Gauge optimization and spectral properties of magnetic Schrödinger operators

Abstract: We establish new necessary and sufficient conditions for the discreteness of spectrum and strict positivity of magnetic Schrödinger operators with a positive scalar potential. They extend earlier results by Maz'ya and Shubin (2005), which were obtained in case when there is no magnetic field. We also derive two-sided estimates for the bottoms of spectrum and essential spectrum, extending results by Maz'ya and Otelbaev (1977). The main idea is to optimize the gauge of the magnetic field, thus reducing the quadratic form to one without magnetic field (but with an appropriately adjusted scalar potential).

\section{Introduction and main results}\label{S:main}

The main object of this paper is the magnetic Schr\"odinger operator
with the Dirichlet  boundary conditions in an open set $\Omega\subset\hbox{{\bbb R}}^n$.
This operator has the form

\begin{equation}\label{E:Schroed}
H_{a,V}=-\sum_{j=1}^n \left(\frac{\partial}{\partial {x^j}}+ia_j\right)^2+V,
\end{equation}
where $a_j=a_j(x)$, $V=V(x)$, $x=(x^1,\dots,x^n)\in\Omega$.
We assume that $a_j$ and $V$ are real-valued functions,
$V\ge 0$,  $V\in L^1_{loc}(\Omega)$ and $a\in L^\infty_{loc}(\bar\Om)$, i.e. for every  $j=1,\dots,n$
we have $a_j\in L^\infty_{loc}(\Omega)$ and the extension of $a_j$ by $0$
to $\hbox{{\bbb R}}^n\setminus\Omega$ is in  $L^\infty_{loc}(\hbox{{\bbb R}}^n)$.

Denote also
\begin{equation*}\label{E:nabla_a}
\nabla_a u=\nabla u +iau=
\left(\frac{\partial u}{\partial x^1}+ia_1 u,\dots, \frac{\partial u}{\partial x^n}+ia_n u\right),
\end{equation*}
and   define the quadratic form
\begin{equation}\label{E:haV}
h_{a,V}(u,u)=\int_{\Omega}(|\nabla_a u|^2+V|u|^2)dx
\end{equation}
on functions $u\in C_0^\infty(\Omega)$.
Then we can define the operator $H_{a,V}$
by the closure of this quadratic form in $L^2(\Omega)$.
This closure exists \cite{Leinfelder-Simader}.

In this paper we will discuss criteria for the discreteness of spectrum
and strict possitivily of $H_{a,V}$ in $L^2(\Omega)$, as well as two-sided estimates
for the bottoms of the spectrum and essential spectrum. For the discreteness of spectrum
criteria the requirement $V\ge 0$ can be replaced by the semi-boundedness of $V$ from below.

We will say that  $H_{a,V}$
has a \textit{discrete spectrum} if
its spectrum consists of isolated eigenvalues of finite
multiplicities.  It follows that the only accumulation point of
these eigenvalues is $+\infty$. Equivalently we may say that $H_{a,V}$
has a compact resolvent.

Our first goal is to provide a direct necessary and sufficient condition  for the discreteness of the
spectrum of $H_{a,V}$. Another condition was established in \cite{Kondratiev-Mazya-Shubin}.
The difference between them is that the condition in \cite{Kondratiev-Mazya-Shubin} almost completely
separates electric and magnetic fields, whereas the condition in this paper, which is otherwise simpler,
is based on a combined characteristic of the fields. Both conditions use Wiener capacity
as was originated by A.~Molchanov \cite{Molchanov} and later developed by V.~Maz'ya
(see \cite{Mazya8}) for the usual Schr\"odinger operator without magnetic field.
(See also \cite{Mazya-Shubin, Mazya-Shubin2} for more recent results and references.)

We will denote the Wiener capacity of a compact set $F\subset \hbox{{\bbb R}}^n$ by $\, {\rm cap}\, (F)$.
By $Q_d$ we will denote a closed cube with the edges of length $d$, which
are parallel to coordinate axes. In case $n=2$ the capacity of $F\subset Q_d$ will be taken
with respect to $\overset{\circ}Q_{2d}$, the interior of $Q_{2d}$.

Let $P\in \hbox{{\bbb C}}[x]$, i.e. $P$ is a polynomial in $x^1,\dots,x^n$ with complex coefficients.
We will call it \textit{generic} on $Q_d$ if $0$ is not a critical value of the map
$P:{\cal U}\to\hbox{{\bbb C}}\cong \hbox{{\bbb R}}^2$ for a neighborhood ${\cal U}$ of $Q_d$ in $\hbox{{\bbb R}}^n$.
This means that the gradients of ${\rm Re}\, P$ and ${\rm Im}\, P$ are linearly independent
on the null-set of $P$, i.e on the set
\begin{equation*}
{\cal U}\cap P^{-1}(0)=\{x|\, x\in {\cal U},\, P(x)=0\}.
\end{equation*}
Then this set is a non-singular algebraic submanifold of real codimension 2.
It follows that its  capacity is $0$ (see e.g. \cite{Meyers, Mazya-Havin}).
By the Sard Lemma, for any given polynomial $P$, the polynomial $P+c$ will be
generic on $Q_d$ for almost all $c\in\hbox{{\bbb C}}$. It follows that the set
of generic (on $Q_d$) polynomials of a fixed degree is an open and dense set
in the set of all polynomials of this degree.

It is clear from the remarks above that generic polynomials form a dense set
in $C^\infty(Q_d)$.

Now we will formulate our main discreteness of spectrum result.

\begin{theorem}\label{T:discr2}
1) Let $d_0>0$, and let $\gamma=\gamma(d)$ be defined for
$d\in(0,d_0)$, take values in $(0,1)$
and satisfy the condition
\begin{equation}\label{E:ga-cond}
\limsup_{d\downarrow 0}d^{-2}\gamma(d)=+\infty.
\end{equation}
Then  the spectrum of $H_{a,V}$ in $L^2(\Omega)$ is discrete  if and only if
for every $d\in (0,d_0)$
\begin{equation}\label{E:discr2}
\inf_{F,\omega}\int_{Q_d\setminus F}\left(\left|\frac{\nabla\omega(x)}{i\omega(x)}+a(x)\right|^2+V(x)\right)dx \to
+\infty\  {\rm as}\ Q_d\to\infty,
\end{equation}
where $F$ runs over compact sets, such that
\begin{equation}\label{E:in-F-out}
Q_d\setminus\Omega\subset F\subset Q_d
\end{equation}
and $F$
satisfies the  negligibility condition
\begin{equation}\label{E:negligible}
\, {\rm cap}\, (F)\le\gamma(d)\, {\rm cap}\, (Q_d),
\end{equation}
$\omega$ runs over
complex valued functions from
$C^\infty(Q_d\setminus e)$,  where $e$ is a compact set
such that $e\subset {\rm Int}\, F$
($e$ depends on $\omega$), $|\omega(x)|=1$ for every $x\in Q_d\setminus e$. Here $Q_d\to\infty$
means that the cube $Q_d$ goes to infinity with fixed $d$.

2) The same is true if
$\omega$ runs over all functions of the form $P/|P|$ where $P$ is a generic polynomial
with complex coefficients on $Q_d$, defined on $Q_d\setminus P^{-1}(0)$. (In this case
the test functions $\omega$ and sets $F$ are taken independently.)

The conditions above taken with different functions $\gamma$ are equivalent.
\end{theorem}

\begin{remark}\label{R:Qd-Om}
{\rm
If for a fixed cube $Q_d$ there are no compact sets $F$ satisfying
the conditions \eqref{E:in-F-out} and \eqref{E:negligible}, then the infimum
in \eqref{E:discr2} is naturally declared to be $+\infty$. In other words,
in \eqref{E:discr2} we can restrict ourselves to cubes $Q_d$
which are essentially in $\Omega$ i.e. have negligible intersection with $\hbox{{\bbb R}}^n\setminus \Omega$
in the sense that
\begin{equation*}
\, {\rm cap}\, (Q_d\setminus\Omega)\le \gamma(d)\, {\rm cap}\, (Q_d).
\end{equation*}
}
\end{remark}

\begin{remark}\label{R:infinities}
{\rm
The advantage of the second part of Theorem \ref{T:discr2}, as compared with the first one,
is that the test sets $F$  and functions
$\omega$ run over the corresponding families independently. However it has a disadvantage too:
the integral in \eqref{E:discr2} can be $+\infty$ if
$P^{-1}(0)\cap(Q_d\setminus {\rm Int}\,(F))\ne \emptyset$.
It is easy to see that it is indeed $+\infty$ if
$P^{-1}(0)\cap{\rm Int}\,(Q_d\setminus F)\ne \emptyset$.
So this situation can be excluded from the consideration in \eqref{E:discr2}
since we are only interested in the infimum. However the integral can also be $+\infty$
if $P^{-1}(0)\cap{\rm Int}\,(Q_d\setminus F)=\emptyset$, but $P^{-1}(0)$ intersects with
the boundary of $Q_d\setminus F$.
}
\end{remark}

\begin{remark}\label{R:gauge}
{\rm
We can locally represent $\omega$ in the form $\omega=e^{i\phi}$, where $\phi$
is a locally defined real-valued $C^\infty$ function. We can in fact consider $\phi$
as a globally  defined function with values in $\hbox{{\bbb R}}/2\pi\hbox{{\bbb Z}}$. Then $\nabla\phi=\nabla\omega/(i\omega)$,
and we see that taking infimum over $\omega$'s in \eqref{E:discr2} is a way of minimizing
over different gauges.
}
\end{remark}

Theorem \ref{T:discr2} extends the main result of \cite{Mazya-Shubin} to the case
of magnetic Schr\"odinger operators. (To get the discreteness of spectrum result
of \cite{Mazya-Shubin}  we can take $a\equiv 0$ and observe that then $\omega\equiv 1$
minimizes the integral in the left hand side of \eqref{E:discr2}.)
More general test bodies were considered in
\cite{Mazya-Shubin}  instead of cubes, and $V$ was allowed to be a positive Radon measure,
which is absolutely continuous with respect to the Wiener capacity
(instead of a positive locally integrable function). These
results can be also extended to the magnetic Schr\"odinger  operators
without additional difficulties. We have chosen the
simplest case for our exposition  to make it more transparent.

Another necessary an sufficient condition of the discreteness of spectrum
for the magnetic Schr\"odinger operators, obtained in \cite{Kondratiev-Mazya-Shubin},
is different in the nature of characterization of magnetic fields, and it allows
only small negligible sets (i.e. small $\gamma$'s), so it does not extend the result
of \cite{Mazya-Shubin}, unlike Theorem \ref{T:discr2}. The same applies to the positivity
results below.

Now we will formulate our main positivity result. We will say that the operator $H_{a,V}$
is {\it strictly positive} if its spectrum is contained in $[\lambda,+\infty)$ for some $\lambda>0$.
This is equivalent to the estimate
\begin{equation}\label{E:la-pos}
\int_{\Omega}|u|^2 dx \le \lambda^{-1}h_{a,V}(u,u), \quad u\in C_0^\infty(\Omega).
\end{equation}

\begin{theorem}\label{T:pos} Let us choose an arbitrary $\gamma\in (0,1)$.
The operator $H_{a,V}$ with $V\ge 0$ is strictly positive if and only if
the following condition is satisfied: there exist $d>0$ and $\kappa>0$ such that for every $Q_d$
\begin{equation}\label{E:pos}
d^{-n}\inf_{F,\omega}\int_{Q_d\setminus F}\left(\left|\frac{\nabla\omega(x)}{i\omega(x)}+a(x)\right|^2+V(x)\right)dx\ge\kappa,
\end{equation}
where $F$ runs over compact sets, such that $Q_d\setminus\Omega\subset F\subset Q_d$ and $F$
satisfies the  negligibility condition
$\, {\rm cap}\, (F)\le\gamma\, {\rm cap}\, (Q_d)$,
$\omega$ runs over functions from
$C^\infty(Q_d\setminus e)$,  $e\Subset {\rm Int}\, F$, $|\omega(x)|=1$ for all $x\in Q_d\setminus e$.

Conditions on $\omega$ can be replaced by saying that $\omega=P/|P|$ where $P$
is a generic polynomial in $Q_d$ (and then $\omega$ is taken independently of
$F$).

If $H_{a,V}$ is strictly positive, then in both cases the condition \eqref{E:pos}
is in fact satisfied for all sufficiently large $d$ (with the same $\kappa$).
\end{theorem}

As in Theorem \ref{T:discr2}, we declare the infimum in \eqref{E:pos} to be $+\infty$
if there are no $F$'s satisfying the conditions above.

In Sections \ref{S:two-sided} and \ref{S:2-sided-ess} we will establish two-sided estimates for
the bottoms of the spectrum and the essential spectrum of $H_{a,V}$ in terms of
capacitary interior diameter. These results imply Theorem \ref{T:pos}
and a weaker version of Theorem \ref{T:discr2}, with $\gamma$ independent of $d$.
They extend and improve earlier results by V.~Maz'ya \cite{Mazya-74},
V.~Maz'ya and M.~Otelbaev \cite{Mazya-Otelbaev}
(see also Sect. 12.2 and 12.3 in \cite{Mazya8}).

For the Dirichlet Laplacian $H_{0,0}=-\Delta$ in domains $\Omega\subset \hbox{{\bbb R}}^n$, stronger
two-sided estimates  for the bottom of spectrum and essential spectrum
(with explicit constants in the estimates) were obtained in \cite{Mazya-Shubin2}
(see also more references and history there). These estimates are given
in terms of the interior capacitary radius.

In the last Section \ref{S:example} we provide a special class
of magnetic Schr\"odinger operators where
positivity and two-sided estimates for the bottom of the spectrum
can be found in more explicit terms: they reduce to a direct integral
of the Schr\"odinger operators without magnetic field.

\section{Sufficiency}\label{S:suff}

In this section we will prove the sufficiency of the conditions, formulated
in Theorem \ref{T:discr2}  for the discreteness of spectrum.
We will start with some general preliminaries.

For any $u\in C^\infty(Q_d)$ denote $\omega=u/|u|$, which is a complex-valued function defined
on the open set $Q_d\setminus u^{-1}(0)=\{x\in Q_d|\; u(x)\ne 0\}$, so $|\omega|=1$ on this set.

Since $\nabla_a u= \omega (\nabla |u|) + |u| \nabla \omega+i|u|\omega a$, we have
on $Q_d\setminus u^{-1}(0)$
\begin{equation*}
|\nabla_a u|^2=\left|\nabla |u|+i|u|\left(\frac{\nabla\omega}{i\omega}+a\right)\right|^2
=|\nabla|u||^2+\left|\left(\frac{\nabla\omega}{i\omega}+a\right)\right|^2|u|^2
\end{equation*}
because $\nabla\omega/(i\omega)$ is real. Therefore,
\begin{align}\label{E:haV-2}
&h_{a,V}(u,u)_{Q_d}=\int_{Q_d}(|\nabla_au|^2+V|u|^2)dx=
\int_{Q_d\setminus u^{-1}(0)}(|\nabla_au|^2+V|u|^2)dx\\
&=\int_{Q_d\setminus u^{-1}(0)}\left(|\nabla|u||^2+\left(\left|\left(\frac{\nabla\omega}{i\omega}+
a\right)\right|^2+V\right)|u|^2\right)dx, \notag
\end{align}
where we took into account that $\nabla u=\nabla |u|=\nabla_a u=0$ almost everywhere on $u^{-1}(0)$.
We see that  the function
\begin{equation}\label{E:effective}
\tilde V=\tilde V[\omega;a,V]=\left|\left(\frac{\nabla\omega}{i\omega}+a\right)\right|^2+V
\end{equation}
plays the role of an ``effective potential".
It  is defined on $Q_d\setminus u^{-1}(0)$.

Now we will apply arguments from  Chapter 12 in \cite{Mazya8} and also Section 3 in
\cite{Kondratiev-Mazya-Shubin}.
Standard compactness arguments show that to prove the discreteness of spectrum of
$H_{a,V}$ it suffices to establish that for every $\varepsilon>0$ there exist $d=d(\varepsilon)$, $R=R(\varepsilon)$
such that for every cube $Q_d$ with ${\rm dist}(Q_d,0)\ge R$
\begin{equation}\label{E:norm-haV}
\|u\|^2_{L^2(Q_d)}\le \varepsilon h_{a,V}(u,u)_{Q_d}, \quad u\in C_0^\infty(\Omega).
\end{equation}

The requirement $u\in C_0^\infty(\Omega)$ can be replaced by $u\in \, {\rm Lip}_c(\Omega)$
(the set of Lipschitz functions with a compact support in $\Omega$) or by $u\in H_c^1(\Omega)$
(the Sobolev space of functions $u\in L^2(\Omega)$ with $\nabla u\in L^2(\Omega)$ and with
a compact support in $\Omega$). Actually we do not need $u$ to be defined in $\Omega$:
in each of the cases above we can equivalently consider $u$'s which are defined on $Q_d$
and vanish in a neighborhood of $Q_d\setminus\Omega$.

Below we will need the following lemma, which was proved by Maz'ya \cite{Mazya-63}
(even in a more general case of a higher order analogue of the Dirichlet integral)
and is a particular case of much more general Theorem 10.1.2, part 1,
in \cite{Mazya8} (see also Lemma 2.1 in \cite{Kondratiev-Mazya-Shubin}
or Lemma 4.1 in \cite{Mazya-Shubin} for simplified expositions,
and Lemma 3.1 in \cite{Mazya-Shubin2}
for a version with an explicit constant).

\begin{lemma}\label{L:Mazya1}
There exists $C_n>0$ such that the following inequality holds for every complex-valued
function $u\in \, {\rm Lip}(Q_d)$  which
vanishes on a compact set $F\subset Q_d$ (but is not identically $0$ on $Q_d$):
\begin{equation}\label{E:cap-above}
\, {\rm cap}\, (F)\le \frac{C_n\int_{Q_d} |\nabla u(x)|^2dx}{d^{-n}\int_{Q_d} |u(x)|^2 dx}\;.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}

The following Lemma is easily extracted from  the arguments given
in the proof of Lemma 12.1.1  in \cite{Mazya8}.
\begin{lemma}\label{L:Mazya2}
 Let $v\in\, {\rm Lip}(Q_d)$, $\tilde V\in L^1_{loc}(Q_d\setminus v^{-1}(0))$,
$\tilde V\ge 0$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{E:Mazya(2)}
\int_{Q_d}|v|^2 dx\le \min\left\{\frac{4C_nd^n}{\, {\rm cap}\, (Q_d\setminus {\cal M}_\tau)}\int_{Q_d}|\nabla v|^2 dx,
\frac{4d^n}{\int_{{\cal M}_\tau}\tilde V dx}\
\int_{{\cal M}_\tau}\tilde V|v|^2 dx\right\},
\end{equation}
where $\tau=\left(\frac{1}{4d^n}\int_{Q_d}|v|^2 dx\right)^{1/2}$, ${\cal M}_\tau=\{x|\;|v(x)|>\tau\}$,
and $C_n$ is the constant from \eqref{E:cap-above}.
(The last term in \eqref{E:Mazya(2)} is declared to be $+\infty$ if its denominator vanishes.)
\end{lemma}

\medskip
{\bf Proof of Lemma \ref{L:Mazya2}.}
Since
\begin{equation*}
|v|^2\le 2\tau^2+2(|v|-\tau)^2 \quad \hbox{on}\ {\cal M}_\tau,
\end{equation*}
we have
\begin{equation*}
\int_{Q_d} |v|^2dx\le 2\tau^2d^n+
2\int_{\cal M_\tau} (|v|-\tau)^2dx.
\end{equation*}
Therefore
\begin{equation}\label{E:(3)}
\int_{Q_d} |v|^2 dx\le
4\int_{\cal M_\tau} (|v|-\tau)^2dx.
\end{equation}
Using \eqref{E:(3)} and applying Lemma \ref{L:Mazya1} to the function $u=(|v|-\tau)_+$, which
equals $|v|-\tau$ on ${\cal M}_\tau$ and $0$ on
$Q_d\setminus {\cal M}_\tau$, we see that
\begin{equation*}
\, {\rm cap}\, (Q_d\setminus{\cal M}_\tau)\le
\frac{C_n\int_{{\cal M}_\tau}|\nabla(|v|-\tau)|^2 dx}
{d^{-n}\int_{Q_d}|u|^2 dx}\le
\frac{4C_n\int_{Q_d}|\nabla v|^2 dx}
{d^{-n}\int_{Q_d}|v|^2 dx}\;.
\end{equation*}
where $C_n$ is the constant from \eqref{E:cap-above}.
Therefore
\begin{equation}\label{E:(4)}
\int_{Q_d}|v|^2 dx \le\frac{4C_n d^n\int_{Q_d}|\nabla v|^2 dx}{\, {\rm cap}\, (Q_d\setminus{\cal M}_\tau)}\;.
\end{equation}
On the other hand,
\begin{equation*}
\int_{{\cal M}_\tau} \tilde V |v|^2  dx\ge
\tau^2\int_{{\cal M}_\tau} \tilde V dx
=\frac{1}{4d^n}\int_{Q_d}|v|^2dx\cdot \int_{{\cal M}_\tau} \tilde V dx,
\end{equation*}
hence
\begin{equation}\label{E:(5)}
\int_{Q_d} |v|^2 dx\le
\frac{4 d^n}{ \int_{{\cal M}_\tau} \tilde V dx}\int_{\cal M_\tau} \tilde V|v|^2 dx,
\end{equation}
where the right hand side is declared to be $+\infty$ if the denominator is $0$.

The resulting inequality \eqref{E:Mazya(2)} follows from \eqref{E:(4)} and \eqref{E:(5)}. $\square$

\begin{corollary}\label{C:Mazya2} There exists $C_n>0$ such that the following holds.
Assume that $v\in\, {\rm Lip}(Q_d)$, $\tilde V\in L^1_{loc}(Q_d\setminus v^{-1}(0))$,
$\tilde V\ge 0$. Then for every $\gamma\in(0,1)$
\begin{equation}\label{E:Mazya(2)-cor}
\int_{Q_d}|v|^2 dx\le \frac{C_nd^2}{\gamma}  \int_{Q_d}|\nabla v|^2 dx
+\frac{4d^n}{\underset{F}\inf\int_{Q_d\setminus F}\tilde V dx}\
\int_{Q_d\setminus v^{-1}(0)}\tilde V|v|^2 dx,
\end{equation}
where the infimum is taken over all compact sets $F\subset Q_d$ such that
${\rm Int}\, F\supset v^{-1}(0)$ and $F$ satisfies
the negligibility condition \eqref{E:negligible}. If there is no such $F$'s,
then we declare the infimum to be $+\infty$ and the last term
itself to be $0$.
The last term in \eqref{E:Mazya(2)-cor} is declared to be $+\infty$ if the infimum vanishes.
\end{corollary}

{\bf Proof.} Assume first that $\, {\rm cap}\, (Q_d\setminus {\cal M}_\tau)>\gamma\, {\rm cap}\, (Q_d)$.
Then Lemma \ref{L:Mazya2} implies that
\begin{equation}\label{E:part1}
\int_{Q_d}|v|^2 dx\le \frac{C_n^{(1)}d^n}{\gamma\, {\rm cap}\, (Q_d)}\int_{Q_d}|\nabla v|^2 dx=
\frac{C_n^{(2)}d^2}{\gamma}\int_{Q_d}|\nabla v|^2 dx.
\end{equation}
In the opposite case $\, {\rm cap}\, (Q_d\setminus {\cal M}_\tau)\le \gamma\, {\rm cap}\, (Q_d)$ we
can use the second term in the braces in the right-hand side of \eqref{E:Mazya(2)} and
replace the integral in the denominator by the infimum of such integrals over $Q_d\setminus F$
with the conditions on $F$ as formulated in the Corollary. (Note that in this case
the family of admissible $F$'s is not empty because it includes $Q_d\setminus{\cal M}_\tau$.)
We get then
\begin{equation}\label{E:part2}
\int_{Q_d}|v|^2 dx\le \frac{4d^n}{\underset{F}\inf\int_{Q_d\setminus F}\tilde V dx}\
\int_{Q_d\setminus v^{-1}(0)}\tilde V|v|^2 dx.
\end{equation}
Combining \eqref{E:part1} and \eqref{E:part2}, we get \eqref{E:Mazya(2)-cor}
for arbitrary $\gamma\in (0,1)$. $\square$

\medskip
{\bf Proof of sufficiency in Theorem \ref{T:discr2}.}
1) Let us apply \eqref{E:Mazya(2)-cor} with $v=|u|$ where $u\in C_0^\infty(\Omega)$
and $\tilde V$ given by
\eqref{E:effective} with $\omega=u/|u|$. Note that the condition ${\rm Int}\, F\supset v^{-1}(0)$
implies that ${\rm Int}\, F\supset Q_d\setminus \Omega$ because $\hbox{supp}\; v$ is a compact subset in $\Omega$.
We see  that to achieve
\eqref{E:norm-haV}  it suffices that the following two conditions
are satisfied (for the same cube $Q_d$)
\begin{equation}\label{E:2-conditions}
\frac{C_n d^2}{\gamma}\le \varepsilon,\qquad \frac{4d^n}{\underset{F}\inf\int_{Q_d\setminus F}\tilde V dx}\le\varepsilon,
\end{equation}
where $\gamma$ in the first inequality and in the negligibility condition \eqref{E:negligible}
may depend upon $Q_d$ (and even  upon $a$ and $V$ as well). Clearly, these inequalities
will hold if we require that the first inequality holds together with the second one replaced
by the stronger inequality
\begin{equation}\label{E:stronger-ineq}
\frac{4d^n}{\underset{F,\omega}\inf\int_{Q_d\setminus F}\tilde V dx}\le\varepsilon.
\end{equation}
Now we can take $\gamma=\gamma(d)$ satisfying \eqref{E:ga-cond} to see that it is sufficient that for for every
$\varepsilon>0$ there exists $d\in(0,d_0)$ and $R=R(d)>0$ such that for every cube $Q_d$ with ${\rm dist}(Q_d,0)\ge R$
\begin{equation}\label{E:d-conditions}
C_n d^2 \gamma(d)^{-1}\le\varepsilon, \qquad
\underset{F,\omega}\inf\;\frac{1}{d^n}\int_{Q_d\setminus F}\tilde V dx \ge 4\varepsilon^{-1}.
\end{equation}
It is clear from \eqref{E:ga-cond} that
we can choose $\varepsilon=\max\{C_n,4\}d^2\gamma(d)^{-1}$ along a sequence $d=d_k\to 0$ to conclude that
the conditions \eqref{E:d-conditions} can be replaced by a single condition
\begin{equation}\label{E:discr3}
\underset{F,\omega}\inf\;\frac{1}{d^n}\int_{Q_d\setminus F}\tilde Vdx \ge d^{-2}\gamma(d), \quad \tilde V=\tilde V[\omega;a,V],
\end{equation}
which should be satisfied for all $d\in (0,d_0)$ and for distant cubes,
i.e. when ${\rm dist}(Q_d,0)\ge R$, $R=R(d)$. This proves the sufficiency in the first part of
Theorem \ref{T:discr2}, because \eqref{E:discr2} obviously implies \eqref{E:discr3}.

\medskip
2) Let us prove sufficiency in the second part of Theorem \ref{T:discr2}.
We will argue as in the first
part of this proof.
Since the generic polynomials are dense in $C^{\infty}(Q_d)$
(in its standard Frechet topology),
it suffices to establish that for every $\varepsilon>0$ the estimate \eqref{E:norm-haV} holds
for distant cubes $Q_d$. It follows that it is sufficient to require that
there exists $d_0>0$ such that
for every $d\in (0, d_0)$
the inequality  \eqref{E:discr3} holds for distant cubes $Q_d$
(i.e. cubes with ${\rm dist}(Q_d,0)\ge R(d)$),
for generic polynomials $u$ on $Q_d$,
and with $\tilde V=\tilde V[\omega;a,V]$, where $\omega=P/|P|$, $P$ is another
generic polynomial on $Q_d$, such that $P^{-1}(0)\cap Q_d$ is in the interior of $F$
with respect to $Q_d$, i.e.
\begin{equation}\label{E:dist}
{\rm dist}(P^{-1}(0)\cap Q_d, Q_d\setminus F)>0.
\end{equation}
According to the formulation of Theorem \ref{T:discr2}, part 2, we can  assume that \eqref{E:discr3}
is fulfilled if
we  allow arbitrary $\omega=P/|P|$, unrelated to $F$, i.e. if we abandon the condition \eqref{E:dist}.
But then the infimum in \eqref{E:discr3} becomes smaller and we get a stronger condition. So both versions
of \eqref{E:discr3} are satisfied, which ends the proof of sufficiency in Theorem \ref{T:discr2}.
$\square$

\begin{remark}\label{R:inf-equiv}
{\rm
Let us denote the infimum in \eqref{E:discr3} by $I(\gamma)$, where we assume that $\omega=P/|P|$ and $F$
(satisfying \eqref{E:in-F-out} and \eqref{E:negligible})
are taken independently of each other. By
$\tilde I(\gamma)$ we will denote the same infimum but with additional condition \eqref{E:dist} imposed upon
$P$  and $F$. Clearly, $I(\gamma)\le\tilde I(\gamma)$.

On the other hand
the inequality $\tilde I(\gamma)\le I(\gamma')$ holds for any positive $\gamma'<\gamma$. This would follow if
we prove that for every fixed $\omega=P/|P|$, where $P$ is a generic polynomial on $Q_d$, and for every
compact $F'$, $Q_d\setminus\Omega\subset F'\subset Q_d$, with $\, {\rm cap}\, (F')\le\gamma'\, {\rm cap}\, (Q_d)$,
there exists a compact $F$, $Q_d\setminus\Omega\subset F\subset Q_d$, with $\, {\rm cap}\, (F)\le\gamma\, {\rm cap}\, (Q_d)$,
satisfying \eqref{E:dist}, such that
\begin{equation*}
\int_{Q_d\setminus F}\tilde V[\omega;a,V] dx \le \int_{Q_d\setminus F'}\tilde V[\omega;a,V] dx,
\end{equation*}
with the same $\omega=P/|P|$. The last inequality will be fulfilled automatically if $F\supset F'$.
So we can take $F=F'\cup U$ where $U$ is the closure of a sufficiently small neighborhood of
$P^{-1}(0)\cap Q_d$ in $Q_d$. Then the condition \eqref{E:dist} will be  satisfied. Besides,
we can choose $U$ to have an arbitrarily small capacity because $\, {\rm cap}\, (P^{-1}(0))=0$. Then the inequality
$\, {\rm cap}\, (F)\le\gamma\, {\rm cap}\, (Q_d)$ will also hold due to subadditivity of capacity.

This argument shows that the condition \eqref{E:discr3} with independent $F$ and $\omega=P/|P|$
follows from the same condition with the additional requirement \eqref{E:dist}, but with an arbitrary
smaller $\gamma$. (We can take e.g. $(1-\kappa)\gamma(d)$ instead of $\gamma(d)$, where $\kappa>0$ is arbitrarily small.)
So these conditions are almost equivalent.
In particular, the corresponding conditions \eqref{E:discr2} are equivalent.
}
\end{remark}

\begin{remark}
{\rm
Instead of the condition \eqref{E:discr2}, it is sufficient to require
a weaker condition \eqref{E:discr3}. (The left hand side of \eqref{E:discr3} is not
required to tend to $+\infty$ as $Q_d\to\infty$.)  But,
as we will see later, the stronger condition \eqref{E:discr2} is also necessary, so
the conditions \eqref{E:discr2} and \eqref{E:discr3} are in fact equivalent
for any $\gamma$, satisfying  \eqref{E:ga-cond}.
In particular, it would follow that the above versions of the condition \eqref{E:discr3} are equaivalent.
}
\end{remark}

\section{Necessity}\label{S:nec}

In this section we will prove the necessity of the conditions formulated
in Theorem \ref{T:discr2} for the discreteness of spectrum.

\medskip
1) Let us assume that $H_{a,V}$ has a discrete spectrum. This implies that for every $d>0$
\begin{equation}\label{E:nec-loc}
\inf_u\;\frac{h_{a,V}(u,u)_{Q_d}}{\|u\|^2_{L^2(Q_d)}}\to +\infty \quad {\rm as} \quad Q_d\to\infty,
\end{equation}
where the infimum is taken over all $u\in\, {\rm Lip}(Q_d)$, $u\not\equiv 0$,
$u=0$ in a neighborhood of $Q_d\setminus \Omega$
(see e.g. Theorem 1.2 in \cite{Kondratiev-Shubin}). Let us fix $d>0$.
Then \eqref{E:nec-loc} means that  for every
$\varepsilon>0$ there exists $R=R(\varepsilon)$ that for every cube $Q_d$ with ${\rm dist}(Q_d,0)\ge R$
\begin{equation}\label{E:nec-loc2}
\|u\|^2_{L^2(Q_d)}\le \varepsilon h_{a,V}(u,u)_{Q_d}, \quad u\in \, {\rm Lip}(Q_d),\
(\hbox{supp}\; u)\cap (Q_d\setminus\Omega)=\emptyset.
\end{equation}
We would like to use this estimate with  a test function $u=(1-P_F)\omega$.
Here $F\subset\hbox{{\bbb R}}^n$, ${\rm Int}\, F\supset Q_d\setminus\Omega$, $F$ is a {\it regular} compact set,
i.e. $F$ is a compact subset in the cube
$Q_{3d/2}$ (with the same center as $Q_d$) and $F$ is the closure of an open set with a smooth boundary;
$P_F$ is the  equilibrium potential of $F$, i.e. for $n\ge 3$ we have
$P_F\in C(\hbox{{\bbb R}}^n)$, $P_F=1$ on $F$, $\Delta P_F=0$ on $\hbox{{\bbb R}}^n\setminus F$, $P_F(x)\to 0$ as $|x|\to\infty$,
and for $n=2$ we have $P_F\in C(\hbox{{\bbb R}}^2)$, $P_F=1$ on $F$, $\Delta P_F=0$ on $({\rm Int}\, Q_{2d})\setminus F$,
$P_F=0$ on $\hbox{{\bbb R}}^2\setminus Q_{2d}$;
$\omega\in C^\infty(Q_d\setminus e)$,
$|\omega(x)|=1$ for all $x\in Q_d\setminus e$, $e\subset {\rm Int}\, F$ and $F,\omega$ are chosen so that
\begin{equation}\label{E:near-inf}
\int_{Q_d\setminus F} \tilde V dx \le \inf_{F,\omega} \int_{Q_d\setminus F} \tilde V dx + \delta d^{n-2},
\end{equation}
where we use the same notations as in Sect. \ref{S:suff} (in particular
$\tilde V=\tilde V[\omega;a,V]$ is given by \eqref{E:effective}), and $\delta>0$ is sufficiently small.
It is well known that $0\le P_F\le 1$ everywhere and
\begin{equation}\label{E:phi-F}
\int_{\hbox{{\bbb R}}^n}|\nabla P_F|^2 dx=\, {\rm cap}\, (F).
\end{equation}

Clearly, $|u|=1-P_F$ and $\omega(x)=u(x)/|u(x)|$ if $u(x)\ne 0$. Therefore $u(x)=|u(x)|\omega(x)$
for all $x\in Q_d\setminus e$. The calculations in Sect. \ref{S:suff} are applicable in this case
and lead to the formula \eqref{E:haV-2} and to the ``effective" potential $\tilde V$ of the same form
\eqref{E:effective}, defined on $Q_d\setminus e$.  It follows that
\begin{align}\label{E:haV-above}
&h_{a,V}(u,u)_{Q_d}=
\int_{Q_d}|\nabla P_F|^2 dx
+\int_{Q_d}\left(\left|\frac{\nabla\omega}{i\omega}+a\right|^2+V\right)|1-P_F|^2 dx\\
&\le  \, {\rm cap}\, (F)  + \int_{Q_d\setminus F}\left(\left|\frac{\nabla\omega}{i\omega}+a\right|^2+V\right) dx
= \, {\rm cap}\, (F)+ \int_{Q_d\setminus F}\tilde V dx \notag\\
& \le \, {\rm cap}\, (F) + \delta d^{n-2} + \inf_{F,\omega}\int_{Q_d\setminus F}\tilde V dx. \notag
\end{align}

Now we need to estimate  $\|u\|_{L^2(Q_d)}$ from below.
To this end we need the following
\begin{lemma}\label{L:L2-norm-below}
There exists $C=C_n>0$ such that for every $\eta\in(0,1/2]$
\begin{equation}\label{E:L2-norm-below}
\left(1-\frac{\, {\rm cap}\, (F)}{\, {\rm cap}\, (Q_d)}\right)^2
\le C_n\left[\eta\frac{\, {\rm cap}\, (F)}{\, {\rm cap}\, (Q_d)}+\eta^{-1} d^{-n}\int_{Q_d}(1-P_F)^2 dx\right].
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}

For the proof of this Lemma see  \cite{Mazya-Shubin} (formula (3.10) there).

\medskip
Assuming that $\, {\rm cap}\, (F)\le\gamma\, {\rm cap}\, (Q_d)$ with $\gamma\in(0,1)$, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{E:L2-norm-below2}
(1-\gamma)^2\le C_n\left[\eta\gamma+\eta^{-1} d^{-n}\int_{Q_d}(1-P_F)^2 dx\right].
\end{equation}
Choosing
\begin{equation}\label{E:eta}
\eta=\min\left\{\frac{1}{2}, \frac{(1-\gamma)^2}{2\gamma C_n}\right\},
\end{equation}
we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{E:int-below}
\int_{Q_d}(1-P_F)^2 dx\ge (2C_n)^{-1}\eta(1-\gamma)^2 d^n.
\end{equation}

Taking into account that $|u|=1-P_F$ and
using the estimates
\eqref{E:haV-above} and \eqref{E:int-below} in \eqref{E:nec-loc2}, we see
that for distant cubes
\begin{equation}\label{E:final-nec}
(2C_n)^{-1}\eta(1-\gamma)^2 d^n\le \varepsilon \left(\, {\rm cap}\, (F) + \delta d^{n-2}
+ \inf_{F,\omega}\int_{Q_d\setminus F}\tilde V dx\right),
\end{equation}
where the infimum is taken over all regular $F$ satisfying $\, {\rm cap}\, (F)\le\gamma\, {\rm cap}\, (Q_d)$.
But now we can approximate an arbitrary $F$, satisfying the same inequality, by
regular sets from above, using the well-known continuity property of the capacity
(see e.g. \cite{Mazya8}, Sect. 2.2.1). Then we obtain the same inequality with the infimum taken
over arbitrary (not necessarily regular) negligible compact sets $F$.
It follows that \eqref{E:discr2} is satisfied, which ends
proof of the first part of Theorem \ref{T:discr2}.

\medskip
2) According to the first part of Theorem \ref{T:discr2},
which we already established, the discreteness of spectrum implies that the condition \eqref{E:discr2}
is fulfilled if the infimum taken over $\omega, F$ such that $\omega=P/|P|$ where $P$ is a generic
polynomial on $Q_d$, $F$ is a compact subset in $Q_d$ and the condition \eqref{E:dist}
is satisfied. It remains to get rid of the condition \eqref{E:dist}. This is easily done
by the same arguments as in the proof of sufficiency in Theorem \ref{T:discr2}
and in Remark \ref{R:inf-equiv}.
This ends the proof of Theorem \ref{T:discr2}.  $\square$

\section{Positivity}\label{S:pos}

In this section we will prove  Theorem \ref{T:pos} and provide its interesting corollary.

\medskip
\textbf{Proof of sufficiency in Theorem \ref{T:pos}.}  Let us assume that \eqref{E:pos} holds for some
$d>0$ and $\kappa>0$ (with any of two versions for the set of $\omega$'s).
Using Corollary \ref{C:Mazya2}, as in the proof of
the sufficiency in Theorem \ref{T:discr2}, we come to
the conclusion that the estimate \eqref{E:la-pos} holds with
\begin{equation}\label{E:la}
\lambda=\min\left\{C_n^{-1}d^{-2}\gamma, \kappa/4\right\},
\end{equation}
hence $H_{a,V}$ is strictly positive. $\square$

\medskip
\textbf{Proof of necessity in Theorem \ref{T:pos}.} Let us assume that
$H_{a,V}$ is strictly positive, i.e. the estimate \eqref{E:la-pos} holds.
Then arguing as in the proof of necessity in Theorem \ref{T:discr2},
we come to the estimate \eqref{E:final-nec} with $\varepsilon=\lambda^{-1}$ and $\eta$
given by \eqref{E:eta}. It follows that
\begin{align}\label{E:final-pos}
&d^{-n}\inf_{F,\omega}\int_{Q_d\setminus F}
\left(\left|\frac{\nabla\omega}{i\omega}+a\right|^2+V\right)dx\\
&\ge (2C_n)^{-1}\eta(1-\gamma)^{2}\lambda-d^{-2}(\, {\rm cap}\, (Q_1)+\delta).
\notag
\end{align}
This implies  the inequality
\begin{equation}\label{E:final-pos2}
d^{-n}\inf_{F,\omega}\int_{Q_d\setminus F}
\left(\left|\frac{\nabla\omega}{i\omega}+a\right|^2+V\right)dx
\ge (4C_n)^{-1}\eta(1-\gamma)^{2}\lambda,
\end{equation}
provided $d>0$ is chosen so that
\begin{equation}\label{E:d-ge}
d^2\ge 4C_n\eta^{-1}(1-\gamma)^{-2}\lambda^{-1}(\, {\rm cap}\, (Q_1)+\delta).
\end{equation}
This works for both versions of the choices of $\omega$'s and so ends the proof
of Theorem \ref{T:pos}. $\square$

\section{Two-sided estimates for the bottom of the spectrum}\label{S:two-sided}
In this section we will establish two-sided estimates for the bottom
of the spectrum for the Schr\"odinger operators
$H_{a,V}$ in $L^2(\Omega)$. These estimates extend and improve results
by V.~Maz'ya and  M.~Otelbaev
\cite{Mazya-Otelbaev} (see also \cite{Mazya8}, Sect. 12.2, 12.3)
where the case of Schr\"odinger operators without magnetic fields was considered.
The results are based on
the notion of the capacitary interior diameter which is defined as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{E:D}
D=D(\Omega,\gamma,a,V)={\rm sup}_{Q_d}\left\{d:\; d^{n-2}\ge \inf_{F,\omega}\int_{Q_d\setminus F}
\left(\left|\frac{\nabla\omega}{i\omega}+a\right|^2+V\right)dx\right\},
\end{equation}
where the choice of the pairs $F,\omega$ is as in Theorem \ref{T:pos}
(with any of two options there), with $\gamma\in (0,1)$ assumed to be a constant.
It is easy to see  that $D>0$ (take $d$ to be very small).
On the other hand it may happen that $D=+\infty$; for example
this is the case if $\Omega$ contains arbitrarily large cubes (e.g. $\Omega=\hbox{{\bbb R}}^n$)
and both $a$ and $V$ vanish identically, i.e. when
$H_{a,V}=-\Delta$ in $L^2(\hbox{{\bbb R}}^n)$. So generally $0<D\le +\infty$.

It is easy to see that $D$ is an increasing function of $\Omega$ and $\gamma$
(provided $a$ and $V$ are fixed).

The definition of $D$ by \eqref{E:D} can be extended to the case when $\gamma=\gamma(d)$, i.e.
$\gamma:(0,+\infty)\to (0,1)$, but for simplicity we will only consider the case
when $\gamma$ is a constant.

\begin{theorem}\label{T:2-sided}
For every $\gamma\in(0,1)$ there exists $C=C(\gamma,n)>0$, such that
\begin{equation}\label{E:2-sided}
C^{-1}D^{-2} \le \lambda \le CD^{-2},
\end{equation}
where $\lambda$ is the bottom of the Dirichlet spectrum of $H_{a,V}$ in $L^2(\Omega)$,
i.e. the best constant in \eqref{E:la-pos}.
\end{theorem}

\begin{remark}
{\rm
Note that $H_{a,V}$ is strictly positive if and only if $\lambda>0$. Therefore \eqref{E:2-sided}
implies that the strict positivity is equivalent to the inequality $D<+\infty$.
More precisely, the first inequality in \eqref{E:2-sided}, estimating $\lambda$ from below, implies
the sufficiency in Theorem \ref{T:pos}, whereas the second one, estimating $\lambda$
from above, implies the necessity in this theorem. We will obtain proofs of
these inequalities by analyzing corresponding parts of the proof of Theorem
\ref{T:pos}.
}
\end{remark}

{\bf Proof of Theorem \ref{T:2-sided}.} 1) Let us start with proving the first inequality,
estimating $\lambda$ from below.
Denote the bottom of Neumann spectrum of $H_{a,V}$ on $Q_d$ by $\mu(Q_d)$, i.e.
$\mu(Q_d)$ is the left hand side of \eqref{E:nec-loc}.
(Note that it depends upon $\Omega$ too.)
Then \eqref{E:Mazya(2)-cor} implies that for every $d>0$
and  every cube $Q_d$
\begin{align*}
\mu(Q_d)^{-1}&\le C_1\max\left\{\frac{d^2}{\gamma},\ \frac{d^n}{\inf_{F,\omega}\int_{Q_d\setminus F}\tilde V dx}\right\}\\
&\le C_1\gamma^{-1}\max\left\{d^{2}, \frac{d^n}{\inf_{F,\omega}\int_{Q_d\setminus F}\tilde V dx}\right\},
\end{align*}
where $\tilde V=\tilde V[\omega;a,V]$ is the ``effective potential" defined by \eqref{E:effective}.
Therefore,
\begin{equation}\label{E:mu-ge}
\mu(Q_d)\ge \gamma C_1^{-1}\min\left\{d^{-2}, d^{-n}\inf_{F,\omega}\int_{Q_d\setminus F}\tilde V dx\right\}.
\end{equation}
Let us assume that for some $d>0$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{E:d-2-le}
d^{-2}\le d^{-n}\inf_{F,\omega}\int_{Q_d\setminus F}\tilde V dx
\quad\text{\rm for all}\ \  Q_d.
\end{equation}
(This holds in particular if $d>D$.)
Then we obviously have
\begin{equation}\label{E:la-ge}
\lambda\ge \inf_{Q_d} \mu(Q_d)\ge \gamma C_1^{-1}d^{-2}
\end{equation}
for this particular $d$. Taking limit as $d\downarrow D$, we obtain the same inequality
with $d=D$, which proves the left inequality in \eqref{E:2-sided}.

\medskip
2) Now let us prove the second inequality in \eqref{E:2-sided},
estimating $\lambda$ from above.
To this end let us look at the inequalities \eqref{E:final-pos2} and \eqref{E:d-ge}.
They imply that there exists $C=C(\gamma)>0$ such that for every cube $Q_d$
at least one of the inequalities
\begin{equation}\label{E:2-ineq}
\lambda\le Cd^{-2}, \quad \lambda\le C d^{-n}\inf_{F,\omega}\int_{Q_d\setminus F}\tilde V dx,
\end{equation}
must hold. By definition of $D$ (see \eqref{E:D}) this implies that
$\lambda\le CD^{-2}$ which ends the proof.
$\square$

\begin{remark}
{\rm For the Dirichlet Laplacian (i.e. for $H_{0,0}=-\Delta$) in domains $\Omega$
and for small $\gamma>0$ the result of Theorem \ref{T:2-sided} was proved in \cite{Mazya-74}.
This result for arbitrary $\gamma\in(0,1)$ was obtained in \cite{Mazya-Shubin2}, where also
explicit values of the constants in the upper and lower bounds were given.
}
\end{remark}

\section{Persson type theorem for magnetic Schr\"odinger operators}\label{S:Persson}

This section contains a preparatory result, expressing the bottom of the
essential spectrum of $H_{a,V}$ in $L^2(\Omega)$ as a limit of the bottoms of the Dirichlet
spectrum of this operator on the exteriors of large balls. The first result of this kind
is probably due to Persson \cite{Persson}  (for the usual Schr\"odinger operators, without
magnetic field), see also Chapter 3 in \cite{Agmon82} and Theorem 3.12 in \cite{CFKS}.
(In particular, the Laplacian is replaced by general second-order operators in divergence form
in \cite{Agmon82}.)
 The arguments given in these sources can be extended to our case. Nevertheless for the sake
of convenience of the reader we offer a proof which seems to be different from what we
have seen in the literature.

For any open set $U\subset\hbox{{\bbb R}}^n$, denote by $\lambda(U; H_{a,V})$ the bottom of the Dirichlet
spectrum of $H_{a,V}$ in $L^2(U)$, i.e. the spectrum of the operator defined by
the closure of the quadratic form $h_{a,V}$ (see \eqref{E:haV}) in $L^2(U)$
from the initial domain $C_0^\infty(U)$. In other words,
\begin{equation}\label{E:la-Om}
\lambda(U;H_{a,V})=
\inf\left\{\left.\frac{h_{a,V}(u,u)}{(u,u)}\right|u\in C_0^{\infty}(U)\setminus\{0\}\right\},
\end{equation}
where $(\cdot,\cdot)$ means the scalar product in $L^2(U)$.

Usually $H_{a,V}$ will be fixed in our arguments, and in this case we will write $\lambda(U)$
instead of $\lambda(U; H_{a,V})$ if this does not lead to a confusion.

Note that $U\subset U'$ implies $\lambda(U)\ge \lambda(U')$.

For any self-adjoint operator $H$ in a Hilbert space ${\cal H}$ and any $\lambda\in\hbox{{\bbb R}}$ denote by $E_\lambda$
(or $E_\lambda(H)$) the spectral projection of $H$ corresponding  to the interval $(-\infty,\lambda)$.
Let us introduce the ``counting function" of the spectrum by
\begin{equation}\label{E:N-la}
N(\lambda)=N(\lambda;H)=\, {\rm Tr}\,  E_\lambda=\dim{\rm Im} E_\lambda.
\end{equation}
It is an increasing function of $\lambda$ with values in $[0,+\infty]$. If $H$ is semibounded below,
and $\lambda_\infty$ is the bottom of its essential spectrum $\sigma_{ess}(H)$, then
\begin{equation}\label{E:la-infty-abstr}
\lambda_\infty = {\rm sup} \{\lambda\in\hbox{{\bbb R}}|\; N(\lambda)<+\infty\}.
\end{equation}

The following Lemma is a well known variational principle
(see e.g. \cite{Berezin-Shubin}, Section 3 in Appendix 1). In this form
it is often attributed to I.M.~Glazman.

\begin{lemma}[\rm Glazman's Lemma]\label{L:Glazman} For every $\lambda\in\hbox{{\bbb R}}$,
\begin{equation}\label{E:Glazman}
N(\lambda)={\rm sup}\{\dim L|\; L\subset Q(h), h(u,u)<\lambda(u,u), \forall u\in L\setminus\{0\}\},
\end{equation}
where $h$ is the quadratic form of $H$, $Q(h)$ is the domain of $h$, $L$ is
a linear subspace of $Q(h)$,  $(\cdot,\cdot)$ stands for the scalar product
in ${\cal H}$.

This holds also if we replace $Q(h)$ by any core of $h$.
\end{lemma}

\begin{corollary}\label{C:N-la-2} For the operator $H_{a,V}$ in $L^2(\Omega)$
with the Dirichlet boundary condition
\begin{equation}\label{E:N-la-2}
N(\lambda)={\rm sup}\{\dim L|\; L\subset C_0^\infty(\Omega), h_{a,V}(u,u)<\lambda(u,u), \forall u\in L\setminus\{0\}\}.
\end{equation}
\end{corollary}

The following theorem is a version of the Persson theorem \cite{Persson}
(see also Theorem 3.12 in \cite{CFKS}, as well as \cite{Agmon82}).

\begin{theorem}\label{P:la-infty}
For $\lambda_\infty=\inf\sigma_{ess}(H_{a,V})$ in $L^2(\Omega)$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{E:la-infty}
\lambda_\infty=\lim_{R\to\infty}\lambda(\Omega\setminus \bar{B}_R(0)),
\end{equation}
where $\bar{B}_R(0)$ is the closed ball with the radius $R$ and center at $0$.
\end{theorem}

Note that the limit in \eqref{E:la-infty} exists in $[0,+\infty]$
because
$\lambda(\Omega\setminus \bar{B}_R(0))$ increases with respect to $R$.

\medskip
\textbf{Proof of Theorem \ref{P:la-infty}}.
1) Let us prove first that $\lambda_\infty$ is not larger than the right hand side
in \eqref{E:la-infty}. To this end it suffices to consider the case
when the right hand side is finite.

Let us take an arbitrary $\tilde\lambda$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{E:tilde-la}
\tilde\lambda>\lim_{R\to\infty}\lambda(\Omega\setminus \bar{B}_R(0))={\rm sup}_R \lambda(\Omega\setminus \bar{B}_R(0)).
\end{equation}
Taking $R_1>0$ arbitrary and using the inequality $\tilde\lambda>\lambda(\Omega\setminus \bar{B}_{R_1}(0))$,
we can find a function $\psi_1\in C_0^\infty(\Omega\setminus \bar{B}_{R_1}(0))$, such that $\|\psi_1\|=1$
(here $\|\cdot\|$ means the norm in $L^2(\hbox{{\bbb R}}^n)$) and $h_{a,V}(\psi_1,\psi_1)< \tilde\lambda$.
Choose $R_2>R_1$ so that $\hbox{supp}\;\psi_1\subset B_{R_2}(0)$. Now using the inequality
$\tilde\lambda>\lambda(\Omega\setminus \bar{B}_{R_2}(0))$, we can construct
$\psi_2\in C_0^\infty(\Omega\setminus \bar{B}_{R_2}(0))$ so that $\|\psi_2\|=1$
and $h_{a,V}(\psi_2,\psi_2)< \tilde\lambda$. Proceeding by induction, we can
construct an orthonormal sequence of functions $\psi_k\in C_0^\infty(\Omega)$, $k=1,2,\dots$,
with disjoint supports, such that $h_{a,V}(\psi_k,\psi_k)<\tilde\lambda$
for all $k$. It follows that $h_{a,V}(u,u)< \tilde\lambda(u,u)$ for any $u\ne 0$ in the linear span
$L$ of the sequence $\{\psi_k\}$. This implies that $N(\tilde\lambda)=+\infty$,
hence $\lambda_\infty\le\tilde\lambda$ due to \eqref{E:la-infty-abstr}. Since $\tilde\lambda$
is an arbitrary number satisfying \eqref{E:tilde-la}, this proves that $\lambda_\infty$
does not exceed the right hand side of \eqref{E:la-infty}.

2) Now let us prove that $\lambda_\infty$ is not smaller than
right hand side of \eqref{E:la-infty}. To this end it is sufficient to prove that
\begin{equation}\label{E:la-infty-below}
\lambda_\infty\ge\lambda(\Omega\setminus K),
\end{equation}
for every compact set $K\subset\Omega$.
It is enough to consider the case when $\lambda_\infty<\infty$.
Ad absurdum let us assume that $\lambda_\infty<\lambda(\Omega\setminus K)$
for some $K$. Let us choose $\tilde\lambda$ so that
\begin{equation}\label{E:la-3}
\lambda_\infty<\tilde\lambda<\lambda(\Omega\setminus K).
\end{equation}
Due to \eqref{E:la-infty-abstr} we have $N(\tilde\lambda)=+\infty$,
and the same is true if we replace $\tilde\lambda$ by $\tilde\lambda-\varepsilon$
for a sufficiently small $\varepsilon>0$. Therefore, due to Corollary \ref{C:N-la-2},
for every integer $N>0$ we can find a subspace $L\subset C_0^{\infty}(\Omega)$,
such that $\dim L=N$ and
\begin{equation}\label{E:haV-on-L}
h_{a,V}(u,u)\le\tilde\lambda(u,u), \quad u\in L.
\end{equation}
On the other hand, the opposite inequality is true if $\hbox{supp}\; u\subset \Omega\setminus K$.
More precisely, according to \eqref{E:la-Om},
\begin{equation}\label{E:haV-out}
h_{a,V}(u,u)\ge\lambda(\Omega\setminus K)(u,u), \quad u\in C_0^\infty(\Omega\setminus K).
\end{equation}
We will establish that the combination of \eqref{E:haV-on-L}  and \eqref{E:haV-out}
is impossible if $N$ is sufficiently large. To this end we will split $|u|^2$
for every $u\in L$
into a sum $|u_0|^2+|u_1|^2$ where $u_0$ is  supported in a neighborhood of $K$ and  $u_1$
has its support in $\Omega\setminus K$. This splitting is conveniently done
by use of the IMS localization formula (see e.g. Section 3.1 in \cite{CFKS} and
Lemma 3.1 in \cite{Shubin96}).

Let us choose $R_0>0$, so that $K\subset B_{R_0}(0)$, and take $R>2R_0$.
We can choose functions $J_0\in C_0^\infty(B_{2R}(0))$
and $J_1\in C^\infty(\hbox{{\bbb R}}^n)$, such that
$J_0=1$ on $\bar{B}_{R_0}(0)$, $0\le J_0(x)\le 1$ for all
$x\in \hbox{{\bbb R}}^n$, $J_1\ge 0$, $J_0^2+J_1^2\equiv 1$
(hence $J_1\le 1$ and $J_1=0$ on $\bar{B}_{R_0}(0)$), and
\begin{equation}\label{E:der-est}
{\rm sup}(|\nabla J_0|+|\nabla J_1|)\le C_n R^{-1}.
\end{equation}
Due to the IMS localization formula we obtain for any $u\in C_0^\infty(\hbox{{\bbb R}}^n)$
\begin{equation}\label{E:IMS}
h_{a,V}(u,u)=\sum_{k=0}^1 h_{a,V}(J_ku,J_ku)-\sum_{k=0}^1(|\nabla J_k|^2u,u).
\end{equation}
It follows from \eqref{E:der-est} and \eqref{E:IMS} that
\begin{equation}\label{E:IMS-ge}
h_{a,V}(u,u)\ge h_{a,V}(J_0u,J_0u)+h_{a,V}(J_1u,J_1u)-C_n^2 R^{-2}(u,u).
\end{equation}
The inequality
\eqref{E:haV-out} implies
\begin{equation}\label{E:haV-J1}
h_{a,V}(J_1u,J_1u)\ge \lambda(\Omega\setminus K) (J_1u,J_1u), \quad u\in C_0^\infty(\Omega).
\end{equation}
Taking $u\in L$, we obtain from \eqref{E:haV-on-L}, \eqref{E:IMS-ge} and \eqref{E:haV-J1} that
\begin{align*}
&h_{a,V}(J_0u,J_0u)\le h_{a,V}(u,u)+C_n^2R^{-2}(u,u)-h_{a,V}(J_1u,J_1u)\\
&\le (\tilde\lambda +C_n^2R^{-2})(u,u)-\lambda(\Omega\setminus K)(J_1u,J_1u)\\
&= (\tilde\lambda +C_n^2R^{-2})(J_0u,J_0u) -
(\lambda(\Omega\setminus K)-\tilde\lambda-C_n^2R^{-2})(J_1u,J_1u).
\end{align*}
If $R>0$ is sufficiently large, so that
$\tilde\lambda +C_n^2R^{-2}< \lambda(\Omega\setminus K)$,
we obtain
\begin{equation*}
h_{a,V}(J_0u,J_0u)\le (\tilde\lambda+C_n^2R^{-2})(J_0u,J_0u)\le
(\lambda(\Omega\setminus K))(J_0u,J_0u),
\quad u\in L.
\end{equation*}
(The inequality is strict if $J_0u\ne 0$.)
It follows from Corollary \ref{C:N-la-2}, that for the subspace
$J_0(L)\subset C_0^\infty(\Omega\cap B_{2R}(0))$
\begin{equation*}
\dim J_0(L)\le N\left(\lambda(\Omega\setminus K); H_{a,V}|_{\Omega\cap B_{2R}(0)}\right),
\end{equation*}
where $H_{a,V}|_{\Omega\cap B_{2R}(0)}$ is the operator $H_{a,V}$ in $L^2(\Omega\cap B_{2R}(0))$
with the Dirichlet boundary conditions, i.e. the operator defined by the closure
of the quadratic form $h_{a,V}$ in $L^2(\Omega\cap B_{2R}(0))$ from  $C_0^\infty(\Omega\cap B_{2R}(0))$.
Since $\Omega\cap B_{2R}(0)$ is bounded, $H_{a,V}|_{\Omega\cap B_{2R}(0)}$ has a discrete spectrum,
so the number $N\left(\lambda(\Omega\setminus K); H_{a,V}|_{\Omega\cap B_{2R}(0)}\right)$
is finite.

Now let us consider the multiplication-by-$J_0$ operator, restricted to $L$:
\begin{align*}\label{E:mult-by-J0}
M_{J_0}:L&\longrightarrow L^2(\Omega\cap B_{2R}(0))\\
u&\longmapsto J_0u
\notag
\end{align*}
Then $\, {\rm Ker}\,  M_{J_0}$ consists of functions from $L$ which vanish on $\hbox{supp}\; J_0$
(in particular, in a neighborhood of $K$), so
$\, {\rm Ker}\,  M_{J_0}\subset C_0^\infty(\Omega\setminus K)$.  Therefore, for any function
$u\in \, {\rm Ker}\,  M_{J_0}$ both estimates \eqref{E:haV-on-L} and \eqref{E:haV-out} should be
satisfied. Since $\tilde\lambda<\lambda(\Omega\setminus K)$, this is only possible if $u=0$.

So we conclude that $\, {\rm Ker}\,  M_{J_0}=\{0\}$, so the map $M_{J_0}$ is injective.
It follows that
\begin{equation*}
N=\dim L=\dim J_0(L)\le N\left(\lambda(\Omega\setminus K); H_{a,V}|_{\Omega\cap B_{2R}(0)}\right).
\end{equation*}
This contradicts to the  assumption \eqref{E:la-3} which implies that $N$
can be arbitrarily large. Hence we proved \eqref{E:la-infty-below}. $\square$

\section{Two-sided estimates for the bottom of the essential spectrum}\label{S:2-sided-ess}

Now we turn to two-sided estimates of the bottom of the essential spectrum
for $H_{a,V}$ in $L^2(\Omega)$.
Denote $\Omega_R=\Omega\setminus \bar{B}_R(0)$ and
\begin{equation*}
D_R=D_R(\Omega,\gamma,a,V)=D(\Omega_R,\gamma,a,V).
\end{equation*}
(cf. \eqref{E:D}). Since $D_R$ decreases as $R$ increases, we can define
\begin{equation}\label{E:D-infty}
D_\infty=D_\infty(\Omega,\gamma,a,V)=\lim_{R\to\infty} D_R(\Omega,\gamma,a,V).
\end{equation}
So $D_{\infty}\in [0,+\infty]$, and both $0$ and $+\infty$ can occur.
Clearly, $D_R$, $D_{\infty}$  increase with $\gamma$ provided $\Omega, a, V$
are fixed. Similarly, they increase with $\Omega$, i.e. if $\Omega\subset\Omega'$,
then $D_R(\Omega,\gamma,a,V)\le  D_R(\Omega',\gamma,a,V)$,
and the same is true for $D_{\infty}$.

\begin{theorem}\label{T:2-sided-ess}
There exists $C=C(\gamma,n)>0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{E:2-sided-ess}
C^{-1}D_{\infty}^{-2}\le \lambda_{\infty}\le C D_{\infty}^{-2},
\end{equation}
where $\lambda_{\infty}$ is the bottom of the essential spectrum of $H_{a,V}$
in $L^2(\Omega)$.
\end{theorem}

{\bf Proof.} The result immediately folows from \eqref{E:D-infty}
and Theorem \ref{T:2-sided}. $\square$

\begin{remark}
{\rm
Theorem \ref{T:discr2} with $\gamma=const$ follows from Theorem \ref{T:2-sided-ess} because
the discreteness of spectrum is equivalent to the equality $\lambda_{\infty}=+\infty$, and
the equality $D_{\infty}=0$ is equivalent to the corresponding conditions in
Theorem \ref{T:discr2}.
}
\end{remark}

\section{A special class of operators}\label{S:example}

In this Section we will consider special magnetic Schr\"odinger operators
 $H_{a,V}$ in $L^2(\hbox{{\bbb R}}^n)$, with the potentials of the form
 \begin{equation*}\label{E:special}
 a=a(x')=(0,\dots, 0, a_n(x')), \quad V=V(x'),
 \end{equation*}
 where $x'=(x^1,\dots, x^{n-1})$. In particular, $a$ and $V$ do not depend on the
 last coordinate $x^n$.  So the operator has the form
 \begin{equation}\label{E:HaV-special}
 H_{a,V} = -\Delta_{x'}  + \left(\frac{1}{i}\frac{\partial}{\partial x^n} + a_n(x')\right)^2 + V(x'),
 \end{equation}
 We assume that  the  local regularity conditions
 $V\in L^1_{loc}(\hbox{{\bbb R}}^{n-1})$, $a_n\in L^2_{loc}(\hbox{{\bbb R}}^{n-1})$
are satisfied, and, as above, $V\ge 0$, hence
the self-adjoint operator $H_{a,V}$
is well defined through the quadratic form,

 Note that the magnetic field $B=da$ does not generally vanish
 for such a potential $a$, but the corresponding skew-symmetric
 matrix $(B_{jk})_{j,k=1}^n$ has a special form, with $B_{jk}=0$
 if $1\le j,k\le n-1$.

 Since the operator $H_{a,V}$ is invariant with respect to translations along the $x^n$ axis,
 making Fourier transform from $x^n$ to $\mu\in\hbox{{\bbb R}}$, we obtain that $H_{a,V}$ is unitary
 equivalent to the following direct integral of self-adjoint operators
 \begin{equation}\label{E:tilde-H}
 \tilde{H}_{a,V}=\int^\oplus_{\hbox{{\bbb R}}} H_{a,V}(\mu) \frac{d\mu}{2\pi}\;,
 \end{equation}
 where
 \begin{equation*}\label{E:HaV-mu}
 H_{a,V}(\mu) =  -\Delta_{x'}  + \left(\mu + a_n(x')\right)^2 + V(x'),
 \end{equation*}
 which is a Schr\"odinger operator without magnetic field in $L^2(\hbox{{\bbb R}}^{n-1})$,
 with a positive scalar
 potential
 \begin{equation*}
 V_\mu(x') =  \left(\mu + a_n(x')\right)^2 + V(x')
 =\mu^2 + 2\mu a_n(x') + a_n(x')^2 + V(x') .
 \end{equation*}
 depending quadratically upon a parameter $\mu\in \hbox{{\bbb R}}$.
 Since the term $2\mu a_n(x')$ is dominated by the sum of the other terms in
 the right hand side, the regular perturbation theory applies, so it follows, in particular,
 that the bottom of the spectrum of $H_{a,V}(\mu)$ is a continuous function of $\mu$.
 Moreover, the bounded parts of whole spectrum of $H_{a,V}(\mu)$ are continuous
 with respect to $\mu\in\hbox{{\bbb R}}$ in a natural sense. Due to the direct integral decomposition,
we see that all the spectrum of  $H_{a,V}$  is essential (i.e., it has no isolated points
of finite multiplicity).

Now let $\lambda, \lambda_\mu$ denote the bottoms of the spectra of the operators
$H_{a,V}$ and $H_{a,V}(\mu)$ respectively. Then it follows from
the direct integral decomposition \eqref{E:tilde-H}
and the arguments above, that
\begin{equation}\label{E:la-lamu}
\lambda=\inf \{\lambda_\mu|\;\mu\in\hbox{{\bbb R}}\}.
\end{equation}

Finally, similar to \eqref{E:D}, let us define
\begin{equation*}\label{E:tilde-D}
\tilde D=\tilde D(\gamma, a,V)=\inf_{\mu\in\hbox{{\bbb R}}} {\rm sup}_{Q_d}\left\{d:\; d^{n-2}\ge \inf_{F}\int_{Q_d\setminus F}
V_\mu(x')dx'\right\},
\end{equation*}
where $0<\gamma< 1$ and the second infimum is taken over $F\subset Q_d$, satisfying
the negligibility condition $\, {\rm cap}\, (F)\le \gamma\, {\rm cap}\, (Q_d)$.

Now using the simplest version of Theorem \ref{T:2-sided}
(without magnetic field, i.e. with $a\equiv 0$),
we immediately obtain
\begin{proposition}\label{P:2-sided}
For every $\gamma\in(0,1)$ there exists $C=C(\gamma,n)>0$, such that
\begin{equation*}\label{E:2-sided-special}
C^{-1}\tilde D^{-2} \le \lambda \le C\tilde D^{-2}.
\end{equation*}
\end{proposition}

Spectral Theory (math.SP); Mathematical Physics (math-ph)


Blocking Coloured Point Sets

Abstract: This paper studies problems related to visibility among points in the plane. A point $x$ \emph{blocks} two points $v$ and $w$ if $x$ is in the interior of the line segment $\bar{vw}$. A set of points $P$ is \emph{$k$-blocked} if each point in $P$ is assigned one of $k$ colours, such that distinct points $v,w\in P$ are assigned the same colour if and only if some other point in $P$ blocks $v$ and $w$. The focus of this paper is the conjecture that each $k$-blocked set has bounded size (as a function of $k$). Results in the literature imply that every 2-blocked set has at most 3 points, and every 3-blocked set has at most 6 points. We prove that every 4-blocked set has at most 12 points, and that this bound is tight. In fact, we characterise all sets $\{n_1,n_2,n_3,n_4\}$ such that some 4-blocked set has exactly $n_i$ points in the $i$-th colour class. Amongst other results, for infinitely many values of $k$, we construct $k$-blocked sets with $k^{1.79...}$ points.

\section{Introduction}
\seclabel{Intro}

This paper studies problems related to visibility and blocking in sets
of coloured points in the plane.  A point $x$ \emph{blocks} two points
$v$ and $w$ if $x$ is in the interior of the line segment
$\overline{vw}$. Let $P$ be a finite set of points in the plane. Two
points $v$ and $w$ are \emph{visible} with respect to $P$ if no point
in $P$ blocks $v$ and $w$.  The \emph{visibility graph} of $P$
has vertex set $P$, where two distinct points $v,w\in P$ are adjacent
if and only if they are visible with respect to $P$. A point set $B$ \emph{blocks}
$P$ if $P\cap B=\emptyset$ and for all distinct $v,w\in P$ there is a
point in $B$ that blocks $v$ and $w$. That is, no two points in $P$
are visible with respect to $P\cup B$, or alternatively, $P$ is an
independent set in the visibility graph of $P\cup B$.

A set of points $P$ is \emph{$k$-blocked} if each point in $P$ is
assigned one of $k$ colours, such that each pair of points $v,w\in P$
are visible with respect to $P$ if and only if $v$ and $w$ are
coloured differently. Thus $v$ and $w$ are assigned the same colour if
and only if some other point in $P$ blocks $v$ and $w$. A
\emph{$k$-set} is a multiset of $k$ positive
integers. For a $k$-set $\{n_1,\dots,n_k\}$, we say $P$ is
$\{n_1,\dots,n_k\}$-blocked if it is $k$-blocked and for some
labelling of the colours by the integers $[k]:=\{1,2,\dots,k\}$, the
$i$-th colour class has exactly $n_i$ points, for each
$i\in[k]$. Equivalently, $P$ is $\{n_1,\dots,n_k\}$-blocked if the
visibility graph of $P$ is the complete $k$-partite graph
$K(n_1,\dots,n_k)$.  A $k$-set $\{n_1,\dots,n_k\}$ is
\emph{representable} if there is an $\{n_1,\dots,n_k\}$-blocked point
set. See \figref{K3333} for an example.

\Figure[!ht]{K3333}{\includegraphics{K3333}}{A $\{3,3,3,3\}$-blocked point set.}

The following fundamental conjecture regarding $k$-blocked point sets
is the focus of this paper.

\begin{conjecture}
  \conjlabel{kBlocked} For each integer $k$ there  is an
  integer $n$ such that every $k$-blocked set has at most $n$ points.
\end{conjecture}

As illustrated in
\figref{23Blocked}, the following theorem is a direct consequence of the characterisation
of 2- and 3-colourable visibility graphs by \citet{KPW-DCG05}.

\begin{theorem}
\thmlabel{23}
$\{1,1\}$ and $\{1,2\}$ are the only representable 2-sets, and \\
$\{1,1,1\}$, $\{1,1,2\}$, $\{1,2,2\}$ and $\{2,2,2\}$ are the only representable 3-sets.
\end{theorem}

\Figure{23Blocked}{\includegraphics{23Blocked}}{The 2-blocked and
  3-blocked point sets.}

In particular, every $2$-blocked point set has at most 3 points, and
every $3$-blocked point set has at most 6 points. This proves
\conjref{kBlocked} for $k\leq 3$.

This paper makes the following contributions. \secref{Background}
introduces some background motivation for the study of $k$-blocked
point sets, and observes that results in the literature prove
\conjref{kBlocked} for $k=4$. \secref{SmallColourClasses} describes
methods for constructing $k$-blocked sets from a given $(k-1)$-blocked
set. These methods lead to a characterisation of representable
$k$-sets when each colour class has at most three
points. \secref{Four} studies the $k=4$ case in more detail. In
particular, we characterise the representable 4-sets, and conclude
that the example in \figref{K3333} is in fact the largest
4-blocked point set. \secref{Midpoint} introduces a special class of
$k$-blocked sets (so-called midpoint-blocked sets) that lead to a
construction of the largest known $k$-blocked sets for infinitely many
values of $k$.

\section{Basic Properties}

\begin{lemma}
  \lemlabel{SelfBlockingThree} At most three points are collinear in
  every $k$-blocked point set.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
  Suppose that four points  $p,q,r,s$ are collinear in this order. Thus $(p,q,r,s)$ is an induced path  in the visibility graph.  Thus $p$ is not adjacent to $r$ and not
  adjacent to $s$.  Thus $p$, $r$, and $s$ have the same colour.  This
  is a contradiction since $r$ and $s$ are adjacent.  Thus no four
  points are collinear.
\end{proof}

A set of points $P$ is in \emph{general position} if no three
points in $P$ are collinear.

\begin{lemma}
  \lemlabel{GenPos} Each colour class in a $k$-blocked
  point set is in general position.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
  Suppose on the contrary that three points from a single colour
  class are collinear.  Then no other points are in the same line by
  \lemref{SelfBlockingThree}.  Thus two of the three points are
  adjacent, which is a contradiction.
\end{proof}

\section{Some Background Motivation}
\seclabel{Background}

Much recent research on blockers began with the following conjecture by
\citet{KPW-DCG05}.

\begin{conjecture}[Big-Line-Big-Clique Conjecture \citep{KPW-DCG05}]
  \conjlabel{BigClique} For all integers $t$ and $\ell$ there is an
  integer $n$ such that for every finite set $P$ of at least $n$
  points in the plane:
  \begin{itemize}
  \item $P$ contains $\ell$ collinear points, or
  \item $P$ contains $t$ pairwise visible points\\
(that is, the visibility graph of $P$ contains a $t$-clique).
  \end{itemize}
\end{conjecture}

\conjref{BigClique} is true for $t\leq 5$, but is open for $t\geq6$ or
$\ell\geq4$; see \citep{PorWood-Blockers,EmptyPentagon}. Given that, in general,  \conjref{BigClique} is challenging, Jan K{\'a}ra suggested the following weakening.

\begin{conjecture}[\citep{PorWood-Blockers}]
\conjlabel{BigChromaticNumber}
For all integers $t$ and $\ell$ there is an integer $n$ such that for every
finite set $P$ of at least $n$ points in the plane:
  \begin{itemize}
  \item $P$ contains $\ell$ collinear points, or
  \item the chromatic number of the visibility graph of $P$ is at least $t$.
 \end{itemize}
\end{conjecture}

\conjref{BigClique} implies \conjref{BigChromaticNumber} since every
graph that contains a $t$-clique has chromatic number at least $t$.

\begin{proposition}
\conjref{BigChromaticNumber} with $\ell=4$ and $t=k+1$ implies \conjref{kBlocked}.
\end{proposition}

\begin{proof}
  Assume \conjref{BigChromaticNumber} holds for $\ell=4$ and
  $t=k+1$. Suppose there is a $k$-blocked set $P$ of at least $n$
  points. By \lemref{SelfBlockingThree}, at most three points are
  collinear in $P$. Thus the first conclusion of
  \conjref{BigChromaticNumber} does not hold. By definition, the
  visibility graph of $P$ is $k$-colourable.  Thus the second conclusion of
  \conjref{BigChromaticNumber} does not hold. This contradiction
  proves that every $k$-blocked set has less than $n$ points, and
  \conjref{kBlocked} holds.
\end{proof}

Thus, since \conjref{BigClique} holds for $t\leq5$,
\conjref{kBlocked} holds for $k\leq4$. In \secref{Four} we take this
result much further, by characterising all representable 4-sets,
this concluding a tight bound on the size of a 4-blocked set.

\medskip Part of our interest in blocked point sets comes from the
following.

\begin{proposition}
  \proplabel{TuranGraph} For all $k\geq3$ and $n\geq2$, the edge set
  of the $k$-partite Tur\'an graph $K(n,n,\dots,n)$ can be partitioned
  into a set of `lines', where:
  \begin{itemize}
  \item each line is either an edge or an induced path on three
    vertices,
  \item every pair of vertices is in exactly one line, and
  \item for every line $L$ there is a vertex adjacent
    to each vertex in $L$.
  \end{itemize}
\end{proposition}

\begin{proof}
Let $\vvv{i,p}$ be the $p$-th vertex in the
  $i$-th colour class for $i\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}_k$ and $p\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}_n$ (taken as additive
  cyclic groups).  We introduce three types of lines.  First, for
  $i\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}_k$ and distinct $p,q\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}_n$, let the triple
  $\{\vvv{i,p},\vvv{i+1,p+q},\vvv{i,q}\}$ be a line. Second, for
  $i\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}_k$ and $p\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}_n$, let the pair
  $\{\vvv{i,p},\vvv{i+1,p+p}\}$ be a line.  Third, for $p,q\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}_n$
  and distinct non-consecutive $i,j\in\ensuremath{\mathbb{Z}}_k$, let
  the pair $\{\vvv{i,p},\vvv{j,q}\}$ be a line.  By construction each
  line is either an edge or an induced path on three vertices.

  Every pair of vertices in the same colour class are in exactly one
  line (of the first type). Consider vertices $\vvv{i,p}$ and
  $\vvv{j,q}$ in distinct colour classes. First suppose that $i$ and
  $j$ are consecutive.  Without loss of generality, $j=i+1$.  If
  $q\neq p+p$ then $\vvv{i,p}$ and $\vvv{j,q}$ are in exactly one line
  (of the first type).  If $q=p+p$ then $\vvv{i,p}$ and $\vvv{j,q}$
  are in exactly one line (of the second type). If $i$ and $j$ are not
  consecutive, then $\vvv{i,p}$ and $\vvv{j,q}$ are in exactly one
  line (of the third type).  This proves that every pair of vertices
  is in exactly one line.  Moreover, every edge of $K(n,n,\dots,n)$ is
  in exactly one line, and the lines partition the edges set.

  Since every line $L$ is contained in the union of two colour
  classes, each vertex in neither colour class
  intersecting $L$ is adjacent to each vertex in $L$.
\end{proof}

\propref{TuranGraph} is significant for \conjref{BigClique} because it
says that $K(n,\dots,n)$ behaves like a `visibility space' with no
four collinear points, but it has no large clique (for fixed
$k$). \conjref{kBlocked}, if true, implies that such a visibility
space is not `geometrically representable' for large $n$.

\medskip
Let $b(n)$ be the minimum integer such that some set of $n$ points in
the plane in general position is blocked by some set of $b(n)$
points. \citet{Matousek09} proved that $b(n)\geq 2n-3$.
\citet{DPT09} improved this bound to $b(n)\geq(\frac{25}{8}-o(1))n$.
Many authors have conjectured or stated as an open problem that
$b(n)$ is super-linear.

\begin{conjecture}[\citep{Matousek09,Pinchasi,DPT09,PorWood-Blockers}]
\conjlabel{Blockers}
$\frac{b(n)}{n}\rightarrow\infty$ as $n\rightarrow\infty$.
\end{conjecture}

\citet{PorWood-Blockers} proved that  \conjref{Blockers}
implies \conjref{BigChromaticNumber}, and thus implies
\conjref{kBlocked}. That  \conjref{kBlocked} is implied by a number of other
well-known conjectures, yet remains challenging, adds to its interest.

\section{$k$-Blocked Sets with Small Colour Classes}
\seclabel{SmallColourClasses}

We now describe some methods for building blocked point sets
from smaller blocked point sets.

\begin{lemma}
  \lemlabel{BuildSelfBlocking} Let $G$ be a visibility graph. Let
  $i\in\{1,2,3\}$.  Furthermore suppose that if $i\geq2$ then
  $V(G)\neq\emptyset$, and if $i=3$ then not all the vertices of $G$
  are collinear.  Let $G_i$ be the graph obtained from $G$ by adding
  an independent set of $i$ new vertices, each adjacent to every
  vertex in $G$.  Then $G_1$, $G_2$, and $G_3$ are visibility graphs.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
  For distinct points $p$ and $q$, let $\overleftarrow{pq}$ denote the ray
  that is (1) contained in the line through $p$ and $q$, (2) starting
  at $p$, and (3) not containing $q$. Let $\mathcal{L}$ be the union
  of the set of lines containing at least two vertices in $G$.

  $i=1$: Since $\mathcal{L}$ is the union of finitely many lines,
  there is a point $p\not\in \mathcal{L}$. Thus $p$ is visible from
  every vertex of $G$. By adding a new vertex at $p$, we obtain a
  representation of $G_1$ as a visibility graph.

  $i=2$: Let $p$ be a point not in $\mathcal{L}$. Let $v$ be a vertex
  of $G$.  Each line in $\mathcal{L}$ intersects $\overleftarrow{vp}$
  in at most one point.  Thus
  $\overleftarrow{vp}\setminus\mathcal{L}\neq\emptyset$.  Let $q$ be a
  point in $\overleftarrow{vp}\setminus\mathcal{L}$.  Thus $p$ and $q$
  are visible from every vertex of $G$, but $p$ and $q$ are blocked by
  $v$. By adding new vertices at $p$ and $q$, we obtain a
  representation of $G_2$ as a visibility graph.

  $i=3$: Let $u,v,w$ be non-collinear vertices in $G$.  Let $p$ be a
  point not in $\mathcal{L}$ and not in the convex hull of $\{u,v,w\}$. Without loss
  of generality, $\overline{uv}\cap\overline{pw}\neq\emptyset$.  There
  are infinitely many pairs of points $q\in\overleftarrow{up}$ and
  $r\in\overleftarrow{vp}$ such that $w$ blocks $q$ and $r$. Thus
  there are such $q$ and $r$ both not in $\mathcal{L}$.  By
  construction, $u$ blocks $p$ and $q$, and $v$ blocks $p$ and $r$. By
  adding new vertices at $p$, $q$ and $r$, we obtain a representation
  of $G_3$ as a visibility graph.
\end{proof}

Since no $(\geq3)$-blocked set is collinear,   \lemref{BuildSelfBlocking}  implies:

\begin{corollary}
  \corlabel{Build} If $k\geq4$ and   $\{n_1,\dots,n_{k-1}\}$ is
  representable and $n_k\in\{1,2,3\}$, then
  $\{n_1,\dots,n_{k-1},n_k\}$ is representable.
 \end{corollary}

The representable $(\leq 3)$-sets were characterised in \thmref{23}. In
each case, each colour class has at most three vertices. Now we
characterise the representable $(\geq 4)$-sets, assuming that
each colour class has at most three vertices.

\begin{proposition}
\proplabel{SmallColourClasses}
$\{n_1,\dots,n_k\}$ is representable whenever $k\geq4$ and each $n_i\leq 3$, except for $\{1,3,3,3\}$.
\end{proposition}

\begin{proof}
  We say the $k$-set $\{n_1,\dots,n_k\}$ \emph{contains}
the $(k-1)$-set  $\{n_1,\dots,n_{i-1},n_{i+1},\dots,n_k\}$ for each $i\in[k]$.
\lemref{1333} below proves that $\{1,3,3,3\}$ is not representable. We
  proceed by induction on $k$. If $\{n_1,\dots,n_k\}$ contains a
  representable $(k-1)$-set, then \corref{Build} implies
  that $\{n_1,\dots,n_k\}$ is also representable. Now assume that
  every $(k-1)$-set contained in $\{n_1,\dots,n_k\}$ is not
  representable.  By induction, we may assume that $k\leq 5$.
  Moreover, if $k=5$ then $\{n_1,\dots,n_5\}$ must contain $\{1,3,3,3\}$
  (since by induction all other 4-sets are representable).
  Similarly, if $k=4$ then $\{n_1,\dots,n_4\}$ must contain $\{1,1,3\}$,
  $\{1,2,3\}$, $\{1,3,3\}$, $\{2,2,3\}$, $\{2,3,3\}$ or $\{3,3,3\}$ (since
  $\{1,1,1\}$, $\{1,1,2\}$, $\{1,2,2\}$ and $\{2,2,2\}$ are
  representable by \thmref{23}). The following table describes the required
  construction in each remaining case.

  \bigskip
  \begin{tabular}{ll|ll}
    \hline
    $\{1,1,1,x\}$ & contains $\{1,1,1\}$ &
    $\{1,1,2,x\}$ & contains $\{1,1,2\}$\\
    $\{1,1,3,3\}$ & \figref{K3333} minus $\{r_1,g_3,r_3,g_1\}$&
    $\{1,2,2,x\}$ & contains $\{1,2,2\}$\\
    $\{1,2,3,3\}$ & \figref{K3333} minus $\{g_1,g_3,r_3\}$&
    $\{2,2,2,x\}$ & contains $\{2,2,2\}$\\
    $\{2,2,3,3\}$ & \figref{K3333} minus $\{g_3,r_3\}$ &
    $\{2,3,3,3\}$ & \figref{K3333} minus $g_3$\\
    $\{1,1,3,3,3\}$ & contains $\{1,1,3,3\}$ &
    $\{1,2,3,3,3\}$ & contains $\{1,2,3,3\}$\\
    $\{1,3,3,3,3\}$ & contains $\{3,3,3,3\}$\\
    \hline
  \end{tabular}
  \newline
\end{proof}

\section{4-Blocked Point Sets}
\seclabel{Four}

As we saw in \secref{Background}, \conjref{kBlocked} holds for
$k\leq4$. In this section we study 4-blocked point sets in more
detail. First we derive explicit bounds on the size of 4-blocked sets
from other results in the literature. Then, following a more detailed
approach, we characterise all representable 4-sets, to conclude a
tight bound on the size of 4-blocked sets.

\begin{proposition}
  \proplabel{4BlockedA} Every $4$-blocked set has less than $2^{790}$
  points.
\end{proposition}

\begin{proof}
  \citet{EmptyPentagon} proved that every set of at least
  $\ES(\frac{(2\ell-1)^{\ell}-1}{2\ell-2} )$ points in the plane
  contains $\ell$ collinear points or an empty convex pentagon, where
  $\ES(k)$ is the minimum integer such that every set of at least
  $\ES(k)$ points in general position in the plane contains $k$ points
  in convex position.  Let $P$ be a $4$-blocked set.  The visibility
  graph of $P$ is $4$-colourable, and thus contains no empty convex
  pentagon.  By \lemref{SelfBlockingThree}, at most three points in
  $P$ are collinear. Thus $|P| \leq \ES(400)-1$ by the above result
  with $\ell=4$.  \citet{TothValtr05} proved that
  $\ES(k)\leq\binom{2k-5}{k-2}+1$.  Hence $|P|\leq
  \binom{795}{398}<2^{790}$.
\end{proof}

\begin{lemma}
  \lemlabel{SelfBlockingLargeColourClass} If $P$ is a blocked set of
  $n$ points with $m$ points in the largest colour class, then
  $n\geq 3m-3$ and $n\geq(\frac{33}{8}-o(1))m$.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
  If $S$ is the largest colour class then $P-S$ blocks $S$.  By
  \lemref{GenPos}, $S$ is in general position.  By the results of
  \citet{Matousek09} and \citet{DPT09} mentioned in
  \secref{Background}, $n-m\geq 2m-3$ and
  $n-m\geq(\frac{25}{8}-o(1))m$.
\end{proof}

\begin{proposition}
  \proplabel{4BlockedB} Every $4$-blocked set has less than $2^{578}$
  points.
\end{proposition}

\begin{proof}
  Let $P$ be a $4$-blocked set of $n$ points.  Let $S$ be the largest
  colour class in $P$.  Let $m: = |S| \geq\frac{n}{4}$.  By
  \lemref{SelfBlockingLargeColourClass},
  $n\geq(\frac{33}{8}-o(1))m\geq(\frac{33}{32}-o(1))n$.  Thus
  $o(n)\geq\frac{n}{32}$. Hence $n$ is bounded.  A precise bound is
  obtained as follows.  \citet{DPT09} proved that $S$ needs at least
  $\frac{25m}{8}-\frac{25m}{2\ln m}-\frac{25}{8}$ blockers, which come
  from the other colour classes.  Thus $n-m \geq
  \frac{25m}{8}-\frac{25m}{2\ln m}-\frac{25}{8}$, implying $n \geq
  \frac{33m}{8}-\frac{25m}{2\ln m}-\frac{25}{8}$.  Since
  $\frac{n}{4}\leq m\leq n$, we have $\frac{25n}{2\ln n}+\frac{25}{8}
  \geq \frac{n}{32}$.  It follows that $n\leq 2^{578}$.
\end{proof}

The next result is the simplest known proof that every 4-blocked point
set has bounded size.

\begin{proposition}
  \proplabel{4BlockedC} Every $4$-blocked set has at most $36$ points.
\end{proposition}

\begin{proof}
  Let $P$ be a 4-blocked set. Suppose that $|P| \geq 37$.  Let $S$ be
  the largest colour class. Thus $|S|\geq10$.  By \lemref{GenPos}, $S$
  is in general position.  By a theorem of \citet{Harborth78}, some
  $5$-point subset $K\subseteq S$ is the vertex-set of an empty convex
  pentagon $\conv(K)$.  Let $T:= P \cap ( \conv(K) - K )$.  Since
  $\conv(K)$ is empty with respect to $S$, each point in $T$ is not in
  $S$.  Thus $T$ is 3-blocked.  $K$ needs at least 8 blockers (5
  blockers for the edges on the boundary of $\conv(K)$, and 3 blockers
  for the chords of $\conv(K)$).  Thus $|T| \geq 8$. But every
  3-blocked set has at most 6 points, which is a contradiction.  Hence
  $|P| \leq 36$.
\end{proof}

We now set out to characterise all representable 4-sets. We need a
few technical lemmas.

\begin{lemma}
  \lemlabel{New}
Let $A$ be a set of three  monochromatic points in a
  4-blocked set $P$. Then $P\cap\conv(A)$ contains a point from  each colour class.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
  $P\cap\conv(A)$ contains at least three points in $A$.  If
  $P\cap\conv(A)$ contains no point from one of the three other colour
  classes, then $P\cap\conv(A)$ is a $(\leq 3)$-blocked set with three
  points in one colour class ($A$), contradicting \thmref{23}.
\end{proof}

\begin{lemma}
\lemlabel{1333}
$\{3,3,3,1\}$ is not representable.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
Let $a*b*c$ mean that $b$ blocks $a$ and $c$, and let $a*b*c*d$ mean
that $a*b*c$ and $b*c*d$.  This allows us to record the order in which points occur on a line.

Suppose that $P$ is a $\{3,3,3,1\}$-blocked set of points, with colour classes $A=\{a_1, a_2, a_3\}$, $B=\{b_1, b_2, b_3\}$, $C=\{c_1, c_2, c_3\}$, and $D=\{d\}$.

If $d$ does not block some monochromatic pair, then $P\setminus D$ is
a 3-blocked set of nine points, contradicting \thmref{23}. Therefore $d$
blocks some monochromatic pair, which we may call $a_1, a_2$.  Now
$\overleftrightarrow{a_1a_2}$ divides the remaining seven points of
$P$ into two sets, $P_1$ and $P_2$, where WLOG $4\leq|P_1|\leq 7$ and $0\leq|P_2|\leq3$.  If $|P_1|\ge6$, then $P_1\cup\{a_1\}$ is a 3-blocked set of more
than six points, contradicting \thmref{23}.  Thus $|P_1|=4$ and $|P_2|=3$, or
$|P_1|=5$ and $|P_2|=2$. Consider the following cases, as illustrated in \figref{1333}.

\textbf{Case 1.} $|P_1|=4$ and $|P_2|=3$:

We have $a_3 \in P_1$ and $P_1\neq\{a_3,b_1,b_2,b_3\}$ and
$P_1\neq\{a_3,c_1,c_2,c_3\}$, as otherwise $P_1$ is a 2-blocked set of
four points, contradicting \thmref{23}. WLOG, $P_1=\{a_3, b_1,
b_2,c_1\}$ and $P_2=\{b_3, c_2, c_3\}$, where $c_2*b_3*c_3$.  Some
point in $P_1$ blocks $b_1$ and $b_2$.  If $b_1*a_3*b_2$, then neither
$b_1$ nor $b_2$ can block $\overline{a_3a_1}$ or $\overline{a_3a_2}$; thus $c_1$ blocks
$a_3$ from both $a_1$ and $a_2$, a contradiction.  Therefore
$b_1*c_1*b_2$.  Since two of these three points must block $\overline{a_3a_1}$
and $\overline{a_3a_2}$, we may assume that $a_1*b_1*a_3$, and either $a_2*b_2*a_3$ or
$a_2*c_1*a_3$.

\begin{figure}[ht]
\includegraphics[scale=0.61]{1333a.png}
\hfill
\includegraphics[scale=0.61]{1333b.png}
\hfill
\includegraphics[scale=0.61]{1333c.png}
\caption{\figlabel{1333} Cases 1.1, 1.2, and 2.}
\end{figure}

Case 1.1. $a_2*b_2*a_3$:  Since $c_2*b_3*c_3$, the only possible blockers for $\overline{b_1b_3}$ are on $\overleftrightarrow{a_1a_2}$.  We cannot have $b_3*a_1*b_1$, for then $b_3*a_1*b_1*a_3$.  We cannot have $b_3*a_2*b_1$, for then $\overleftrightarrow{b_1b_3}$ separates $b_2$ from $a_1$ and $d$, one of which needs to block $\overline{b_2b_3}$.  Therefore $b_1*d*b_3$.  Similarly, $b_2*d*b_3$, a contradiction.

Case 1.2. $a_2*c_1*a_3$:  Thus $a_2$ does not block
$\overline{c_1c_2}$ or $\overline{c_1c_3}$.  Therefore $a_1$ and $d$
block $\overline{c_1c_2}$ and $\overline{c_1c_3}$.  WLOG,
$c_2*a_1*c_1$ and $c_3*d*c_1$.  Since $c_2*b_3*c_3$, the blocker for
$\overline{b_1b_3}$ is on the same side of
$\overleftrightarrow{c_1c_3}$ as $a_1$, and on the same side of
$\overleftrightarrow{b_1b_2}$ as $a_1$.  The only such points are
$a_1$, $c_2$, and $b_3$.  Thus $a_1$ or $c_2$ block
$\overline{b_1b_3}$. Now, $c_2$ does not block $\overline{b_1b_3}$, as
otherwise $b_1*c_2*b_3*c_3$. Similarly,
$a_1$ does not block $\overline{b_1b_3}$, as
otherwise $b_3*a_1*b_1*a_3$. This contradiction concludes this case.

\textbf{Case 2.} $|P_1|=5$ and $|P_2|=2$:

We have $a_3\in P_1$, as otherwise $P_1$ is 2-blocked, contradicting
\thmref{23}. WLOG,
$P_1=\{a_3, b_1, b_2, c_1, c_2\}$ and $P_2=\{b_3, c_3\}$.  Note that
$a_3$ must block at least one of $\overline{b_1b_2}$,
$\overline{c_1c_2}$, because $P_1\setminus \{a_3\}$ is too large to be
2-blocked; however, it cannot block both, for then there would be no
valid blockers left for $a_3$.  Thus WLOG $b_1*a_3*b_2$ and
$c_1*b_1*c_2$.  Since $a_3\in \overline{b_1b_2}$, neither $b_1$ nor
$b_2$ block $\overline{a_3a_1}$ or $\overline{a_3a_2}$.  Thus, WLOG, $a_1*c_1*a_3$ and $a_2*c_2*a_3$.

By \lemref{New}, $P\cap\conv\{c_1,c_2,c_3\}$ contains some member of $A$, WLOG $a_1$.  We cannot have $a_1 \in \overline{c_1c_3}$, for then $c_3*a_1*c_1*a_3$.  Therefore $a_1$ is on the same side of $\overleftrightarrow{c_1c_3}$ as $c_2$; consequently, $d$ and $a_2$ are, as well.  It follows that $c_1*b_3*c_3$, and so $b_3$ sees $b_2$.
\end{proof}

\begin{lemma}
  \lemlabel{K4221} Let $P$ be a 4-blocked set. Suppose that some
  colour class $S$ of $P$ contains a subset $K$, such that $|K|=4$ and
  $K$ is the vertex-set of a convex quadrilateral $\conv(K)$ that is
  empty with respect to $S$. Then $P$ is $\{4,2,2,1)$-blocked.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
  Let $T:= P \cap (\conv(K) - K )$.  Since $\conv(K)$ is empty with
  respect to $S$, each point in $T$ is not in $S$.  Thus $T$ is
  3-blocked.  $K$ needs at least 5 blockers (4 blockers for the edges
  on the boundary of $\conv(K)$, and at least 1 blocker for the chords
  of $\conv(K)$).  The only representable 3-sets with at least 5
  points are $\{2,2,1\}$ and $\{2,2,2\}$.  Exactly four points in $T$ are
  on the boundary of $\conv(T)$.  Every $\{2,2,2\}$-blocked set contains
  three points on the boundary of the convex hull.  Thus $T$ is
  $\{2,2,1\}$-blocked.  Hence, as illustrated in
  \figref{BradsTwistedGrid}, one point $c$ in $T$ is at the
  intersection of the two chords of $\conv(K)$, and exactly one point
  in $T$ is on each edge of the boundary of $\conv(K)$, such that the
  points on opposite edges of $\conv(K)$ are collinear with $c$.

  \begin{figure}[ht]
    \includegraphics[scale=0.8]{BradsTwistedGrid}
    \caption{\figlabel{BradsTwistedGrid} A $\{4,2,2,1\}$-blocked point
      set.}
  \end{figure}

  We claim that no other point is in $P$.  Suppose otherwise, and let
  $p$ be a point in $P$ outside $\conv(K)$ at minimum distance from
  $\conv(K)$.  Let $x$ be a point in $\conv(K)$ receiving the same
  colour as $p$.  Thus $p$ and $x$ are blocked by some point $b$ in
  $\conv(K)$.  Thus $b$ and $x$ are collinear with no other point in
  $P\cap \conv(K)$.  Hence $x\neq c$ and $x\not\in K$.  Thus $x$ is in the
  interior of one of the edges of the boundary of $\conv(K)$.  Let $y$
  be the point in $\conv(K)$ receiving the same colour as $x$.  Thus
  $x$ and $y$ are on opposite edges of the boundary of $\conv(K)$.
  Hence $p$ and $y$ receive the same colour, implying $p$ and $y$ are
  blocked. Since $p$ is at minimum distance from $\conv(K)$, this
  blocker must a point $z$ of $\conv(K)$. This implies that $p,z,y$
  and one other point of $\conv(K)$ are four collinear points, which
contradicts \lemref{SelfBlockingThree}. Hence no other point is in $P$, and $P$ is
  $\{4,2,2,1\}$-blocked.
\end{proof}

\lemref{K4221} has the following corollary (let $K:=S$).

\begin{corollary}
  \corlabel{K4221} Let $P$ be a 4-blocked set. Suppose that some
  colour class $S$ consists of exactly four points in convex
  position. Then $P$ is $\{4,2,2,1\}$-blocked.
\end{corollary}

The next lemma is a key step in our characterisation of representable
4-sets.

\begin{lemma}
  \lemlabel{FourInColourClass} Each colour class in a 4-blocked point
  set has at most four points.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
  Suppose that some $4$-blocked point set $P$ has a colour class $S$
  with at least five points. Esther Klein~\citep{ES35} proved that
  every set of least five points in general position in the plane
  contains an empty quadrilateral. By \lemref{GenPos}, $S$ is in
  general position. Thus $S$ contains a subset $K$, such that $|K|=4$
  and $K$ is the vertex-set of a convex quadrilateral $\conv(K)$ that
  is empty with respect to $S$. By \lemref{K4221}, $P$ is
  $\{4,2,2,1\}$-blocked, which is the desired contradiction.
\end{proof}

\begin{lemma}
  \lemlabel{K4222} Let $P$ be a 4-blocked point set with colour classes
  $A, B, C, D$. Suppose that no colour class consists of exactly
  four points in convex position (that is, \corref{K4221} is not
  applicable). Furthermore, suppose that some colour class $A$
  consists of exactly four points in nonconvex position. Then $P$ is
  $\{4,2,2,2\}$-blocked (as in \figref{K4222}).
\end{lemma}

\begin{figure}[ht]
  \includegraphics{K4222}
  \caption{\figlabel{K4222} A $\{4,2,2,2\}$-blocked point set.}
\end{figure}

\begin{proof}
  By \lemref{FourInColourClass}, each colour class has at most four
  points.  By assumption, every 4-point colour class is in nonconvex
  position. We may assume that $A$ is a minimal in the sense that no
  other 4-point colour class is within $\conv(A)$.

  Let $Q:=P\cap \conv(A)$. Thus $Q$ is 4-blocked, and one colour
  class is $A$. By the minimality of $A$, each other colour class in
  $Q$ has at most three points. We first prove that $Q$ is
  $\{4,2,2,2\}$-blocked, and then show that this implies that $P=Q$.

  Let $A=\{a_1, a_2, a_3, a_4\}$, where $a_4$ is the  interior point of
  $\conv(A)$.  Note that the edges with points in $A$ divide
  $\conv (A)$ into three triangles with disjoint interiors. By
  \lemref{New}, each
  colour class of $Q$ is represented in each of these triangles;
  this requires at least two points of each colour (one of which
  could sit on the edge shared by two triangles).

  We name a point with reference to its colour class, such as $b_1\in
  B$; or, we name a point with reference to its position.  Let
  $x_{ij}$ be the unique member of $Q':=Q\setminus A$ that blocks
  $\overline{a_ia_j}$, for $1\le i<j \le 4$.  This accounts for
  exactly 6 points of $Q'$.

  $Q$ is not $\{4,3,3,3\}$-blocked, as otherwise we could delete the three
  outer members of $A$ to represent $\{3,3,3,1\}$, which contradicts
  \lemref{1333}. Thus $Q$ is $\{4,2,2,2\}$-blocked,
  $\{4,3,2,2\}$-blocked, or $\{4,3,3,2\}$-blocked.

  First suppose that $Q$ is $\{4,3,2,2\}$-blocked. Then $Q'$ consists of
  six points $x_{ij}$ and one additional point, $y$.  We have three
  cases:

  \begin{figure}[ht]
    \includegraphics[scale=0.69]{Nonconvex4c1.png}
\hspace*{-4mm}
    \includegraphics[scale=0.69]{Nonconvex4c2.png}
\hspace*{-4mm}
  \includegraphics[scale=0.69]{Nonconvex4c3.png}
\hspace*{-4mm}\\
\vspace*{-2ex}
    \caption{Diagrams of $\{4,3,2,2\}$ cases 1, 2, and 3.}
  \end{figure}

  \begin{enumerate}
  \item If $y$ blocks two points $x_{i4}$ and $x_{j4}$, then suppose
    WLOG that $x_{24}*y*x_{34}$.  Now $y$ is on one side or the other
    of $\overleftrightarrow{x_{14}a_4}$, and therefore sees at least
    one of $x_{12}$, $x_{13}$; WLOG we may say that $y$ sees $x_{12}$.
    Now $x_{12}$, $x_{14}$, $x_{24}$, and $y$ are four mutually
    visible points in $Q'$.
  \item If $y$ is collinear with, but does not block, two points
    $x_{i4}$ and $x_{j4}$, then suppose WLOG that $y*x_{24}*x_{34}$.
    Now $x_{12}$ is on one side or the other of
    $\overleftrightarrow{yx_{24}}$, and therefore sees either $x_{14}$
    or $x_{23}$.  Whichever one $x_{12}$ sees, that point is mutually
    visible with $x_{12}$, $x_{24}$, and $y$; thus we have four
    mutually visible points in $Q'$.
  \item If $y$ is not collinear with two points $x_{i4}$ and $x_{j4}$,
    then $y$ sees all such points; thus $x_{14}$, $x_{24}$, $x_{34}$,
    and $y$ are four mutually visible points in $Q'$.
  \end{enumerate}
  In all cases, we have four mutually visible points in three colours,
  which is impossible.

  Now suppose that $Q$ is $\{4,3,3,2\}$-blocked. Then $Q'$ comprises six
  points $x_{ij}$ and two additional points, $y_1$ and $y_2$.  Let
  $\delta = \{ x_{i4}:1\le i \le 3\}$ and let $\delta_2$ be the set of
  segments with endpoints in $\delta$.  How many of the points $y_i$
  block members of $\delta_2$?  Again, we have three cases:

  \begin{figure}[ht]
    \includegraphics[scale=0.69]{Nonconvex4c4.png}
    \hfill
    \includegraphics[scale=0.69]{Nonconvex4c5.png}
    \hfill
    \includegraphics[scale=0.69]{Nonconvex4c6.png}
\hspace*{-2mm}\\
\vspace*{-2ex}
   \caption{Diagrams of $\{4,3,3,2\}$ cases 1, 2, and 3.}
  \end{figure}

  \begin{enumerate}
  \item If neither $y_1$ nor $y_2$ blocks a segment in $\delta_2$, then
    recall that $y_1$ and $y_2$ cannot both block each other.  Thus,
    WLOG, $y_2$ does not block $y_1$.  Now $\delta$ and $y_1$ give us
    four mutually visible points in $Q'$.

  \item If $y_1$ blocks a segment in $\delta_2$ and $y_2$ does not,
    then WLOG $x_{24}*y_1*x_{34}$. \0{ If $y_2$ and $x_{12}$ are on
      opposite sides of $\overleftrightarrow{x_{14}y_1}$, then
      $x_{12}$, $x_{14}$, $x_{24}$, and $y_1$ are four mutually
      visible points in $Q'$.  No: $a_4$ could block
      $\overline{y_1x_{12}}$. On the other hand,}Also WLOG, suppose
    that $a_2$ and $a_4$ are on the same side of
    $\overleftrightarrow{x_{14}y_1}$, so $a_4 \notin \conv(x_{13},
    x_{14}, x_{34}, y_1)$.  Now $y_2 \in \conv(x_{13}, x_{14}, x_{34},
    y_1)$, for otherwise these four points in $Q'$ are mutually
    visible.

    Also note that $\overline{y_1x_{12}}$ is the only edge with
    points in $\{x_{12}, x_{14}, x_{24}, y_1\}$ that can be blocked
    by $a_4$.  To prevent these four points from being mutually
    visible, we require $y_1*a_4*x_{12}$.

    Thus $y_1$ and $x_{12}$ belong to the same colour class, which we
    may suppose is $B$.  Since $x_{12}$, $x_{14}$, and $x_{24}$ are
    mutually visible, we may suppose that $x_{24}\in C$ and
    $x_{14}\in D$.

    Since $x_{24}*y_1*x_{34}$, we have $x_{34}\in C$.  Since $x_{23}$
    sees $x_{24}$ and $y_1$, we have $x_{23}\in D$.

    Now $y_2$ sees $y_1 \in B$ and $x_{34}\in C$, and we conclude
    that $y_2\in D$; however, $y_2$ sees either $x_{14}$ or $x_{23}$,
    and colour class $D$ is not blocked.

  \item If both $y_1$ and $y_2$ block segments in $\delta_2$, then WLOG
    $x_{i4}*y_i*x_{34}$ for $i=1,2$.  Now $\{x_{14}, x_{24}, a_4\}$ is
    insufficient to block $x_{12}$ from $\{y_1, y_2\}$, for this would
    imply some $x_{12}*x_{i4}*y_i*x_{34}$.  Therefore some $y_i$ sees
    $x_{12}$; now $x_{12}$, $x_{14}$, $x_{24}$, and $y_i$ are four
    mutually visible points in $Q'$.
  \end{enumerate}

  The only remaining case is that $Q$ is $\{4,2,2,2\}$-blocked. This is
  possible, as illustrated in \figref{K4222}. We now show that this
  point set is essentially the only $\{4,2,2,2\}$-blocked set, up to
  betweenness-preserving deformations. We have exactly enough points
  in colour classes $B$, $C$, and $D$ to block all edges between
  points in colour class $A$.  As each of the three $A$-triangles
  with point $a_4$ must contain a representative from each of the
  other three colour classes, it follows that of the six $A$-edges,
  $B$ blocks one interior edge and the opposite boundary edge, and
  likewise for $C$ and $D$.  WLOG: $b_1=x_{14}$, $b_2=x_{23}$,
  $c_1=x_{24}$, $c_2=x_{13}$, $d_1=x_{34}$, $d_2=x_{12}$.  Since $b_1$
  blocks $a_4$, $a_4$ cannot block $b_1$.  Since $\overline{b_1b_2}$
  can be blocked only by an interior point of $\conv(A)$, it follows
  that either $c_1$ or $d_1$ blocks $\overline{b_1b_2}$.  As these
  cases are symmetric, we may choose $c_1\in\overline{b_1b_2}$.  Now
  $b_1$ cannot block $c_1$, so $c_1$ must be blocked by $d_1$, which
  must in turn be blocked by $b_1$.

  Now we show that $P=Q$. (This basically says that the point set in
  \figref{K4222} cannot be extended without introducing a new
  colour.)\ Suppose to the contrary that some point $x$ is in $P
  \setminus Q$; thus $x \notin \conv(A)$.  Note that every point
  outside $\conv(A)$ can see a vertex of $\conv(A)$, so $x$ must not
  be in colour class $A$.  WLOG, we suppose $x$ matches the points in
  $B$.  Recall that $b_2$ is on the supporting line
  $\overleftrightarrow{a_2a_3}$, and will see $x$ unless $x$ is in the
  same half-plane (as determined by this line) as the rest of $Q$.
  Who blocks $\overline{b_1x}$?  Not $a_2$ or $a_3$, for this would
  put $x$ in the wrong half-plane.  Not $a_1$, $a_4$, $d_1$, or $d_2$,
  for $b_1$ blocks each of these.  Not $c_1$, which is on
  $\overline{b_1b_2}$.  Therefore $\overline{b_1x}$ can be blocked
  only by $c_2$.  Since $c_1\in\overline{b_1b_2}$ and
  $c_2\in\overline{b_1x}$, it follows that $b_2$ and $x$ (and any
  blocker between them) are on the same side of
  $\overleftrightarrow{c_1c_2}$.  But the only other points of $Q$ in
  that open half-plane are $a_2$ and $a_3$, which cannot block $b_2$.
  Thus $x$ sees $b_2$, which is a contradiction. Thus $P=Q$ and $P$ is
  $\{4,2,2,2\}$-blocked.
\end{proof}

We now prove the main theorem of this section.

\begin{theorem}
A 4-set $\{a,b,c,d\}$ is representable  if and only if
  \begin{itemize}
  \item $\{a,b,c,d\} = \{4,2,2,1\}$, or
  \item $\{a,b,c,d\} = \{4,2,2,2\}$, or
  \item all of $a,b,c,d \leq 3$ except for $\{3,3,3,1\}$
  \end{itemize}
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
  \twofigref{BradsTwistedGrid}{K4222} respectively show
  $\{4,2,2,1\}$-blocked and $\{4,2,2,2\}$-blocked point sets.  When
  $a,b,c,d \leq 3$, the required constructions are described in
  \propref{SmallColourClasses}.  Now we prove that these are the only
  representable 4-sets.  Let $P$ be a $4$-blocked point set.  By
  \lemref{FourInColourClass}, each colour class has at most four
  points. Let $S$ be the largest colour class.  If $|S|\leq 3$ then we
  are done by \propref{SmallColourClasses}.  Now assume that $|S|=4$.
  If $S$ is in nonconvex position, then $P$ is $\{4,2,2,2\}$-blocked by
  \lemref{K4222}.  If $S$ is in convex position, then $P$ is
  $\{4,2,2,1\}$-blocked by \corref{K4221}.
\end{proof}

\begin{corollary}
  Every 4-blocked set has at most 12 points, and there is a
  4-blocked set with 12 points.
\end{corollary}

Note that in addition to the $\{3,3,3,3\}$-blocked set shown in
\figref{K3333}, there is a different $\{3,3,3,3\}$-blocked point set, as
illustrated in \figref{3333b}.

\begin{figure}[!ht]
  \includegraphics[scale=0.6]{3333b.png}
\vspace*{-2ex}
  \caption{\figlabel{3333b} Another $\{3,3,3,3\}$-blocked point
    set.}
\end{figure}

\section{Midpoint-Blocked Point Sets}
\seclabel{Midpoint}

A $k$-blocked point set $P$ is \emph{$k$-midpoint-blocked} if for each
monochromatic pair of distinct points $v,w\in P$ the midpoint of
$\overline{vw}$ is in $P$.  Of course, the midpoint of $\overline{vw}$
blocks $v$ and $w$. A point set $P$ is
\emph{$\{n_1,\dots,n_k\}$-midpoint-blocked} if it is
$\{n_1,\dots,n_k\}$-blocked and $k$-midpoint-blocked.
For example, the
point set in \figref{K3333} is $\{3,3,3,3\}$-midpoint-blocked.

Another interesting example is the projection\footnote{If $G$ is the
  visibility graph of some point set $P\subseteq\ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}^d$, then $G$ is the
  visibility graph of some projection of $P$ to $\ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}^2$ (since a random
  projection of $P$ to $\ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}^2$ is occlusion-free with probability
  $1$).} of $[3]^d$. With $d=1$ this point set is $\{2,1\}$-blocked,
with $d=2$ it is $\{4,2,2,1\}$-blocked, and with $d=3$ it is
$\{8,4,4,4,2,2,2,1\}$-blocked.  In general, each set of points with
exactly the same set of coordinates equal to $2$ is a colour
class, there are $2^{d-i}$ colour classes of points with exactly $i$
coordinates equal to $2$, and $[3]^d$ is $\{\binom{d}{i}\times
2^i:i\in[0,d]\}$-midpoint-blocked and $2^d$-midpoint-blocked.

We now prove \conjref{kBlocked} when restricted to
$k$-midpoint-blocked point sets. (Finally we have weakened
\conjref{BigClique} to something proveable!)\

\citet{HHUZ} introduced the following definition. Let $m(n)$ be the
minimum number of midpoints determined by some set of $n$ points in
general position in the plane. Since the midpoint of $\overline{vw}$
blocks $v$ and $w$, we have $b(n)\leq m(n)$. \citet{HHUZ} constructed
a set of $n$ points in general position in the plane that determine at
most $cn^{\log 3}$ midpoints for some contant $c$. (All logarithms
here are binary.)\ Thus $b(n)\leq
m(n)\leq cn^{\log3} =cn^{1.585\ldots}$. This upper bound was
improved by \citet{Pach-Midpoints-Geom03} (and later by
\citet{Matousek09}) to
$$b(n)\leq m(n)\leq nc^{\sqrt{\log n}}\enspace.$$
\citet{HHUZ} conjectured that $m(n)$ is super-linear, which was
verified by \citet{Pach-Midpoints-Geom03}; that is,
$\frac{m(n)}{n}\rightarrow\infty$ as $n\rightarrow\infty$.
\citet{PorWood-Blockers} proved the following more precise version:
For some constant $c>0$, for all $\epsilon>0$ there is an integer
$N(\epsilon)$ such that $m(n)\geq c n(\log n)^{1/(3+\epsilon)}$ for
all $n\geq N(\epsilon)$.

\begin{theorem}
  For each $k$ there is an integer $n$ such that every
  $k$-midpoint-blocked set has at most $n$ points. More precisely,
  there is an absolute constant $c$ and for each $\epsilon>0$ there is
  an an integer $N(\epsilon)$, such that for all $k$, every
  $k$-midpoint-blocked set has at most
  $k\max\{N(\epsilon),c^{(k-1)^{3+\epsilon}}\}$ points.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
  Let $P$ be $k$-midpoint-blocked set of $n$ points. If $n\leq k
  N(\epsilon)$ then we are done. Now assume that $\frac{n}{k}>
  N(\epsilon)$.  Let $S$ be a set of exactly $s:=\ceil{\frac{n}{k}}$
  monochromatic points in $P$.  Thus $S$ is in general position by
  \lemref{GenPos}.  And for every pair of distinct points $v,w \in S$
  the midpoint of $\overline{vw}$ is in $P-S$.  Thus
$$ c \tfrac{n}{k}(\log\tfrac{n}{k})^{1/(3+\epsilon)}\leq m(s) \leq
n-s\leq n(1-\tfrac{1}{k})\enspace.$$ Hence
$(\log\tfrac{n}{k})^{1/(3+\epsilon)}\leq(k-1)/c$, implying
$n\leq k 2^{((k-1)/c)^{3+\epsilon}}$. The result follows.
\end{proof}

We now construct $k$-midpoint-blocked point sets with a `large' number
of points.  The method is based on the following product of point sets
$P$ and $Q$.  For each point $v\in P\cup Q$, let $(x_v,y_v)$ be the
coordinates of $v$.  Let $P\times Q$ be the point set $\{(v,w):v\in
P,w\in Q\}$ where $(v,w)$ is at $(x_v,y_v,x_w,y_w)$ in $4$-dimensional
space. For brevity we do not distinguish between a point in $\ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}^4$ and
its image in an occlusion-free projection of the visibility graph of
$P\times Q$ into $\ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}^2$.

\begin{lemma}
  \lemlabel{ProductLemma} If $P$ is a
  $\{n_1,\dots,n_k\}$-midpoint-blocked point set and $Q$ is a
  $\{m_1,\dots,m_{\ell}\}$-midpoint-blocked point set, then $P\times Q$
  is $\{n_im_j:i\in[k],j\in[\ell]\}$-midpoint-blocked.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
  Colour each point $(v,w)$ in $P\times Q$ by the pair
  $(\col(v),\col(w))$.  Thus there are $n_im_j$ points for the
  $(i,j)$-th colour class.  Consider distinct points $(v,w)$ and
  $(a,b)$ in $P\times Q$.

  Suppose that $\col(v,w)=\col(a,b)$. Thus $\col(v)=\col(a)$ and
  $\col(w)=\col(b)$.  Since $P$ and $Q$ are midpoint-blocked,
  $\ensuremath{\protect\tfrac{1}{2}}(v+a)\in P$ and $\ensuremath{\protect\tfrac{1}{2}}(w+b)\in Q$.  Thus
  $(\ensuremath{\protect\tfrac{1}{2}}(v+a),\ensuremath{\protect\tfrac{1}{2}}(w+b))$, which is positioned at
  $(\ensuremath{\protect\tfrac{1}{2}}(x_v+x_a),\ensuremath{\protect\tfrac{1}{2}}(y_v+y_a),\ensuremath{\protect\tfrac{1}{2}}(x_w+x_b),\ensuremath{\protect\tfrac{1}{2}}(y_w+y_b))$, is
  in $P\times Q$.  This point is the midpoint of
  $\overline{(v,w)(a,b)}$.  Thus $(v,w)$ and $(a,b)$ are blocked by
  their midpoint in $P\times Q$.

  Conversely, suppose that some point $(r,s)\in P\times Q$ blocks
  $(v,w)$ and $(a,b)$.  Thus $x_r=\alpha x_v+(1-\alpha)x_a$ for some
  $\alpha\in(0,1)$, and $y_r=\beta y_v+(1-\beta)y_a$ for some
  $\beta\in(0,1)$, and $x_s=\delta x_w+(1-\delta)x_b$ for some
  $\delta\in(0,1)$, and $y_s=\gamma y_w+(1-\gamma)y_b$ for some
  $\gamma\in(0,1)$.  Hence $r$ blocks $v$ and $a$ in $P$, and $s$
  blocks $w$ and $b$ in $Q$.  Thus $\col(v)=\col(a)\neq\col(r)$ in
  $P$, and $\col(w)=\col(b)\neq\col(s)$ in $Q$, implying
  $(\col(v),\col(w))=(\col(a),\col(b))$.

  We have shown that two points in $P\times Q$ are blocked if and only
  if they have the same colour.  Thus $P\times Q$ is blocked.  Since
  every blocker is a midpoint, $P\times Q$ is midpoint-blocked.
\end{proof}

Say $P$ is a $k$-midpoint blocked set of $n$ points.  By
\lemref{ProductLemma}, the $i$-fold product $P^i:=P\times\dots\times
P$ is a $k^i$-blocked set of $n^i=(k^i)^{\log_k n}$ points. Taking $P$
to be the $\{3,3,3,3\}$-midpoint-blocked point set in \figref{K3333}, we
obtain the following result:

\begin{theorem}
  For all $k$ a power of $4$, there is a $k$-blocked set of $k^{\log_4
    12}=k^{1.79\ldots}$ points.
\end{theorem}

This result describes the largest known construction of $k$-blocked or
$k$-midpoint blocked point sets.  To promote further research, we make
the following strong conjectures:

\begin{conjecture}
  \conjlabel{SizeBlocked} Every $k$-blocked point set has $O(k^2)$
  points.
\end{conjecture}

\begin{conjecture}
  \conjlabel{SizeColorClass} In every $k$-blocked point set there are
  at most $k$ points in each colour class.
\end{conjecture}

\conjref{SizeColorClass} would be tight for the projection of $[3]^d$
with $k=2^d$.  Of course, \conjref{SizeColorClass} implies
\conjref{SizeBlocked}, which implies \conjref{kBlocked}.

\section*{Acknowledgements} This research was initiated at The 24th
Bellairs Winter Workshop on Computational Geometry, held in February
2009 at the Bellairs Research Institute of McGill University in
Barbados. The authors are grateful to Godfried Toussaint and Erik
Demaine for organising the workshop, and to the other
participants for providing a stimulating working environment.

\def\cprime{$'$} \def\soft#1{\leavevmode\setbox0=\hbox{h}\dimen7=\ht0\advance
  \dimen7 by-1ex\relax\if t#1\relax\rlap{\raise.6\dimen7
  \hbox{\kern.3ex\char'47}}#1\relax\else\if T#1\relax
  \rlap{\raise.5\dimen7\hbox{\kern1.3ex\char'47}}#1\relax \else\if
  d#1\relax\rlap{\raise.5\dimen7\hbox{\kern.9ex \char'47}}#1\relax\else\if
  D#1\relax\rlap{\raise.5\dimen7 \hbox{\kern1.4ex\char'47}}#1\relax\else\if
  l#1\relax \rlap{\raise.5\dimen7\hbox{\kern.4ex\char'47}}#1\relax \else\if
  L#1\relax\rlap{\raise.5\dimen7\hbox{\kern.7ex
  \char'47}}#1\relax\else\message{accent \string\soft \space #1 not
  defined!}#1\relax\fi\fi\fi\fi\fi\fi} \def\Dbar{\leavevmode\lower.6ex\hbox to
  0pt{\hskip-.23ex\accent"16\hss}D}

Blocking Coloured Point Sets