \ref{injectivity}, \ref{surjectivity},
is a repeated use of equivariant Morse theory.
The key fact in all these cases is that components of the moment
map $\mu$ give equivariantly self-perfecting
Morse functions whose critical set is precisely $F$.
As the same is true for each of the $\overline{N_i}$'s, similar
statements can be made for the one-skeleton $\overline{N}.$

These self-perfecting Morse functions give us a very useful
way of constructing the equivariant cohomology ring of $M$ from
the cohomology rings of the fixed manifolds $F_i$:  roughly speaking,
the contribution
of each fixed manifold to the cohomology ring of $M$ consists
of those classes in $H^*_T(M)$ which vanish on all fixed points ``below''
$F_i$, and whose value on $F_i$ is a multiple of the downward Euler
class of the Morse flow.  As a similar statement can be made about
the cohomology ring of $\overline{N}$, we may compare the
images of $H^*_T(M)$ and $H^*_T(\overline{N})$ to prove our result.

\section{Morse Theory and the Moment Map}

In this section we state several results which will be the key steps
in the proof of Theorem \ref{main}.  Among them is Kirwan's injectivity
theorem (of which we supply a proof).  All of these results follow
directly from the equivariant Morse complex associated to the choice
of a Hamiltonian as a Morse function.  We note that several of the
results of this section have analogs in integral cohomology; however
we are only concerned with rational cohomology in this paper.

Let us recall our set-up.  Let $(M,\omega)$ be a compact symplectic manifold with a
moment map $\mu$ for the action of a  torus $T^n$.  Let $F\subset M$
denote the fixed point set of the torus action.  Given a generic element
$\xi \in \frak{t}$, the function $f = \langle \mu, \xi \rangle : M \longrightarrow {\bf R}$
is a Morse function on $M$ whose critical set coincides with the fixed
point set $F$.

Let us consider the fundamental exact sequence corresponding to the Morse
function $f$.  Let us denote by $C$ the critical set of $f$, and choose
$c\in C$.  We may assume that an interval $[c-\epsilon, c+ \epsilon]$ contains no critical
values of $f$ other than $c$.  Let $M^+_c = f^{-1} (-\infty, c + \epsilon)$,
$M^-_c= f^{-1} (-\infty, c-\epsilon)$.  Then we have the following lemma, which
is the main technical fact behind our results:

\begin{Proposition} \label{exact}
Let a  torus $T$ act on a compact  manifold $M$ with moment
map $\mu : M \longrightarrow {\frak t}^*$.  Given $\xi \in {\frak t}$, choose a critical value
$c$ of the projection $f := \mu^\xi$.
Let $F$ be the set of fixed points,  and let $F_c$ be the
component of $F$ with value $c$.

The long exact sequence in equivariant cohomology for the pair
$(M^+_c, M^-_c)$ splits into short exact sequences:
\begin{equation} \label{exact:1}
0 \longrightarrow H^*_T (M^+_c,M^-_c) {\longrightarrow}H^*_T(M^+_c)
\stackrel{k^*}{\longrightarrow} H^*_T(M^-_c) {\longrightarrow} 0.\end{equation}
Moreover, the restriction from
$H^*_T(M^+_c)$ to $H^*_T(F_c)$  induces an isomorphism
from the kernel of $k^*$ to those classes in $H^*_T(F_c)$
which are  multiples of
$e_c$, the equivariant Euler class  of the negative normal bundle
of $F_c$.
\end{Proposition}

Proof:  By our assumptions, $f$ is a Morse function, and there is a unique
critical value of $f$ contained in the interval $[c-\epsilon,c+\epsilon]$.  Denote the
corresponding critical manifold by $F_c$, and the negative disc and sphere
bundles of $F_c$ by $D_c$, $S_c$ respectively.
The pair $(M_c^+, M_c^-)$ can be retracted onto the pair $(D_c, S_c)$, so there
is an isomorphism

\begin{equation}\label{retr}
H^*_T(M_c^+,M_c^-)\cong H^*_T(D_c,S_c)\end{equation}
By the Thom isomorphism theorem, we have

\begin{equation}\label{thom}
H^*_T(D_c,S_c) \cong  H^{*-\lambda_c}_T(D_c) \  = H^{*-\lambda_c}_T(F_c)\end{equation}
where $\lambda_c$ is the Morse index of the critical manifold $F_c$; so we
obtain a commutative diagram

\begin{equation}\label{inj}
\vcenter{\xymatrix{
\ar[r] &
H^*_T(M_c^+,M_c^-)
\ar[r]^{\gamma_c} \ar[d] &
H^*_T(M_c^+)
\ar[r]^{\beta_c} \ar[d] &
H^*_T(M_c^-)
\ar[r] &
\\
&
H^*_T(D_c,S_c)
\ar[r]^{\delta_c} \ar[d]&
H^*_T(D_c)
&
\\
&
H^{*-\lambda_c}_T(D_c)
\ar[ur]_{\cup e_c} &
\\
}}
\end{equation}

\noindent where $e_c=e(D_c)$ is the equivariant Euler class of the bundle $D_c\longrightarrow F_c$.
The cup product map $\cup e_c$ is {\em injective}; the same therefore
is true of the maps $\delta_c$ and $\gamma_c$, proving the lemma.

The following corollary is then immediate:

\begin{Corollary}\label{perfection}(see \cite{AB1,AB2,K})
The function $f$ is an equivariantly perfect Morse function on $M$.
\end{Corollary}

Another application of this proposition is the proof of the following
theorem of Kirwan.

\begin{Theorem}\label{injectivity_noncomp}
Let a torus $T$ act on a  symplectic manifold $(M,\omega)$ with
proper bounded below  moment map $\mu: M \longrightarrow {\frak t}^*$.  Let $i: F \longrightarrow M $ denote
the natural inclusion of  the set $F$ of fixed points.
The pullback map $i^*:H^*_T(M) \longrightarrow H^*_T(F)$ is injective.
\end{Theorem}

\begin{proof}
Order the critical values of $f$ as $c_1 < c_2 < \dots < c_n$.
The theorem obviously holds for $f^{-1}(-\infty, c_1) = \emptyset.$
Assume the proposition holds for the manifold $M^- := f^{-1}(-\infty, c_i)$.
We will show that it will hold for the manifold $M^+
:= f^{-1}(-\infty, c_{i+1})$;
the result follows then by induction.

By Lemma \ref{exact}, we have a map of short exact sequences

\begin{equation}\label{CD}
\vcenter{\xymatrix{
0
\ar[r] &
H^*_T(M^+,M^-)
\ar[r] \ar[d]^{\simeq} &
H^*_T(M^+)
\ar[r] \ar[d]^{i_+^*} &
H^*_T(M^-)
\ar[r]  \ar[d]^{i_-^*} &
0
\\
0
\ar[r] &
H^*_T(F_i)
\ar[r] &
H^*_T(F \cap M^+)
\ar[r] &
H^*_T(F \cap M^-)
\ar[r] &
0,
\\
}}
\end{equation}
where $F_i$ denotes the critical set with value $c_i$.
By induction, the inclusion $i_-$ of $F \cap M^-$ into $M^-$ induces an
injection in cohomology.  By Proposition \ref{exact} the image of
$H^*_T(M^+, M^-)$ in $H^*_T(M^+)$ is embedded injectively in $H^*_T(F_i)$.
The theorem then follows by diagram chasing.
\end{proof}

\section{Proof of the Main Theorem}

We are now ready to prove our main theorem: the
restriction map to the fixed point set
induces an isomorphism  from the equivariant cohomology of the original
Hamiltonian manifold to the image of the equivariant cohomology of the
one-skeleton,  under its restriction map to the fixed point set.
The key idea is to  use the tools developed in the last section
to  compare the graded rings associated to these images
using the filtration given by the Morse function
obtained by choosing a projection of the moment map.  The result will
then follow from the naturality of these objects, induction on
the critical points, and the injectivity of the restriction map.

Recall that the one-skeleton is given by
$$\overline{N}:=
\{p \in M \mid T \cdot p \mbox{ is one-dimensional or zero-dimensional}\}.$$
Clearly, the image of $i^*: H^*_T(M) \longrightarrow H^*_T(F)$ is
a subset of the image of $j^*: H^*_T(\overline{N}) \longrightarrow H^*_T(F)$.
Therefore, $i^*$
induces a map, which we will also call $i^*$, from
$H^*_T(M)$ to $\operatorname{im} j^* \subset H^*_T(F)$.
By Theorem \ref{injectivity}, this map is injective.
Therefore, to prove the theorem, it suffices to show that this map
is surjective.

On the level of the graded rings associated to the Morse filtration,
surjectivity will follow from comparing the proposition below with
Proposition~\ref{exact}.

\begin{Proposition}\label{onesk}
Let a  torus $T$ act on a compact symplectic manifold $M$ with
moment map $\mu : M \longrightarrow {\frak t}^*$.
Given $\xi \in {\frak t}$, choose  a critical point $c$ of the
projection $f := \mu^\xi$.
Let $F$ denote the fixed point set and let
$F_c$ denote the component of $F$ with value $c$.
Define
$F^- :=  F \cap f^{-1}(-\infty,c-\epsilon)$ and
$\overline{N^+} :=  \overline{N} \cap  f^{-1}(-\infty,c+\epsilon)$.

Let $\eta$ be a cohomology class in $H^*_T(\overline{N^+})$
which vanishes when restricted to $H^*_T(F^-)$.
Its restriction to $H^*_T(F_c)$ is a  multiple of $e_c=e(D_c)$,
the equivariant Euler class of the downward normal bundle $D_c$
of $F_c$ (in $M$).
\end{Proposition}

\begin{proof}

Consider any component $N_\alpha$ of the set $N$
of one-dimensional orbits
such that the closure $\overline{N_\alpha}$ contains  $F_c$.
The closure $\overline{N_\alpha}$ is a smooth $T$-invariant
symplectic manifold with moment map $\mu$.
The class $\eta$ induces a cohomology class on
$\overline{N_\alpha^+}  := \overline{N_\alpha} \cap f^{-1}(-\infty,
c+\epsilon)$
which vanishes when restricted to $\overline{N_\alpha} \cap F^-$,
and hence (by injectivity which we need to state in this version),
when restricted to
$\overline{N_\alpha^-} := \overline{N_\alpha} \cap f^{-1}(-\infty, c-\epsilon)$.
Thus, by Proposition \ref{exact}, any element of the kernel of the natural map
$H^*_T(N_\alpha^+) \longrightarrow H^*_T(N_\alpha^-)$ is, when restricted to
$H^*_T(F_c)$,
a multiple of the equivariant Euler class $e_\alpha$
(here   $e_\alpha=e(D_c \cap \overline{N_\alpha})$
is the equivariant Euler class $e_c$ of the downward normal bundle $D_c \cap
\overline{N_\alpha}$ of $F_c$
in $\overline{N_\alpha}$).

So the restriction of $\eta$ to $F_c$ is a multiple of the
equivariant Euler class of the downward normal bundle of $F_c$ in
$N_\alpha$.
Since this holds for each component $N_\alpha$,
and each of these  components  must have a different stabilizer, we
may apply Lemma \ref{lemma:4.2}  below.
Therefore,
the class $\eta$ must be  multiple of the product of
the equivariant  Euler classes the negative normal bundles to $F_c$
in all the components of $N$ whose closure contains $F_c$.
But this is precisely the equivariant Euler class
of the negative normal bundle to $F_c$ in $M$.
\end{proof}

\begin{Lemma}\label{lemma:4.2}
Let a torus $T$ act on a complex vector bundle $E$ over a manifold $F$,
so that the fixed set is precisely $F$.
Decompose $E$ into the direct sum of bundles $E_\alpha$,
where each $E_\alpha$ is acted on with a different weight $\alpha \in {\frak t}^*$.
Let $e_\alpha$ be the Euler class of the sub-bundle $E_\alpha$.

Then if $y \in H^*_T(F) $ is a  multiple of $e_\alpha$ for each $\alpha$,
then $y$ is a multiple of the product of the $e_\alpha$.
\end{Lemma}

\begin{proof}
Assume first that $F$ is a single point.

Let $\alpha \in {\frak t}^*$ be the weight with which $T$ acts on the
sub-bundle $E_\alpha$. Since $\alpha$ is a linear function
on ${\frak t}$, it lies naturally in $H^*(BT)$ = $H^*_T(F) = {\rm Sym({\frak t}^*)}$,
the algebra of symmetric polynomials on ${\frak t}$.
The equivariant euler class of $E_\alpha$ is given by
$e_\alpha = \alpha^{n_\alpha}$, where $n_\alpha$ is the
complex dimension of $E_\alpha$.  The $\alpha$ are distinct
by assumption, and non-zero since no point not in the zero section is
fixed by $T$.  Therefore, the $e_\alpha$ are  pairwise relatively prime.
(Recall that every polynomial ring over  ${\bf Q}$ is a unique
factorization domain.)

More generally, since
$F$ is fixed by $T$, $H_T^{*}(F) = H^*(F) \otimes H^*(BT)$.
Thus, $H_T^*(F)$ is bigraded.  In particular,
given any integer $i$,
any cohomology class $a \in H_T^*(F)$ has a well-defined
component $a_i \in H^i(F) \otimes H^*(BT)$, and the sum
of all such components is $a$ itself; we will call $a_i$
{\bf the  component of $a$ with $F$-degree $i$}.

Note that the  component of $e_\alpha$ with $F$-degree $0$
is precisely $\alpha^{n_\alpha}$.  By the previous discussion,
these are non-zero and pairwise relatively prime.
Therefore it is enough to prove that
if $e$ and $f$ are two cohomology classes whose
components $e_0$ and $f_0$ with $F$-degree zero are
relatively prime, and if $e$ and $f$ both divide
$\alpha$, then so does $e \cdot f$.
We will prove this by induction.

We claim  that if
$e ( f \cdot w + x) = f (e \cdot w  + y) $,
where the components of $x$ and $y$ with $F$-degree $i$
vanish for all $i < k$, then there exist $x', y'$ such that
$e ( f \cdot w + x') = f (e \cdot w + y')$,
and such that the components of $x'$ and $y'$ with $F$-degree $i$
vanish for all $i < k + 1$.
To see this, compare the
component of $F$-degree $k$ on the two sides of the equation
$e ( f \cdot w + x) = f (e \cdot w + y)$.
Cancelling out terms which appear on
both sides, we get $e_0 x_k = f_0 y_k$.
Since $e_0$ and $f_0$ are relatively prime polynomials,
this shows that there exists $z_k$ such that
$x_k = f_0 z_k$ and $y_k = e_0 z_k$.
\end{proof}

We now proceed to prove  that the map $i^*: H^*_T(M) \longrightarrow \operatorname{im} j^* \subset
H^*_T(F)$  is surjective.
We proceed, as usual, by induction:

Consider  any  critical point $c$ of the projection $f := \mu^\xi$.
Define $M^+ := f^{-1}(-\infty, c+\epsilon)$,
and $M^- := f^{-1}(-\infty, c-\epsilon)$  for any sufficiently
small $\epsilon$.
Let $\overline{N^+} :=  \overline{N} \cap M^+$,
$\overline{N^-} :=  \overline{N} \cap  M^-$,
$F^+ :=  F \cap {M^+}$, and
$F^- :=  F \cap {M^-}$.
Let $i^+: F^+ \longrightarrow M^+$, $i^-: F^- \longrightarrow M^-$, $j^+ :F^+ \longrightarrow \overline{N^+}$ and
$j^- :F^- \longrightarrow \overline{N^-}$ denote the corresponding inclusion maps.
It is enough to assume that the induced map
$i^{-*} : H^*_T(M^-) \longrightarrow \operatorname{im} j^{-*} \subset H^*_T(F^-)$
is surjective, and to prove that the induced map
$i^{+*} : H^*_T(M^+) \longrightarrow \operatorname{im} j^{+*} \subset H^*_T(F^+)$
is also surjective.

Since the images of $H^*_T(M^-)$ and $H^*_T(N^-)$ inside
$H^*_T(F^-)$ are the same, it follows that the natural
restriction map $r$ from $\operatorname{im} j^{+*} \subset H^*_T(F^+)$
to  $\operatorname{im} j^{-*}\subset H^*_T(F^-)$ is surjective.
Thus, taking the  exact sequence (\ref{exact:1}) of Proposition \ref{exact},
we have a map of short exact sequences

\begin{equation}\label{CD2}
\vcenter{\xymatrix{
0
\ar[r] &
H^*_T(M^+,M^-)
\ar[r] \ar[d] &
H^*_T(M^+)
\ar[r] \ar[d]^{i_+^*} &
H^*_T(M^-)
\ar[r]  \ar[d]^{i_-^*} &
0
\\
0
\ar[r] &
\operatorname{ker} r
\ar[r] &
\operatorname{im} j^{+*} \subset H^*_T(F^+)
\ar[r]^{r} &
\operatorname{im} j^{-*} \subset H^*_T(F^-)
\ar[r] &
0,
\\
}}
\end{equation}

By our inductive assumption, $i^{-*}$ is surjective.

By Proposition \ref{onesk},  every element in $\operatorname{ker} r$ is a multiple of
$e_c$, the equivariant Euler class of the negative normal bundle
of $F_c$, the  component of the fixed point set with value $c$.
On the other hand, by Proposition \ref{exact}, every multiple of $e_c$
is in the image of the restriction $H^*_T(M^+,M^-)$ to $H^*_T(F_c)$
Thus,   the arrow from $H^*_T(M^+,M^-)$ to $\operatorname{ker} r$ is
surjective too.

The result follows by a diagram chase.

\section{Some comments about integral cohomology}

We close with some comments about integral cohomology.
Unfortunately,
the integer version of Theorem 1 is  not true in general.
In fact even the injectivity theorem \ref{injectivity} will
not hold in integral cohomology without some assumptions.
However, both injectivity and a version of Theorem 1 can be proved
over the integers where
certain restrictions are placed on the allowable
stabilizer subgroups.

Perhaps the  easiest example where Theorem 1 is
not true for integer cohomology is that of
$S^1 \times S^1$ acting on $S^2 \times S^2$,
with speed two on each sphere.\footnote
{If the reader is disturbed by the fact that this action is not
effective, she or he may tack on another couple of $S^2$'s spinning
at speed one.}
Using the moment map for the diagonal action as our Morse function,
we see that every cohomology class which vanishes outside a neighborhood
of  the north pole $\times$ the north pole must be a
multiple of $4 x^2$ when restricted to that point.
In contrast, there exists a cohomology class on the
one-skeleton which vanishes outside this neighborhood
but is only a multiple of $2 x^2$.  Essentially, the problem
is that the weights are not relatively prime.  It is easy
to place a condition on the stabilizer groups at each fixed
point in a way that negates this possibility.  This is essentially
all that can go wrong, and a version of
Theorem 1 can be expected to hold if such an assumption of relative
primality is made.

Differential Geometry (math.DG); Algebraic Geometry (math.AG); Algebraic Topology (math.AT); Symplectic Geometry (math.SG)


Neural networks with trainable matrix activation functions

Abstract: The training process of neural networks usually optimize weights and bias parameters of linear transformations, while nonlinear activation functions are pre-specified and fixed. This work develops a systematic approach to constructing matrix activation functions whose entries are generalized from ReLU. The activation is based on matrix-vector multiplications using only scalar multiplications and comparisons. The proposed activation functions depend on parameters that are trained along with the weights and bias vectors. Neural networks based on this approach are simple and efficient and are shown to be robust in numerical experiments.

\section{Introduction}

In recent decades, deep neural networks (DNNs) have achieved significant successes in many fields such as computer vision and natural language processing~\cite{vision}, \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1807-10854}. The DNN surrogate model is constructed using recursive composition of linear transformations and nonlinear activation functions. To achieve good performance, it is essential to choose  activation functions suitable for specific applications.
In practice, Rectified Linear Unit  (ReLU) is one of the most popular activation functions for its simplicity and efficiency.
A drawback of ReLU is the presence of vanishing gradient in the training process, known as dying ReLU problem~\cite{Lu_2020}. Several relatively new activation approaches are proposed to overcome this problem, e.g., the simple Leaky ReLU, and
Piecewise Linear Unit (PLU)~\cite{plu}, Softplus~\cite{softplus}, Exponential Linear Unit (ELU)~\cite{elu}, Scaled Exponential Linear Unit (SELU)~\cite{selu}, Gaussian Error Linear Unit (GELU)~\cite{gelu}.

Although the aforementioned activation functions are shown to be competitive in benchmark tests, they are still fixed nonlinear functions. In a DNN structure, it is often hard to determine  a priori the optimal activation function for a specific application.  In this paper, we shall generalize ReLU and introduce arbitrary trainable matrix activation functions. The effectiveness of the proposed approach is validated using function approximation examples and well-known benchmark datasets such as \texttt{CIFAR-10} and \texttt{CIFAR-100}. There are a few classical works on adaptively tuning of parameters in the training process, e.g., the parametric ReLU~\cite{para_relu}. However, our adaptive matrix activation functions are shown to be competitive and more robust in those experiments.

\subsection{Preliminaries}
We consider the general learning process based on a given training set
$\{(x_n,f_n)\}_{n=1}^N$, where the inputs $\{x_n\}_{n=1}^N\subset\mathbb{R}^d$ and outputs $\{f_n\}_{n=1}^N\subset\mathbb{R}^J$ are implicitly related via an unknown target function $f:\mathbb{R}^d\to\mathbb{R}^J$ with $f_n=f(x_n)$.
The ReLU activation function is a piecewise linear function given by
\begin{equation}\label{ReLU}
  \sigma(t)=\max\left\{t,0\right\},
  \quad \mbox{for} \quad t\in \mathbb{R}.
\end{equation}
In the literature  $\sigma$ is acting component-wise on  an input vector. In a DNN, let $L$ be the
  number of layers and $n_\ell$ denote the number of neurons at the $\ell$-th layer for $0\leq\ell\leq L$ with $n_0=d$ and $n_L=J$. Let
  $\mathcal{W}=(W_1,W_2,\ldots,W_L)\in\prod_{\ell=1}^L\mathbb{R}^{n_{\ell}\times n_{\ell-1}}$ denote the tuple of admissible weight matrices and  $\mathcal{B}=(b_1,b_2,\ldots,b_L)\in\prod_{\ell=1}^{L}\mathbb{R}^{n_\ell}$ the tuple of admissible bias vectors. The ReLU DNN approximation to $f$ at the $\ell$-th layer is recursively defined as
\begin{equation}\label{DNN}
\eta_{L,\mathcal{W},\mathcal{B}}:=h_{W_L,b_L}\circ\sigma\circ\cdots\circ h_{W_2,b_2}\circ\sigma\circ h_{W_1,b_1},
\end{equation}
where $h_{\mathcal{W}_\ell,b_\ell}(x)=W_\ell x+b_\ell$ is an affine linear transformation at the $\ell$-th layer.
The traditional training process for such a DNN  is to find optimal
$\mathcal{W}_*\in\prod_{\ell=1}^L\mathbb{R}^{n_{\ell}\times n_{\ell-1}}$,  $\mathcal{B}_*\in\prod_{\ell=1}^{L}\mathbb{R}^{n_\ell}$, (and thus optimal $\eta_{L,\mathcal{W}_*,\mathcal{B}_*}$) such that
\begin{equation}\label{bestfit}
  (\mathcal{W}_*,\mathcal{B}_*)=\arg\min_{\mathcal{W}, \mathcal{B}}
  E(\mathcal{W},\mathcal{B}), \quad\mbox{where}\quad
E(\mathcal{W},\mathcal{B})=\frac1N\sum_{n=1}^N \left|f_n-\eta_{L,\mathcal{W},\mathcal{B}}(x_n)\right|^2.
\end{equation}
In other words, $\eta_{L,\mathcal{W}_*,\mathcal{B}_*}$ best fits the data with respect to the discrete $\ell^2$ norm within the function class $\{\eta_{L,\mathcal{W},\mathcal{B}}\}$. In practice, the sum of squares norm in $E$ could be replaced with more convenient norms.

\section{Trainable matrix activation function}

Having a closer look at ReLU $\sigma,$ we observe that the activation $\sigma\circ\eta_\ell(x)=\sigma(\eta_\ell(x))$ could be realized as a matrix-vector multiplication $\sigma\circ\eta_\ell(x)=D_\ell(\eta_\ell(x))\eta_\ell(x)$ or equivalently $\sigma\circ\eta_\ell=(D_\ell\circ\eta_\ell) \eta_\ell$,
  where $D_\ell$ is a \emph{diagonal} matrix-valued function mapping from $\mathbb{R}^{n_\ell}$ to $\mathbb{R}^{n_\ell\times n_\ell}$ with  entries from the discrete set $\{0,1\}$. This is a simple but quite useful observation. There is no reason to restrict on $\{0,1\}$ and we thus look for a larger  set of values over which the diagonal entries of $D_\ell$ are running or sampled. With slight abuse of notation, our new DNN approximation to $f$ is calculated using the following recurrence relation
\begin{equation}\label{newDNN}
  \eta_1=h_{W_1,b_1},\quad\eta_{\ell+1}=h_{W_{\ell+1},b_{\ell+1}}\circ \big[(D_\ell\circ\eta_{\ell})\eta_{\ell}\big],\quad
  \ell=1,\ldots,L-1.
\end{equation}
Here each $D_\ell$ is diagonal and is of the form \begin{equation}\label{Dell}
 D_\ell(y) = \operatorname{diag}(\alpha_{\ell,1}(y_1),\alpha_{\ell,2}(y_2),\ldots,\alpha_{\ell,n_\ell}(y_{n_\ell})),\quad y\in\mathbb{R}^{n_\ell},
 \end{equation}
 where $\alpha_{\ell,i}(y_i)$ is a nonlinear function to be determined. Since piecewise constant functions can approximate a continuous function within arbitrarily high accuracy, we choose $\alpha_{\ell,i}$ with $1\leq i\leq n_\ell$ to be the following step function
 \begin{equation}\label{alphali}
 	\alpha_{\ell,i}(s) = \left\{
\begin{aligned}
t_{\ell,i,0},     && s \in (-\infty, s_{\ell,i,1}], \\
t_{\ell,i,1},   && s \in (s_{\ell,i,1}, s_{\ell,i,2}],\\
\vdots \\
t_{\ell,i,m_{\ell,i}-1},  && s \in (s_{\ell,i,m_{\ell,i}-1}, s_{\ell,i,m_{\ell,i}}], \\
t_{\ell,i,m_{\ell,i}},  && s \in (s_{\ell,i,m_{\ell,i}}, \infty),
\end{aligned}
\right.
\end{equation}
where $m_{\ell,i}$ is a positive integer and $\{t_{\ell,i,j}\}_{j=0}^{m_{\ell,i}}$ and $\{s_{\ell,i,j}\}_{j=1}^{m_{\ell,i}}$ are constants. We may suppress the indices $\ell,i$ in $\alpha_{\ell,i}$, $m_{\ell,i}$, $t_{\ell,i,j}$, $s_{\ell,i,j}$ and write them as $\alpha$, $m$, $t_j$, $s_j$ when those quantities are uniform across layers and neurons.
If $m=1$, $s_1=0$, $t_0=0$, $t_1=1,$ then the DNN in \eqref{newDNN} is exactly ReLU DNN.
If $m=1$, $s_1=0$, $t_1=1$ and $t_0$ is a fixed small negative number, \eqref{newDNN} reduces to a DNN based on Leaky ReLU. If $m=2$, $s_1=0$, $s_2=1$, $t_0=t_2=0$, $t_1=1$, then $\alpha=\alpha_{\ell,i}$ actually represents the action of a  discontinuous activation function.

In our case, we may train the parameters $\cup_{\ell=1}^L\cup_{i=1}^{n_\ell}\{t_{\ell,i,j}\}_{j=0}^{m_{\ell,i}}$ and $\cup_{\ell=1}^L\cup_{i=1}^{n_\ell}\{s_{\ell,i,j}\}_{j=1}^{m_{\ell,i}}$. In such a way, the resulting DNN may use different activation functions for different neurons and layers, and these activation functions are naturally adapted to the target function $f$ (or the target dataset). Since ReLU and Leaky ReLU are included by our DNN as special cases, the proposed DNN is clearly not worse than the traditional ones in practice.  In the following, we call the neural network in \eqref{newDNN},  with the activation approach given in \eqref{Dell} and \eqref{alphali}, a DNN based on the ``Trainable Matrix Activation Function (TMAF)".

\subsection*{remark}
\emph{The activation functions used in TMAF neural network are not piecewise constants. Instead, TMAF activation is realized using matrix-vector multiplication, where entries of those matrices are trainable piecewise constants.}

Starting from the diagonal activation $D_\ell$, we can go
one step further to construct more general activation matrices. First we note that $D_\ell$ could be viewed as a nonlinear operator $T_\ell: [C(\mathbb{R}^d)]^{n_\ell}\rightarrow [C(\mathbb{R}^d)]^{n_\ell}$, where
\begin{equation*}
    [T_\ell(g)](x)=D_\ell(g(x))g(x),\quad g\in [C(\mathbb{R}^d)]^{n_\ell},\quad x\in\mathbb{R}^d.
\end{equation*}
There seems to be no convincing reason to consider only diagonal operators. A more ambitious possibility is to consider a trainable nonlinear activation \emph{operator} determined by more general matrices, for example, by following tri-diagonal operator \begin{equation}\label{Tell}
    [T_\ell(g)](x)=\begin{pmatrix}\alpha_{\ell,1}&\beta_{\ell,2}&0&\cdots&0\\
    \gamma_{\ell,1}&\alpha_{\ell,2}&\beta_{\ell,3}&\cdots&0\\
    \vdots&\ddots&\ddots&\ddots&\vdots\\
    0&0&\cdots&\alpha_{\ell,n_\ell-1}&\beta_{\ell,n_\ell}\\
    0&0&\cdots&\gamma_{\ell,n_\ell-1}&\alpha_{\ell,n_\ell}\end{pmatrix}g(x),\quad x\in\mathbb{R}^d.
\end{equation}
The diagonal $\{\alpha_{\ell,i}\}$ is given in \eqref{alphali} while the off-diagonals $\beta_{\ell,i}$, $\gamma_{\ell,i}$ are piecewise constant functions in the $i$-th coordinate $y_i$ of $y\in\mathbb{R}^{n_\ell}$ defined in a fashion similar to $\alpha_{\ell,i}$.
Theoretically speaking, even trainable full  matrix activation is possible despite of potentially huge training cost. In summary,
a DNN based on trainable nonlinear activation operators $\{T_\ell\}_{\ell=1}^L$ reads
\begin{equation}\label{newDNN2}
  \eta_1=h_{W_1,b_1},\quad\eta_{\ell+1}=h_{W_{\ell+1},b_{\ell+1}}\circ T_\ell(\eta_{\ell}),\quad
  \ell=1,\ldots,L-1.
\end{equation}
The evaluation of $D_\ell$ and $T_\ell$ are cheap because they require only scalar multiplications and comparisons. When calling a general-purpose packages such as PyTorch or TensorFlow in the training process, it is observed that the computational time of $D_\ell$ and $T_\ell$ is comparable to the classical ReLU.

\subsubsection*{Remark}
\emph{Our observation also applies to an activation function $\sigma$ other than ReLU. For example, we may rescale $\sigma(x)$ to obtain $\sigma(\omega_{i,\ell}x)$ using a set of constants  $\{\omega_{i,\ell}\}$ varying layer by layer and neuron by neuron. Then $\sigma(\omega_{i,\ell}x)$ are used to form a matrix activation function and a TMAF DNN, where $\{\omega_{i,\ell}\}$ are trained according to given data and are adapted to the target function. }

\section{Numerical results}
In this section, we demonstrate the  feasibility  and efficiency of  TMAF by comparing it with  traditional ReLU-type activation functions.  Recall that neurons in the $\ell$-th layer will be activated by the matrix $D_\ell$. In principle, all parameters in \eqref{alphali} are allowed to be trained. To ensure practical efficiency, each diagonal entry $\alpha_\ell=\alpha_{\ell,i}$ of $D_\ell$ remains the same for all $i$. We shall only let function values $\{t_{\ell,i,j}\}$ in \eqref{alphali} be trained in the following. In each experiment, we use the same learning rates, stochastic optimization methods,  and number NE of epochs (optimization iterations). In particular, the learning rate is 1e-4 from epoch $1$ to $\frac{\rm NE}{2}$ and 1e-5 is used from epoch $\frac{\rm NE}{2}+1$ to ${\rm NE}$. The optimization method is ADAM (\cite{adam}) based on mini-batches of size 500. Numerical experiments are performed in PyTorch (\cite{pytorch}). We provide two sets of numerical examples:
\begin{itemize}
  \item Function approximations by TMAF networks and  ReLU-type networks;
  \item Classification problems for \texttt{MNIST} and \texttt{CIFAR} set solved by TMAF and  ReLU networks.
\end{itemize}
For the first class of examples we use the $\ell^2$-loss function as defined in~\eqref{bestfit}.  For the classification problems we consider the \emph{cross-entropy} that is  widely used  as a loss function in classification models. The cross entropy is defined using a training set having $p$ images, each with $N$ pixels. Thus, the training dataset is equivalent to the vector set $\{z_j\}_{j=1}^p\subset{R}^{N}$ with each $z_j$ being an image. The $j$-th image belongs to a class $c_j\in \{1,\ldots,M\}$. The neural network maps $z_j$ to $x_j\in \mathbb{R}^{M}$,
\begin{equation*}
x_j := \eta_{L,\mathcal{W},\mathcal{B}}(z_j)\in \mathbb{R}^M, \quad z_j\in \mathbb{R}^N, \quad j=1,\ldots,p.
\end{equation*}
The cross entropy loss function of $\eta_{L,\mathcal{W},\mathcal{B}}$ then is defined by
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{E}(\mathcal{W},\mathcal{B})  = -\frac{1}{p}\sum_{k=1}^p \log\left(\frac{\exp(x_{c_k,k})}{\sum_{j=1}^M\exp(x_{j,k})}\right).
\end{equation*}
\subsection{Approximation of a smooth function}\label{subsecsin}
As our first example, we use neural networks to approximate
\begin{equation*}
  f(x_1,\cdots,x_n) = \sin(\pi x_1+ \cdots+\pi x_n),
  \quad x_k \in [-2,2], \quad k=1,\ldots,n.
\end{equation*}
The training datasets consist of 20000 input-output data pairs where the input data are randomly sampled from the hypercube $[-2,2]^n$  based on uniform distribution.
The neural networks have single or double hidden layers. Each layer (except input and output layers) has $20$ neurons. For TMAF $D_\ell$ in  \eqref{Dell}, the function $\alpha=\alpha_{\ell,i}$ uses intervals $(-\infty,-1.4)$,  $(-1.4,-0.92]$, $(-0.92,-0.56]$, $(-0.56,-0.26]$, $(-0.26,0]$, $(0,0.26]$, $(0.26,0.56]$, $(0.56,0.92]$, $(0.92,1.4]$,
	$(1.4,\infty)$ such that probability over each of the ten intervals is 0.1 with respect to Gaussian distribution. Moreover, we apply \texttt{BatchNorm1d} in PyTorch to the linear output of neural networks in each hidden layer.
The approximation results are shown in
 Table~\ref{tab:2} and Figures~\ref{fig:u1}--\ref{fig:u56}, where Para-ReLU stands for the parametric ReLU neural network. It is observed that TMAF is the most accurate activation approach in these examples.
 \begin{table}\centering
 \begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l|l|l|}
 \hline
   & \multicolumn{4}{|c|}{Approximation error} \\ \cline{2-5}
   & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{Single hiden layer} & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{Two hiden layers}\\ \hline
   $n$   &      1 &     2    & 5 & 6  \\ \hline
   ReLU  & 0.09  & 0.34
         & 0.14  & 0.48 \\
         \hline
   Para ReLU  & 0.04 & 0.11
         & 0.09  & 0.47 \\
         \hline
   TMAF  & 0.01 & 0.05
         & 0.02  & 0.13  \\
     \hline\hline
 \end{tabular}
 \caption{Approximation errors for  $\sin(\pi x_1+\cdots+\pi x_n)$ by neural networks\label{tab:2}}
\end{table}

\begin{figure}[!h]
  \centering
  \subfloat[$n=1$]{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{sin/pic/compare_test}\label{fig:u1-1}}
  \hspace{0.1in}
  \subfloat[$n=2$]{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{sin_2d/pic/compare_test}\label{fig:u1-2}}
  \caption{Training errors for $\sin(\pi x_{1}+ \cdots+\pi x_n)$, single hidden layer\label{fig:u1}}
\end{figure}

\subsection{Approximation of an oscillatory function}
The next example is on approximating the following function having high, medium and low frequency components
\begin{equation}\label{func}
  f(x) = \sin (100 \pi x) + \cos(50 \pi x) + \sin (\pi x),
\end{equation}
see Figure~\ref{exact100fig} for an illustration. In fact, the function in \eqref{func} is rather difficult to capture by traditional approximation methods as it is highly oscillatory. We consider ReLU, parametric ReLU, and diagonal TMAF neural networks with 3 hidden layers and 400 neurons per layer (except the first and last layers). We also consider the tri-diagonal TMAF (denoted by Tri-diag TMAF, see \eqref{Tell}) with  3 hidden layers and 300 neurons per layer. The training datasets are 20000 input-output data pairs where the input data are randomly sampled from the interval $[-1,1]$ based on uniform distribution.

The diagonal TMAF uses $\alpha=\alpha_{\ell,i}$ in \eqref{alphali} with intervals $(-\infty,-1]$, $(-1+kh,-1+(k+1)h]$, $(1,\infty)$ for $h=0.02,$ $0\leq k\leq99$. The tri-diagonal TMAF is given in \eqref{Tell}, where $\{\alpha_{\ell,i}\}$ is the same as the diagonal TMAF, while $\{\beta_{\ell,i}\}$ are  piecewise constants with respect to intervals $(-\infty,-2.01+\underline{h}]$, $\big\{(-2.01+kh,-2.01+(k+1)h]\big\}_{k=0}^{99}$, $(-0.01,\infty)$, and  $\{\gamma_{\ell,i}\}$ are piecewise constants based on $(-\infty,0.01]$, $\big\{(0.01+kh,0.01+(k+1)h]\big\}_{k=0}^{99}$, $(2.01,\infty)$,  respectively. Numerical results could be found in Figures~\ref{comparison100fig}, \ref{TMAF100fig}, \ref{ReLUpReLU100fig} and Table \ref{comparison100tab}.

\begin{figure}[!h]
\centering
\subfloat[$n=5$]{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{sin_5d/pic/compare_test}\label{fig:u1-5}}
\subfloat[$n=6$]{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{comparisonsin6d}\label{fig:u1-6}}
\caption{Training errors for $\sin(\pi x_{1}+ \cdots+\pi x_n)$, two hidden layers.\label{fig:u56}}
\end{figure}

For this challenging problem, we note that the diagonal TMAF and tri-diagonal TMAF produce high-quality approximations (see Figures \ref{TMAF100fig} and \ref{comparison100fig}) while ReLU and parametric ReLU are not able to approximate the highly oscillating function within reasonable accuracy, see Figure \ref{comparison100fig} and Table \ref{comparison100tab}. Moreover, it is observed from Figure \ref{ReLUpReLU100fig} that ReLU and parametric ReLU actually approximate the low frequency part of the target function. To capture the high frequency, ReLU-type neural networks are clearly required to use much more neurons, introducing significantly amount of  weight and bias parameters. On the other hand, increasing the number of intervals in TMAF only lead to a few more training parameters.

\begin{figure}[!h]
\centering
\subfloat[Exact oscillating function]{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{sin_new/pic/sin.png}\label{exact100fig}}
\hspace{0.1in}
\subfloat[Training loss comparison]{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{comparison100.png}\label{comparison100fig}}
\caption{Plot of $\sin(100 \pi x) + \cos(50 \pi x) + \sin(\pi x)$ and training loss comparison}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}[!h]
  \centering
\subfloat[Diag TMAF approximation]{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{diagTMAF100}}
\hspace{0.1in}
\subfloat[Tri-diag TMAF approximation]{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{triTMAF100}}
\caption{Approximations to $\sin(100 \pi x) + \cos (50 \pi x) + \sin(\pi x)$, TMAF-type}
\label{TMAF100fig}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}[!h]
  \centering
\subfloat[ReLU approximation]{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{ReLU100}}
\hspace{0.1in}
\subfloat[Para ReLU approximation]{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{pReLU100.png}}
\caption{Approximations to $\sin(100 \pi x) + \cos (50 \pi x) + \sin(\pi x)$, ReLU-type}
\label{ReLUpReLU100fig}
\end{figure}

 \begin{table}\centering
 \begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|}
 \hline
  & final loss\\ \hline
 ReLU & 1.00 \\ \hline
 Para ReLU & 1.00 \\ \hline
 Diag TMAF   & 6.45e-2 \\ \hline
 Tri-diag TMAF & 5.81e-2\\ \hline\hline
 \end{tabular}
 \caption{Error comparison for $\sin(100 \pi x) + \cos (50 \pi x) + \sin(\pi x)$}
 \label{comparison100tab}
\end{table}

\subsection{Classification of \texttt{MNIST} and \texttt{CIFAR} datasets}
We now test TMAF by classifying images in the \texttt{MNIST}, \texttt{CIFAR-10} and \texttt{CIFAR-100} dataset.

For the \texttt{MNIST} set, we implement double layer fully connected networks defined as in \eqref{DNN} and \eqref{newDNN} with $10$ neurons per layer (except at the first layer $n_0=764$), and we use ReLU or diagonal TMAF as described in  Subsection \ref{subsecsin}.  Numerical results are shown in Figures~\ref{u15}, \ref{u16} and Table \ref{evaluation-cifar}. We observe that performance of the TMAF and the ReLU networks are similar. Such a behavior clearly should be expected for a simple dataset such as \texttt{MNIST}.

For the \texttt{CIFAR-10} dataset, we use the \verb|ResNet18| network structure provided by~\cite{DBLP:journals/corr/HeZRS15}. The activation functions are still ReLU and the diagonal TMAF used in Subsection \ref{subsecsin}. Numerical results are presented in
 Figures~\ref{u16-1}, ~\ref{u17} and  Table~\ref{evaluation-cifar}. Those parameters given in \cite{pytorch} are already tuned well with respect to ReLU. Nevertheless, TMAF still  produces  smaller errors in the training process and returns  better classification results in the evaluation stage, see Table \ref{evaluation-cifar}.

For the \texttt{CIFAR-100} dataset, we use the \verb|ResNet34| network structure provided by ~\cite{DBLP:journals/corr/HeZRS15} with the ReLU and TMAF activation functions in Subsection \ref{subsecsin}. Numerical results are presented in
 Figures~\ref{u19} and \ref{u20}. In the training process, TMAF again outperforms the classical ReLU network.

It is possible to improve the performance of TMAF applied to those benchmark datasets. The key point is to select suitable intervals in $\alpha_{\ell,i}$ to optimize the performance. A simple strategy is to let those intervals in \eqref{alphali} be varying and adjusted in the training process, which will be investigated in our future research.

\begin{figure}[!h]
\centering
\subfloat[Training loss]{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{single_layer_mnist/pic/compare2}\label{u15}}
\hspace{0.1in}
\subfloat[Classification accuracy]
{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{single_layer_mnist/pic/compare_acc2}\label{u16}}
\caption{\texttt{MNIST}: Two hidden layers}
\end{figure}

\begin{table}\centering
  \begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|}
 \hline
  \multirow{2}{*}{Dataset} & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{Evaluation Accuracy}     \\ \cline{2-3}
                                  & ReLU     & TMAF\\ \hline

   \texttt{MNIST} (2 hidden layers) & 91.8\% & 92.2\%  \\ \hline
    \texttt{CIFAR-10} (Resnet18) & 77.5\%   & 80.2\%     \\

    \hline \hline
 \end{tabular}
 \caption{Evaluation accuracy for \texttt{CIFAR-10}\label{evaluation-cifar}}
\end{table}

\begin{figure}[!h]
\centering
\subfloat[Training loss]{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{cifar/pic/compare30}\label{u16-1}}
\hspace{0.1in}
\subfloat[Classification accuracy]{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{cifar/pic/compare_acc30}\label{u17}}
\caption{Comparison between ReLU and TMAF for \texttt{CIFAR-10}}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}[!h]
 \centering
 \subfloat[Training loss]{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{cifar100/pic/compare2}\label{u19}}
 \hspace{0.1in}
 \subfloat[Classification accuracy]{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{cifar100/pic/compare_acc2}\label{u20}}
 \caption{Comparison between ReLU and TMAF for \texttt{CIFAR-100}}
 \end{figure}