Using Curvature to Select the Time Lag for Delay Reconstruction

Abstract: We propose a curvature-based approach for choosing good values for the time-delay parameter $\tau$ in delay reconstructions. The idea is based on the effects of the delay on the geometry of the reconstructions. If the delay is chosen too small, the reconstructed dynamics are flattened along the main diagonal of the embedding space; too-large delays, on the other hand, can overfold the dynamics. Calculating the curvature of a two-dimensional delay reconstruction is an effective way to identify these extremes and to find a middle ground between them: both the sharp reversals at the ends of an insufficiently unfolded reconstruction and the folds in an overfolded one create spikes in the curvature. We operationalize this observation by computing the mean over the Menger curvature of 2D reconstructions for different time delays. We show that the mean of these values gives an effective heuristic for choosing the time delay. In addition, we show that this curvature-based heuristic is useful even in cases where the customary approach, which uses average mutual information, fails --- e.g., noisy or filtered data.

\section{Introduction}\label{sec:Intro}

Delay-coordinate embedding, or the method of delays, is a
well-established technique for dynamical reconstruction of time-series
data.\cite{takens,sauer91,packard80} This method, which generates a
reconstruction by plotting scalar time-series data against delayed
versions of itself on orthogonal axes, involves two free
parameters---a time delay, $\tau$, and an embedding dimension, $m$.
Examples of reconstructions for the classic Lorenz attractor are shown
in Fig.~\ref{fig:lorenz}.  Though the embedding theorems offer some
theoretical guidance regarding the selection of $\tau$ and $m$, one
must fall back upon heuristics for choosing their values when faced
with finite-precision data from an unknown system.

Over the past decades, the nonlinear dynamics community has devoted
significant effort to developing effective methods for estimating $m$
and $\tau$.  This paper offers a contribution to that arsenal: a new,
geometry-based method for determining $\tau$.  The challenge is this:
if the delay is too small, the reconstructed dynamics are flattened
along the main diagonal of the embedding space; see, {\sl e.g.},
Fig.~\ref{fig:lorenz}(b).  Delays that are too large, on the other
hand, can overfold the dynamics, as in Fig.~\ref{fig:lorenz}(c).  A
common approach to solving this problem, due to Fraser \& Swinney,
\cite{fraser-swinney} seeks a $\tau$ that mazimizes independence
between $\tau$-separated points in the time series, thereby separating
the trajectories. As an alternative, we propose to use the {\sl
  curvature} of trajectories to find a $\tau$ that effectively unfolds
the dynamics while avoiding overfolding.  The idea is based upon the
observation that both sharp reversals like those in
Fig.~\ref{fig:lorenz}(b) and overfolds, as in in
Fig.~\ref{fig:lorenz}(c), can create regions of large curvature in a
2D projection of the reconstructed dynamics.

\begin{figure*}
	\subfloat[]{
	\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{figs/embed_3d_lorenz_traj.jpg}
	}
	\subfloat[]{
	\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{figs/embed_2d_lorenz_2_1.jpg}}
	\subfloat[]{
	\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{figs/embed_2d_lorenz_2_30.jpg}}
	\caption{The Lorenz attractor: (a) full state-space trajectory; 2D delay
          reconstructions from the $x(t)$ time series with (b)
          $\tau=1$ and (c) $\tau=30$.}
	\label{fig:lorenz}
\end{figure*}

We operationalize this observation by computing various statistics
over the local curvature of 2D reconstructions using a discrete
curvature due to Menger: the curvature, $c$, of three non-collinear
points---say $x$, $y$, and $z$---is the inverse of the radius of the
unique circumcircle through these points.\cite{Blumenthal70} It can
be seen that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:menger}
c(x,y,z) = \frac{1}{r} = \frac{4A}{|x-y||y-z||z-x|},
\end{equation}
where $A$ is the area of the triangle $xyz$.  In our case, as
illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:menger}, $x$, $y$, and $z$ are three
successive points along a reconstructed trajectory of a dynamical
system, and we define
\begin{equation}\label{eq:localC}
	M_j(\tau) = c(\vec{x}_{j-1},\vec{x}_j,\vec{x}_{j+1}) .
\end{equation}
Of course, when the trajectory is relatively straight, the local
curvature will be small; if it has a sharp turn, the local curvature
will be large.

\begin{figure}
	\includegraphics[width=3in]{figs/curvature_formula.jpg}
	\caption{The local curvature of a triplet of successive points
          selected from a trajectory of a dynamical system.}
	\label{fig:menger}
\end{figure}

The variations of the curvature along a trajectory can be visualized
by computing a local average.  For example, 2D reconstructions of data
from the Lorenz attractor are shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:lorenz_curvature_heatmaps} for four different values of
the time delay $\tau$.  In each case, the color represents the local
average of \eqref{eq:menger} over trajectory points that fall in a
grid cell, using a uniform $500 \times 500$ grid.  These heat maps
bring out the effects of $\tau$ upon the local curvature.  When $\tau$
is small, the reconstructed trajectory has sharp turns at its local
maxima and minima, which manifest as dark blue regions in
Fig.~\ref{fig:lorenz_curvature_heatmaps}(a).  Spikes in the curvature
can also arise from overfolding, when the time delay is large, as in
Fig.~\ref{fig:lorenz_curvature_heatmaps}(c).  We seek a middle ground
between these two extremes by choosing a time delay that minimizes the
average curvature, $\overline{M}$, along a 2D reconstructed
trajectory; as we will see, this corresponds to
Fig.~\ref{fig:lorenz_curvature_heatmaps}(b).
Specifically, the proposed heuristic is that $\tau$ be chosen to give
the first minimum of $\overline{M}(\tau)$.

\begin{figure*}[htb!]
	\includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{figs/LorenzHeatmaps.pdf}
\caption{Curvature heat maps of 2D delay reconstructions of the Lorenz
  attractor of Fig.~\ref{fig:lorenz}: (a) $\tau = 1$, (b) $\tau = 18$,
  (c) $\tau = 30$, and (d) $\tau = 60$. The color represents the local value of the
  log of the curvature, \eqref{eq:localC}.  Panels (a) and
  (c) correspond to panels (b) and (c) of Fig.~\ref{fig:lorenz},
  respectively.} \label{fig:lorenz_curvature_heatmaps}
\end{figure*}

In \S\ref{sec:Results}, we evaluate the effectiveness of this
curvature heuristic for a suite of examples (quasiperiodic, Lorenz,
and driven damped pendulum dynamics).  We compare our heuristic to
the method of Fraser \& Swinney\cite{fraser-swinney} that chooses the
delay giving the first minimum on a plot of the average mutual
information (AMI) versus $\tau$; see \S\ref{sec:DCE}.
Since our aim is to obtain a dynamical reconstruction that is
diffeomorphic to the full state-space dynamics of the system, we use a
dynamical invariant---the correlation dimension, $d_2$---to compare
the full and reconstructed dynamics.  As described in more detail in
\S\ref{sec:Methods}, this involves computing $d_2$ for embeddings
constructed using the $\tau$ values suggested by the curvature- and
AMI-based heuristics and comparing these to the correlation dimension
of the full state-space trajectory.
The curvature-based heuristic matches the performance of AMI in many
of our examples and outperforms it in others: {\sl e.g.}, when the data
suffers from defects such as noise, limited trajectory length, or
smoothing.  Moreover, the first minima of $\overline{M}(\tau)$ are
generally deeper than those for AMI, making the choice of an
effective $\tau$ more clear.

\section{Parameter Selection in Delay Reconstruction} \label{sec:DCE}

As mentioned above, success in delay reconstruction involves selection
of values for two free parameters: the time delay, $\tau$, and the
embedding dimension, $m$.  A large number of useful heuristics have
been proposed in the literature for estimating these, both separately
and
together.\cite{Gibson92,fraser-swinney,Olbrich97,kantz97,Buzug92Comp,josh-tdAIS,liebert-wavering,Buzugfilldeform,Liebert89,rosenstein94,Cao97Embed,Kugi96,joshua-pnp,KBA92,Hegger:1999yq,kantz97,Holger-and-Liz}
In this paper, we focus on selecting $\tau$, even though the two
parameters have interacting effects.  (Indeed, these interactions
support an elegant method for selecting them at the same time.
\cite{pecoraUnified})

Given a scalar time series $\{x_t, t \in {\mathbb{ N}}\}$, an $m$-dimensional,
time-delay reconstruction corresponds to the sequence of delay vectors
\begin{equation}\label{eq:delayVector}
	\vec{x}_j=[x_j,~x_{j-\tau}, ~ \dots, ~ x_{j-(m-1)\tau}]^T \in {\mathbb{ R}}^m
\end{equation}
for a given delay $\tau$.  The time delay or ``lag" $\tau$ defines the
number of steps separating each coordinate.

The theoretical constraints on the time delay are far from stringent,
requiring only $\tau>0$.\cite{sauer91,takens}  This only applies in
the case of infinitely long, noise-free time series and infinite precision arithmetic, however---idealizations that are never realized in
practice.  As a result, the selection of $\tau$ plays an important
role in the practical application of this methodology.
\cite{fraser-swinney,kantz97,Buzug92Comp,liebert-wavering,Buzugfilldeform,Liebert89,rosenstein94,josh-tdAIS}

The fact that the time delay does not play into the underlying
mathematical framework is a double-edged sword.  Because the
theoretical constraints are so loose, there is no practical way to
derive an ``optimal" lag, or even know what criteria such a lag would
satisfy.\cite{kantz97} Casdagli {\sl et al.} \cite{Casdagli:1991a}
provide a discussion of this theory and the impacts of $\tau$ on
reconstructing an attractor for a noisy observation function.
Unfortunately, their discussion gives no practical methods for
estimating $\tau$, even though it does nicely delineate a range of
$\tau$ between {\sl redundancy} and {\sl irrelevance}.  For very small
$\tau$, $x_j$ and $x_{j-\tau}$ are effectively indistinguishable.
This is especially a problem in the presence of noise and finite precision.  In this
situation, the reconstruction coordinates are highly {\sl redundant}:
{\sl i.e.}, they contain nearly the same information about the
system.\cite{Casdagli:1991a,Gibson92}  The implication is that a \emph{very}
small $\tau$ is not a good choice because the additional coordinates
in \eqref{eq:delayVector} add almost nothing new to the model.
Choosing an arbitrarily {\sl large} $\tau$ is undesirable as well,
because it makes the coordinates of the reconstruction become causally
unrelated.  In such a case, the measurement of $x_{j-\tau}$ is {\sl
  irrelevant} in predicting $x_j$.\cite{Casdagli:1991a} Useful
$\tau$ values lie somewhere between these two extrema.

In practice, finding $\tau$ values in this middle ground can be quite
challenging.  The most commonly used method for this involves
computing the time-delayed average mutual information or AMI,
$I(x_j,x_{j-\tau})$, for a range of $\tau$.  Fraser \& Swinney argue
that selecting $\tau$ to give the first minimum of AMI will minimize
the redundancy of the embedding coordinates, thereby maximizing the
information content of the overall delay vector.\cite{fraser-swinney}
This standard method is not without problems.  For some time
series---{\sl e.g.}, processes with memory longer than
$\tau$---$I(x_j,x_{j-\tau})$ does not have a minimum.  This occurs in
any autoregressive process, for instance, and in real-world data as
well.\cite{mytkowicz09,josh-IDA13,jones2018southern} Even if a minimum
exists, it can be shallow, requiring a subjective choice on the part
of the practitioner as to its location, or even its existence.  Noise
and other data issues, such as coarse temporal resolution of the time
series, can also affect the performance of any $\tau$-selection
method, including AMI.

\section{Methods}\label{sec:Methods}

In the absence of formal guidelines for selecting optimal parameters,
standard practice in the delay-reconstruction literature is to
illustrate the usefulness of a parameter-selection method in some
specific context: often, its accuracy in estimating dynamical
invariants,\cite{Buzugfilldeform,rosenstein94,liebert-wavering,Olbrich97}
in or maximizing forecast accuracy from a
reconstruction.\cite{josh-tdAIS,joshua-pnp}

In this paper, we show that our time-delay selection criterion allows
for an accurate calculation of the correlation dimension $d_2$ of an
attractor.
We perform the calculations using the Grassberger-Procaccia
algorithm,\cite{GrassbergerPhysicaD} which approximates $d_{2}$ by
looking for the power law
 \begin{equation}\label{eq:powerlaw}
 	C(\epsilon) \sim \epsilon^{d_{2}},
\end{equation}
as the scale parameter $\epsilon \to 0$. Here $C(\epsilon)$ is the
correlation sum
\begin{equation}\label{eq:corrsum}
	C(\epsilon) = \frac{1}{N(N-T)}\sum_{i=1}^N\sum_{j=1}^{i-T} \Theta [\epsilon- ||\vec{x_i} - \vec{x_j}||],
\end{equation}
where $N$ is the number of points in the trajectory,
$\Theta(x)$ is the Heaviside step function, and $T$ is the ``Theiler
window," chosen to ensure that the temporal spacing is large enough to
represent an independently identically distributed sample.  If
\eqref{eq:powerlaw} holds over some sufficiently large
scaling region on a log-log plot, then its slope estimates the
correlation dimension.  A fast algorithm to compute the correlation
sum is available in the TISEAN package.\cite{kantz97,tisean-website}

There are several practical challenges that can affect the computation
of $d_{2}$.  These include selection of the parameters $N$ and $T$, as
well as the range for $\epsilon$.  A persistence-based approach---{\sl
  i.e.}, finding a large range for each parameter that gives
consistent values of the correlation dimension---is perhaps the best
way to make these choices.\cite{kantz97,Holger-and-Liz}  To determine
an appropriate scaling range for \eqref{eq:powerlaw}, the
standard practice is to require that the nearly linear relationship
between $\log (C(\epsilon))$ and $\log(\epsilon)$ exist over a {\sl
  considerable} range of scales.  This is necessarily subjective and
makes the process challenging, if not impossible, to automate.  We
discuss the specifics of our approach to this problem in the Appendix.

\section{Results}\label{sec:Results}

In this section, we demonstrate the performance of our curvature-based
heuristic using three example systems: quasiperiodic motion on a
two-torus, the classic Lorenz system, and a driven damped pendulum.
In each case, we compute a representative trajectory and choose one of
the state-space variables as the measurement function for the
time-delay reconstruction.  We then compute the mean Menger curvature
$\overline{M}(\tau)$ of a 2D delay reconstruction of those data for a
range of values of $\tau$, using a {\tt C++} implementation of
\eqref{eq:menger}.  We choose the time-delay, $\tau_C$, as the first
minimum of that curve.  For the purposes of comparison, we also
compute the average mutual information profile $I(x_{t}; x_{t-\tau})$
using the {\tt mutual} command in the {\tt TISEAN}
package,\cite{tisean-website,kantz97} choosing $\tau_{I}$ at the first
minimum of that curve.  For the Lorenz and pendulum examples, we use
{\tt TISEAN}'s {\tt d2} to calculate the correlation dimension of the
full state-space trajectory and compare it to the correlation
dimension of embeddings constructed with $\tau_C$ and $\tau_{I}$.  Details
of these computations are given in the Appendix, including the
correlation sum plots and a discussion of the nuances of choosing the
scaling region.
For the two-torus, we compare the calculated $d_2$ value of the
embedding to the known dimension of the system.  We also explore and
discuss the effects of noise, low-pass filtering, and data length
using the Lorenz and pendulum systems.

\subsection{Quasiperiodic Dynamics on a Two Torus} \label{sec:Torus}

We begin our discussion with a simple quasiperiodic
system---incommensurate rotation on a two-torus with the flow:
\begin{align}\label{eq:torus}
x &= (R + r\cos(2\pi\ t))\sin(2\pi\phi t), \nonumber \\
y &= (R + r\cos(2\pi\ t))\cos(2\pi\phi t),\\
z &= r\sin(2\pi\ t) \nonumber .
\end{align}
Here, we use the radii $R = 1$ and $r = 0.2$ and frequency ratio $\phi
= \tfrac12(1+\sqrt{5})$, the golden ratio.  For this example, we
generate a time series of 200,000 points with a time spacing of
$0.001$.  The experimental time series, $x(t)$, is the first variable of~(\ref{eq:torus}) as a function of time.

The mean curvature and AMI plots for 2D reconstructions of these data
are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:torus_measures_and_d2}(a).
\begin{figure}[htbp]
	{
		\includegraphics[width=0.8\columnwidth]{figs/torus_measures_vs_tau_ds_rate_1_ma_20.jpg}
	} \\
	{
		\includegraphics[width=0.8\columnwidth]{figs/torus_curvature_142_ds_rate_1_limits_-3.5_-1.5.jpg}
	}
	\caption{Top: Mean curvature (blue) and average mutual
          information (red) profiles as a
          function of time delay, for 2D reconstructions of the
          two-torus dynamics from $x(t)$.
          Bottom: Correlation sums \eqref{eq:corrsum} for $m$-dimensional
          delay reconstructions with $\tau=142$. The scaling region between the two vertical
          lines is used to compute
          $d_2$.}
      \label{fig:torus_measures_and_d2}
\end{figure}
The first minima of the two profiles fall at the same value: $\tau_{I} =
\tau_C = 142$.  Fig.~\ref{fig:torus_measures_and_d2}(b) shows the
correlation sum plots for reconstructions constructed with this $\tau$
value and $m$ ranging up to five, the value generically sufficient for
embedding a two-dimensional invariant set, according to
Takens.\cite{takens} The correlation dimension converges to 2.04 for
$m \ge 4$, close to the true dimension of the two-torus.
Interestingly, the profile of the mean curvature has a wide flat
region around its first minimum, suggesting that any value $\tau_C \in
[100, 200]$ could be appropriate.  Indeed, the correlation dimension
is unchanged for time delays across this interval.  It is often
advantageous, for a variety of
reasons,\cite{joshua-pnp,Casdagli:1991a,josh-tdAIS,Olbrich97} to
choose the time delay as small as possible to maintain the accuracy of
the reconstructed dynamics.  The fact that the curvature suggests a
wide range for $\tau$ would allow a practitioner to exploit this
advantage by selecting a smaller $\tau$; by contrast, the AMI curve
would constrain that choice to a single, larger value.

\subsection{Classic Lorenz Attractor}\label{sec:Lorenz}

As a second example, we consider the canonical Lorenz system,\cite{lorenz}
\begin{align}
\dot{x}&= \sigma(y - x), \nonumber\\
\dot{y} &= x(\rho - z) - y,\\
\dot{z} &= xy - \beta z \nonumber,
\end{align}
for the standard parameters $\sigma = 10$, $\beta = \tfrac83$,
and $\rho = 28$.  We use a fourth-order Runge-Kutta method with a fixed
time step of 0.01 and integrate the system to $t=1000$.  Discarding
the initial transient $t < 100$, we obtain a time series of length
90,000.  As before, we take $x(t)$ to be the measurement function.
Fig.~\ref{fig:lorenz_heuristic_curves} shows the mean curvature and
average mutual information plots for these data.
\begin{figure
	\includegraphics[width=0.8 \linewidth]{figs/lorenz_measures_vs_tau_noise_0.0.jpg}
\caption{Mean curvature and AMI profiles for the Lorenz data:
the $x$ coordinate of Fig.~\ref{fig:lorenz}(a).}
\label{fig:lorenz_heuristic_curves}
\end{figure}
The first minima of both curves fall near $\tau = 18$.  Note, though,
that the minimum in the curvature profile appears significantly
deeper.  Indeed, based on this AMI profile, it is quite likely that a
practitioner would actually choose $\tau_{I} = 60$.

To formalize the notion of depth of a minimum, we define
\begin{equation}\label{eq:depth}
	\Delta = (H_{max} - H_{min})/H_{max},
\end{equation}
where $H_{min}$ is
the height of the curve at that minimum and $H_{max}$ the height at
the subsequent (here, higher $\tau$) maximum.  For the first minimum
in the AMI profile, $\Delta=0.074$; for $\overline{M}$, $\Delta=0.72$.  The
deeper minimum of the $\overline{M}$ curve is a significant advantage in
this regard, as it makes the choice far more clear. Nevertheless, both
values of $\tau$ yield correlation dimensions that are good matches
to the correlation dimension of the full 3D trajectory ($d_2 \approx 2.05$):
for $\tau_C$, we find $d_2 = 2.04$, and for $\tau_{I}$, $d_2 = 2.07$.\footnote
{More details are in the Appendix and Fig.~\ref{fig:lorenz_d2}.}

Even though, in this particular case, the two embeddings give
nearly the same dimensions, a comparison of panels (b) and (d) of
Fig.~\ref{fig:lorenz_curvature_heatmaps} suggests other issues that
are potential problems. In particular, the smaller $\tau$ produces a
far less geometrically complicated reconstruction.  The folds and
kinks in the $\tau=60$
embedding---Fig.~\ref{fig:lorenz_curvature_heatmaps}(d)---could be
problematic if noise were present. This is precisely where we turn our
attention next.

\subsection{Noisy Lorenz Dynamics}\label{sec:noisyLorenz}

To explore the effects of noise on the choice of time delay, we use
the same Lorenz trajectory as in \S\ref{sec:Lorenz} but add
\textit{iid} noise to each point in the trajectory time series with a
uniform distribution of amplitude $0.1 x_{max} = 1.922$, {\sl i.e.}, a
noise-to-signal ratio of $10\%$. For a fair comparison of
the reconstruction to the full, 3D trajectory, it is important to add
noise to each component.  The correlation
dimension calculated from the full, noisy trajectory is $d_2 \approx
2.30$,\footnote
{The scaling
regions for the correlation dimension calculations need to be chosen
carefully in such situations to factor in the noise levels; see the
Appendix for more discussion.}
slightly larger than for the noise-free case, as one would expect

The AMI and curvature profiles for 2D reconstructions of these noisy
data are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:lorenz_noise_heuristics}.
As in the noise-free case, the AMI profile has a comparatively shallow
first minimum ($\Delta=0.066$), now at $\tau = 20$, and a more
well-defined minimum ($\Delta=0.59$) at $\tau = 60$.
This suggests the choice $\tau_{I} = 60$.  Note that the first minimum
of $\overline{M}$, at $\tau_C= 21$, is still well-defined ($\Delta=0.41$).
The corresponding correlation dimensions\footnote
{See Fig.~\ref{fig:lorenz_noise_d2} in the Appendix.}
are $d_2 = 2.28$ for $\tau_C$ and $3.83$ for $\tau_{I}$---the latter far
higher than the correct value.  These results suggest that the
curvature-based heuristic works well in the face of noise, perhaps
because the smaller $\tau$ that it finds produces less overfolding of
the reconstructed trajectory.
To explore this further, we varied the
noise-to-signal ratio from $0.001$ to $0.1$, and found that $\tau_C$
remains relatively steady in the range $[18,21]$, producing a
dimension consistent with the full trajectory. By contrast, the value
of $d_2$ for the AMI reconstruction steadily diverges from the correct
value as the noise grows.  This adds to our confidence about the
robustness of the curvature-based heuristic with respect to noise.

\begin{figure
	\includegraphics[width=0.8 \linewidth]{figs/lorenz_measures_vs_tau_noise_0.1.jpg}
\caption{Mean curvature and AMI profiles for the noisy Lorenz data. Compare to
the curves without noise in Fig.~\ref{fig:lorenz_curvature_heatmaps}.}
\label{fig:lorenz_noise_heuristics}
\end{figure}

\subsection{Driven Damped  Pendulum}\label{sec:Pendulum}

In this section, we consider a pendulum with natural frequency $\nu_0$
that is subject to linear damping and a time-periodic force:
\begin{equation}\begin{split}\label{eq:Pendulum}
	\dot{\theta} &= \omega, \\ \dot{\omega} &= -\beta\omega
	- \nu_0^2 \sin(\theta) +A \cos(\alpha\ t),\\
\end{split}\end{equation}
The coordinates of the 3D, extended phase space $\mathbb{S} \times
\mathbb{R} \times \mathbb{S}$ are angle $\theta$, angular momentum
$\omega$, and time $t$.  To fix parameters, we choose $\nu_0^2 = 98$,
damping $\beta = 2.5$, and a driving force with amplitude $A = 91$ and
frequency $\alpha = 0.75 \nu_0$.  This system has a chaotic attractor.
As in the Lorenz example, we solve the system \eqref{eq:Pendulum}
using fourth-order Runge-Kutta, now with time step of $0.001$.
Discarding the first $10^5$ points to eliminate transient behavior, we
keep a time series of $10^6$ points.  To avoid issues with periodicity
in $\theta$ and $t$, we project the time series onto the three
variables $\{\sin(\theta(t)), \omega(t), \sin(\alpha t)\}$, as seen in
Fig.~\ref{fig:pendulum_recons}(a).
\begin{figure*}
		\subfloat[]{
		\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{figs/chaotic_pendulum_state_space_ds_rate_1.jpg}
		}
		\subfloat[]{
		\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{figs/chaotic_pendulum_reconstruction_tau_120.jpg}
		}
		\subfloat[]{
		\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{figs/chaotic_pendulum_reconstruction_tau_250.jpg}
		}
	\caption{The driven damped pendulum: (a) a projection of the
	full state space onto $(\sin \theta,\omega)$; delay
	reconstructions of $\omega$ for (b) $\tau = 120$; (c)
	$\tau=250$. }
	\label{fig:pendulum_recons}
\end{figure*}
For the time-delay reconstruction experiments, we take $\omega$ as the
measurement function.  Profiles of the mean curvature and AMI of this
signal are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:pendulum_heuristics}.
\begin{figure}
	\includegraphics[width=0.8 \linewidth]{figs/chaotic_pendulum_measures_vs_tau_length_1.1M.jpg}
\caption{Mean curvature and AMI profiles for the driven damped
  pendulum using $\omega$ as the measurement function.}
\label{fig:pendulum_heuristics}
\end{figure}
The former has a broad plateau in the range $50 \lesssim \tau \lesssim
120$, which again provides the flexibility to choose the lowest
possible $\tau$ that successfully reconstructs the dynamics.  The AMI
has a first minimum at $\tau_{I} = 250$.  For this $\tau$ value, as well
as for values across the range $50 \lesssim \tau \lesssim 120$, the
calculated correlation dimension $d_2=2.22$, which matches the
correlation dimension of the full state-space dynamics.  In this case,
the curvature heuristic appears to match the performance of AMI,
perhaps because $d_2$ is relatively insensitive to the choice of
$\tau$, as in the Lorenz example.  However, there are significant
geometrical differences between the resulting 2D reconstructions; see
Fig.~\ref{fig:pendulum_recons}(b)-(c).  The larger $\tau_{I}$ produces an
overfolded reconstruction, increasing the curvature along the
trajectory.  This can, as demonstrated in the previous example,
increase noise sensitivity.

\subsection{Other Data Effects}\label{sec:data-effects}

Data limits---shorter traces or coarser temporal sampling---are
another practical issue in delay reconstruction.  To explore the
effects of data length on the curvature-based heuristic, we repeat
the pendulum experiment with a shorter trajectory, keeping only the
first $200,000$ points, one fifth of the previous time series.
The resulting AMI and mean-curvature profiles (not shown) are essentially identical
to those in Fig.~\ref{fig:pendulum_heuristics}, and
the correlation dimension for the $\tau_C$ reconstruction ($d_2 =
2.20$) is close to that of the full dynamics ($d_2 = 2.18$);
however, for a reconstruction using $\tau_{I}$, $d_2$ increases to $2.35$.\footnote
{See Figs.~\ref{fig:pendulum_d2} and \ref{fig:pendulum_200K_d2} in the
Appendix for the calculations.}
This suggests that the effects of the larger $\tau$
can be more significant for smaller data sets.  Indeed, if there are
fewer points, those that are artificially close, due to overfolding,
will have a larger effect on the correlation function.

Another issue that arises in the practice of nonlinear time-series
analysis is data smoothing.  This often occurs during the measurement
process\cite{jones2018southern} or in data-processing
pipelines,\cite{Pennekamp2019,mytkowicz09,josh-IDA11} but can also
occur naturally through, for example, diffusive
processes.\cite{jones2017water}
To explore the potential effects of
this upon the different $\tau$-selection heuristics, we ran the Lorenz
time series (\S\ref{sec:Lorenz}) through a moving average filter on a
data window $[j-60,j+59]$ for the $jth$ point:
\[
	\tilde{x}_{j} = \frac{1}{120}\sum_{i=-60}^{i=59} x_{j+i} .
\]
The mean curvature and AMI profiles for the smoothed time series
$\tilde{x}$ are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:lorenz_filtered_heuristics}.
\begin{figure}
	\includegraphics[width=0.8 \linewidth]{figs/lorenz_measures_vs_tau_filtering_120.jpg}
\caption{Mean curvature and AMI profiles for the filtered Lorenz data.
Compare to Fig.~\ref{fig:lorenz_heuristic_curves}.}
	\label{fig:lorenz_filtered_heuristics}
\end{figure}
The first clear minimum for the curvature moves slightly, to $\tau_C =
16$, with a depth $\Delta = 0.65$.  The AMI profile, though, is
significantly distorted from that seen in the non-filtered data of
Fig.~\ref{fig:lorenz_heuristic_curves}: there is now no minimum at
$\tau = 18$ and only a weak one at $\tau = 60$ ($\Delta = 0.05$).
This leaves the minimum at $\tau = 102$ ($\Delta = 0.17$) as the
reasonable choice for $\tau_{I}$.

This deformation makes sense: a moving-average filter decreases the
independence of neighboring points, thereby increasing the AMI and
obscuring any minima that occur at lower $\tau$ values.  As in the
previous case of limited data, the larger $\tau_{I}$ creates problems
with the dimension calculation: $d_2$ for the $\tau_{I}$ embedding is
$1.89$---a significant under-estimate.  In contrast, $d_2 = 2.11$ for
the $\tau_C$ embedding, which is still close to the value $d_2 = 2.05$ of
the full, filtered dynamics.\footnote
{Details presented in Fig.~\ref{fig:lorenz_filtered_d2} of the
Appendix.}
This is an encouraging result; obtaining a reconstruction that matches
the underlying dynamics, even though the data are smoothed, is quite
useful.

Over- and under-sampling---{\sl i.e.}, temporal spacing between data
points that is far smaller or far larger than the time scales of the
dynamics---are also issues in the practice of nonlinear time-series
analysis.  Under-sampled data are, of course, a challenge to any
method and there is very little recourse in that situation, as one
should not make up data.  Over-sampling causes different problems.
For the curvature heuristic, points spaced too closely along the
trajectory will be nearly co-linear, which can cause numerical issues
in ~\eqref{eq:menger}.  AMI, in contrast, is relatively immune to this
problem; oversampling simply moves its first minimum to a higher
$\tau$ value.  One can determine whether over-sampling is an issue
using standard best practices: {\sl viz.,} repeating the analysis with every
$n^{th}$ point and observing whether the results
change.\cite{kantz97,Holger-and-Liz}

\section{Conclusions and Future Work}\label{sec:Conclusion}

The curvature heuristic that we have proposed is the following: choose
a time-delay $\tau$ to be the value giving the first local minimum of
the average of the local Menger curvature, \eqref{eq:localC}, along a
segment of a 2D delay reconstruction of a scalar time series
$\{x_j\}$.  The set of experiments presented in the previous section,
which are summarized in Table~\ref{tab:d2_results}, suggest that this
heuristic is useful for selecting an appropriate embedding delay.  In
particular, in every case, the $\tau$ value suggested by that
heuristic gives a correlation dimension from a time-delay embedding
({\sl i.e.}, a reconstruction with a sufficiently large dimension $m$)
that agrees with the dimension of the full attractor---within
reasonable error bounds.

\begin{table}[htbp]
	\begin{tabular}{cc|c|c|c}
		& & Full Dynamics & Curvature  &AMI \\
 		\hline
		\multirow{2}{*}{Two-Torus} &	True dynamics & 2.0  & 2.04  & 2.04 \\
									& $\tau$ & - & 142 & 142  \\
		\hline
		\multirow{2}{*}{Lorenz} &	$d_2$& 2.05  & 2.04  & 2.07 \\
									& $\tau$ & - & 18 & 60  \\
		\hline
		\multirow{2}{*}{Lorenz + Noise} &	$d_2$& 2.30  & 2.28  & 3.83 \\
									& $\tau$ & - & 21 & 60  \\
		\hline
		\multirow{2}{*}{Pendulum (long)} &	$d_2$& 2.22  & 2.22  & 2.21 \\
									& $\tau$ & - & 120 & 250  \\
		\hline
		\multirow{2}{*}{Pendulum (short)} &	$d_2$& 2.18  & 2.20  & 2.35 \\
									& $\tau$ & - & 120 & 250  \\
		\hline
		\multirow{2}{*}{Lorenz + Filtering} &	$d_2$& 2.05  & 2.11  & 1.89 \\
									& $\tau$ & - & 16 & 102  \\
		\hline
	\end{tabular}
	\caption{The dimensions for various systems and their 2D delay
          reconstructions using the time delay chosen by mean
          curvature and AMI heuristics.}
	\label{tab:d2_results}
\end{table}

Just like the conventional AMI heuristic, which is based on averaging
the mutual information, this minimum can be computed before one knows
the correct embedding dimension.  The curvature of a trajectory in a
2D reconstruction is a geometrical signal that can be used to diagnose
problems with the choice of time delay $\tau$.  For example, when
$\tau$ is too small, the reconstructed trajectory lies near the
diagonal---it is not properly unfolded.  This leads to sharp reversals
in the 2D reconstruction near local maxima of the time series, which
locally increases their curvature.  Similarly, when $\tau$ is too
large, a 2D delay reconstruction tends to overfold: such folds again
result in larger curvature on parts of that reconstruction.

The curvature heuristic appears, from our examples, to provide some
advantages regarding the choice of minimum: sometimes, a more-distinct
first minimum than that exhibited by the AMI; in other cases, a wider
first minimum that allows useful flexibility in the choice of $\tau$.
This is important, as ambiguities in identifying the first minimum of
AMI can lead to overfolded reconstructions.  We have also shown that
the curvature heuristic is robust to noise, while the AMI heuristic
can be less so.  The curvature heuristic also appears to be less
influenced by shorter data lengths and low-pass filtering.  In
practice, limited data, as well as data that has been aggregated in
some way, are quite common; in these cases, our heuristic may prove to
be useful.

In the future, we plan to study in more detail the full distribution
of the Menger curvature along trajectory sequences.  From the point of
view of Frenet, a smooth trajectory defines a curve in phase space
that generically has an associated orthonormal frame and a set of
generalized curvatures.\footnote
{For example, in 3D the second curvature is the torsion.}
It is possible that additional information can be gleaned from the
full statistics of one or more of these curvatures---information that
would lead to a better criterion than the average.  It would also be
useful to evaluate the effectiveness of the curvature in selecting a
time delay for other purposes, such as in nonlinear forecasting.  Akin
to Pecora {\sl et al.},\cite{pecoraUnified} one could perhaps leverage curvature-based
metrics to select $m$ and $\tau$ simultaneously.

\begin{acknowledgments}
The authors acknowledge support from National Science Foundation Grant CMMI-1537460. In addition, JDM was partially supported by NSF grant DMS-1812481.
JG was supported by an Omidyar and Applied Complexity Fellowship at the Santa Fe Institute. The authors would like to thank Holger Kantz and Erik Bollt for numerous useful discussions.
\end{acknowledgments}
\section*{Data Availability}
The data that supports the findings of this study are available within the article.

Data Analysis, Statistics and Probability (physics.data-an); Dynamical Systems (math.DS); Chaotic Dynamics (nlin.CD)


An easily computable upper bound on the Hoffman constant for homogeneous inequality systems

Abstract: Let $A\in \mathbb{R}^{m\times n}\setminus \{0\}$ and $P:=\{x:Ax\le 0\}$. This paper provides a procedure to compute an upper bound on the following homogeneous Hoffman constant: \[ H_0(A) := \sup_{u\in \mathbb{R}^n \setminus P} \frac{\text{dist}(u,P)}{\text{dist}(Au, \mathbb{R}^m_-)}. \] In sharp contrast to the intractability of computing more general Hoffman constants, the procedure described in this paper is entirely tractable and easily implementable.

\section{Introduction}

Hoffman constants for systems of linear inequalities, and more general error bounds for feasibility problems, play a central role in mathematical programming.  In particular, Hoffman constants provide a key building block for the convergence of a variety of algorithms~\cite{ApplHLL22,BeckS17,LacoJ15,LeveL10,LuoT93,WangL14}.  Since Hoffman's seminal work~\cite{Hoff52}, Hoffman constants and more general error bounds has been widely studied~\cite{AzeC02,burke1996,guler1995,Li93,MangS87,robinson1973,Zali03,zheng2004}.  However, there has been very limited work on algorithmic procedures that compute or bound Hoffman constants.  The only two references that appear to tackle this computational challenge are the 1995 article by Klatte and Thiere~\cite{KlatT95} and the more recent 2021 article by Pe\~na, Vera, and Zuluaga~\cite{PenaVZ21}.   However, as it is discussed in both~\cite{KlatT95} and~\cite{PenaVZ21}, there are limitations on the algorithmic schemes proposed in both these articles.

\medskip

The central goal of this paper is to devise a procedure that computes an upper bound on the following {\em homogeneous Hoffman constant} $H_0(A)$.  Suppose $A\in {\mathbb R}^{m\times n}$.  Let $P:=\{x:Ax\le 0\}$ and define $H_0(A)$ as
\[
H_0(A):=\sup_{u\in {\mathbb R}^n \setminus P} \frac{\dist(u,P)}{\dist(Au, {\mathbb R}^m_-)}.
\]
For notational convenience, by convention let $H_0(A) := 0$  when $P={\mathbb R}^n$.  This occurs precisely when $A = 0$.

To position this work in the context of Hoffman constants, we next recall the {\em local} and {\em global} Hoffman constants $H(A,b)$ and $H(A)$ associated to linear systems of inequalities defined by $A$.  The homogeneous Hoffman constant $H_0(A)$ is a special case of the following {\em local Hoffman constant} $H(A,b)$.  Suppose $A\in {\mathbb R}^{m\times n}$ and
$b\in A{\mathbb R}^n + {\mathbb R}^m_+$. Let $P_A(b):=\{x\in {\mathbb R}^n: Ax\le b\}$ and define $H(A,b)$ as
\[
H(A,b):=\sup_{u \in {\mathbb R}^n\setminus P_A(b)} \frac{\dist(u,P_A(b))}{\dist(Au, {\mathbb R}^m_-)}.
\]
It is evident that $H_0(A) = H(A,0)$ and thus $H_0(A)$ is bounded above by the following {\em global Hoffman constant} $H(A)$.  Suppose $A\in {\mathbb R}^{m\times n}$.  Define
\[
H(A):=\sup_{b\in A{\mathbb R}^n + {\mathbb R}^m_+} H(A,b).
\]
In his seminal paper~\cite{Hoff52}, Hoffman showed that $H(A)$ is finite and consequently so are $H_0(A)$ and $H(A,b)$ for all $b\in A{\mathbb R}^n + {\mathbb R}^m_+$.

The articles~\cite{KlatT95,PenaVZ21} propose algorithms to compute or estimate the global Hoffman constant $H(A)$.  These algorithms readily yield a computational procedure to bound $H_0(A)$.  However, as it is detailed in~\cite{KlatT95,PenaVZ21}, except for very special cases the computation or even approximation of $H(A)$ is an extremely challenging problem.  Indeed, the recent results in~\cite{PenaVZ2019} show that the Stewart-Todd condition measure $\chi(A)$~\cite{Stew89,Todd90} is the same as $H(\mathbf{A})$ where $\mathbf{A} = \matr{A\\-A}$.  Since the quantity $\chi(A)$ is known to be NP-hard to approximate~\cite{Khac95}, so is $H(A)$.  In sharp contrast, the procedure proposed in this paper for upper bounding the more specialized Hoffman constant $H_0(A)$ is entirely tractable and easily implementable for any $A\in {\mathbb R}^{m\times n}$.
The bound is a formalization of the following three-step approach detailed in Section~\ref{sec.upper.bounds}.

\medskip

First, upper bound $H_0(A)$ in the following two special cases:
\begin{itemize}\item[(i)]
When $A\hat x < 0$ for some $\hat x \in {\mathbb R}^n$ or equivalently when $A^{\text{\sf T}} y = 0, y\ge 0 \Rightarrow y =0$.  (See Proposition~\ref{prop.case.1}.)
\item[(ii)] When $A^{\text{\sf T}} \hat y = 0$ for some $\hat y > 0$ or equivalently when
$Ax\le 0\Rightarrow Ax=0$. (See Proposition~\ref{prop.case.2}.)
\end{itemize}

\medskip

Second, use a canonical partition $A = \matr{A_B\\ A_N}$ of the rows of $A$ such that $A_N$ is as in case (i) and $A_B$ is as in case (ii) above.  (See Proposition~\ref{prop.partition}.)

\medskip

Third, upper bound $H_0(A)$ by stitching together the Hoffman constants $H_0(A_B)$, $H_0(A_N),$ and a third Hoffman constant  $\H(L,K)$ associated to the intersection of the subspace $L:=\{x: A_Bx = 0\}$ and the cone $K:=\{x: A_N x \le 0\}$. (See Theorem~\ref{main.thm}.)

\medskip

The above steps suggest the following computational procedure to upper bound $H_0(A)$:
First, compute the partition $B,N$.  Second, compute upper bounds on $H_0(A_B)$ and on $H_0(A_N)$.  Third, upper bound $\H(L,K)$.
Section~\ref{sec.computation} details this procedure.  As explained  in Section~\ref{sec.computation}, the total computational work in the entire procedure consists of two linear programs, two quadratic programs, a convex program, and a singular value calculation, all of which are computationally tractable.
This is noteworthy in light of the challenges associated to estimating the Hoffman constants $H(A)$ and $H(A,b)$.
A Python implementation and some illustrative examples of this procedure are publicly available at
\begin{center}
{\tt https://github.com/javi-pena}
\end{center}

For ease of notation and computability, we assume throughout the paper that the norm in ${\mathbb R}^m$ satisfies the following {\em componentwise compatibility condition:} if $y,z\in {\mathbb R}^m$ and  $|y|\le |z|$ componentwise then $\|y\| \le \|z\|$.  The componentwise compatibility condition in particular implies that for all $u\in{\mathbb R}^n$
\[
\dist(Au,{\mathbb R}^n_-) = \|(Au)^+\|
\]
where $(Au)^+ = \max\{Au,0\}$ componentwise.  Consequently,
\[
H_0(A)=\sup_{u\in {\mathbb R}^n \setminus P} \frac{\dist(u,P)}{\|(Au)^+\|}.
\]
Observe that most of the usual norms in ${\mathbb R}^m$, including the $\ell_p$ norms for $1\le p \le \infty$ satisfy the componentwise compatibility  condition.

\section{Upper bounds on $H_0(A)$}
\label{sec.upper.bounds}
\subsection{Upper bounds on $H_0(A)$ in two special cases}

We next consider two special cases that can be seen as dual counterparts of each other.

\begin{proposition}\label{prop.case.1}
Suppose $A\in {\mathbb R}^{m\times n}$ and $A\hat x < 0$ for some $\hat x\in{\mathbb R}^n$  or equivalently $A^{\text{\sf T}} y = 0, y \ge 0 \Rightarrow y=0$. Then
\begin{equation}
\label{eq.case.1}
H_0(A) \le \max_{y\in{\mathbb R}^m\atop\|y\|\le 1} \min_{x\in {\mathbb R}^n\atop Ax\le y} \|x\|.
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
For ease of notation, let $H$ denote the right-hand side expression in~\eqref{eq.case.1}.  Observe that $H < +\infty$ because the assumption on $A$ implies that $A{\mathbb R}^n + {\mathbb R}^m_+ = {\mathbb R}^m$.

We need to show that $H_0(A) \le H$.  To that end, let $P:=\{x\in {\mathbb R}^n: Ax \le 0\}$ and suppose that $u \in {\mathbb R}^n\setminus P$.  Let $y:=(Au)^+ \in {\mathbb R}^m$.  The construction of $H$ implies that there exists $x \in {\mathbb R}^n$ such that $Ax\le -y$ and $\|x\| \le H \cdot \|y\| = H \cdot \|(Au)^+\|$.  Thus $x+u \in P$ because
$$A(x+u) = Ax + Au \le -y + Au = -(Au)^+ + Au\le 0.$$
Furthermore $\|(x+u) - u\| = \|x\| \le H \cdot \|(Au)^+\|$. Since this holds for all $u\in{\mathbb R}^n\setminus P$, it follows that $H_0(A) \le H$.
\end{proof}
In addition to the simple direct proof above, an alternative proof of Proposition~\ref{prop.case.1} can also be obtained from~\cite{PenaVZ21}.  Indeed,~\cite[Proposition 2]{PenaVZ21} implies that when $A\in {\mathbb R}^{m\times n}$ satisfies the assumption in Proposition~\ref{prop.case.1}, the right-hand side in~\eqref{eq.case.1} is precisely the global Hoffman constant $H(A)$ which is at least as large as $H_0(A)$ as previously noted.

For computational purposes, it is useful to note that when ${\mathbb R}^m$ is endowed with the $\ell_\infty$ norm, the upper bound in Proposition~\ref{prop.case.1} can be computed via the following convex optimization problem:
\[
\min\{ \|x\|:  Ax \ge \mathbf{1}\}.
\]
In particular, any $\bar x \in {\mathbb R}^n$ such that $A\bar x \ge \mathbf{1}$ yields the upper bound $$H_0(A) \le \|\bar x\|.$$

\bigskip

The following proposition, which can be seen as a dual counterpart of Proposition~\ref{prop.case.1}, relies on the dual norms in ${\mathbb R}^m$ and ${\mathbb R}^n$.  More precisely, suppose both ${\mathbb R}^m$ and ${\mathbb R}^n$ are endowed with their canonical inner products.  In each case let $\|\cdot\|^*$ denote the norm defined as
\[
\|u\|^* = \max_{\|x\|\le 1} \ip{u}{x}.
\]

\begin{proposition}\label{prop.case.2}
Suppose $A\in {\mathbb R}^{m\times n}$ is such that $A^{\text{\sf T}}\hat y = 0$ for some $\hat y >0 $  or equivalently $Ax \le 0 \Rightarrow Ax = 0$. Then
\begin{equation}
\label{eq.case.2}
H_0(A) \le
\max_{v \in A^{\text{\sf T}}({\mathbb R}^m) \atop \|v\|^*\le 1} \min_{y\in {\mathbb R}^m_+, A^{\text{\sf T}} y = v} \|y\|^*.
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Again for ease of notation, let $H$
denote the right-hand side expression in~\eqref{eq.case.2}.
Observe that $H < +\infty$ because the assumption on $A$ implies that $A^{\text{\sf T}} {\mathbb R}^m_+= A^{\text{\sf T}}{\mathbb R}^m$.

We need to show that $H_0(A) \le H$.  To that end, let $P:=\{x\in {\mathbb R}^n: Ax \le 0\}= \{x \in {\mathbb R}^n: Ax = 0\}$ and suppose that $u \in {\mathbb R}^n\setminus P$.  Let
\[
\bar x := \argmin_{x \in P} \|u-x\| = \argmin_{x: Ax=0} \|u-x\|.
\]
The optimality conditions of the latter problem imply that there exists $v\in A^{\text{\sf T}} {\mathbb R}^m$ with $\|v\|^*=1$ such that
\[
\|u-\bar x\| = \ip{v}{u-\bar x}.
\]
The construction of $H$ implies that there exists $y \in {\mathbb R}^m_+$ such that $A^{\text{\sf T}} y =v$ and $\|y\|^* \le H.$  Since $v = A^{\text{\sf T}} y$ we have
\[
\|u-\bar x\| = \ip{v}{u-\bar x} = \ip{A^{\text{\sf T}} y}{u-\bar x} = \ip{y}{A(u-\bar x)}
=\ip{y}{Au}.
\]
In addition, since $y \in {\mathbb R}^m_+$ and $\|y\|^* \le H$, we also have
\[
\|u-\bar x\| = \ip{y}{Au} \le \ip{y}{(Au)^+} \le \|y\|^* \cdot\|(Au)^+\| \le H \cdot \|(Au)^+\|.
\]
Since this holds for all $u\in{\mathbb R}^n\setminus P$, it follows that $H_0(A) \le H$.
\end{proof}

For computational purposes, it is useful to note that when ${\mathbb R}^m$ is endowed with the $\ell_\infty$ norm, the upper bound in Proposition~\ref{prop.case.2} can be computed as follows
\[
\max_{v\in A^{\text{\sf T}}({\mathbb R}^m) \atop \|v\|^*\le 1} \min_{y\in {\mathbb R}^m_+\atop A^{\text{\sf T}} y = v} \mathbf{1}^{\text{\sf T}} y.
\]
The reciprocal of the latter quantity in turn is the radius of the largest ball in $A^{\text{\sf T}}({\mathbb R}^m)$ centered at $0$ and contained in the set
\[
\{A^{\text{\sf T}} y: y \in {\mathbb R}^m_+,  \mathbf{1}^{\text{\sf T}} y = 1\} = \{A^{\text{\sf T}} y: y \in {\mathbb R}^m_+,  \mathbf{1}^{\text{\sf T}} y \le 1\}.
\]
Therefore, if in addition ${\mathbb R}^n$ is endowed with the $\ell_2$ norm then any $\bar y\in {\mathbb R}^m_{++}$ with $\mathbf{1}^{\text{\sf T}} \bar y =1$ and $A^{\text{\sf T}} \bar y = 0$ yields the upper bound
\begin{equation}\label{eq.upper.2}
H_0(A) \le \frac{2}{\sigma_{\min}^+(A^{\text{\sf T}} \bar  Y)},
\end{equation}
where $\bar Y = \text{Diag}(\bar y)$ and $\sigma_{\min}^+(A^{\text{\sf T}} \bar Y)$ denotes the smallest positive singular value of $A^{\text{\sf T}} \bar Y$.
To see why~\eqref{eq.upper.2} holds, observe that if $v \in A^{\text{\sf T}} {\mathbb R}^m$ and $\|v\|_2 \le \frac{\sigma_{\min}^+(A^{\text{\sf T}} \bar Y)}{2}$ then $2v = A^{\text{\sf T}} \bar Y z$ for some $\|z\|_2\le 1$. The latter implies that $|\bar Yz| \le \bar y$ componentwise and thus $2v = A^{\text{\sf T}}(\bar y + \bar Yz)$ with
\[
\bar y + \bar Yz \in {\mathbb R}^m_+ \text{ and } \mathbf{1}^{\text{\sf T}}(\bar y+\bar Yz) \le 2\cdot \mathbf{1}^{\text{\sf T}} \bar  y =2.
\]
In particular, $v\in \{A^{\text{\sf T}} y: y\in {\mathbb R}^m_+, \mathbf{1}^{\text{\sf T}} y \le 1\}$.  Since this holds for any $v\in A^{\text{\sf T}} {\mathbb R}^m$ with $\|v\|_2 \le \frac{\sigma_{\min}^+(A^{\text{\sf T}} \bar Y)}{2}$, it follows that the radius of the largest ball in  $A^{\text{\sf T}}({\mathbb R}^m)$ centered at $0$ and contained in the set
\[
\{A^{\text{\sf T}} y: y \in {\mathbb R}^m_+,  \mathbf{1}^{\text{\sf T}} y = 1\} = \{A^{\text{\sf T}} y: y \in {\mathbb R}^m_+,  \mathbf{1}^{\text{\sf T}} y \le 1\}.
\]
is at least $\frac{\sigma_{\min}^+(A^{\text{\sf T}} \bar Y)}{2}$.

\subsection{Upper bound on $H_0(A)$ for general $A$}

An upper bound on $H(A)$ for general $A\in {\mathbb R}^{m\times n}$ follows by stitching together the cases in the above two propositions via the the canonical partition result in Proposition~\ref{prop.partition} and
the additional Hoffman constant $\H(L,K)$ defined in~\eqref{eq.hoffman} below.

The following result is a consequence of the classical Goldman-Tucker partition theorem.  To make our exposition self-contained, we include a proof.

\begin{proposition}\label{prop.partition} Let $A\in {\mathbb R}^{m\times n}$. There exists a unique partition $B\cup N = \{1,\dots,m\}$ such that
\[
A_B \hat x = 0, \; A_N\hat x < 0 \text{ for some } \hat x\in {\mathbb R}^n
\]
and
\[
A_B^{\text{\sf T}}  \hat y_B = 0 \text{ for some } \hat y_B > 0.
\]
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $N\subseteq\{1,\dots,m\}$ be the largest subset of $\{1,\dots,m\}$ such that
\[
Ax \le 0 \text{ and } A_Nx < 0
\]
has a solution and let $B:=\{1,\dots,m\}\setminus N$.  Observe that $N$ is well-defined and unique and thus so is $B$.
To finish the proof it suffices to show that
\[A_B^{\text{\sf T}} y_B,\; y_B > 0\]
has a solution.
To that end, for $i\in\{1,\dots,m\}$ let $e_i\in {\mathbb R}^n$ is the vector with $i$-th component equal to one and all other equal to zero.  Observe that $i \in B$ if and only if the following system of equations and inequalities does not have a solution:
\[
\matr{ A & e_i}\matr{x\\t} \le 0, \matr{0 & 1}\matr{x\\t} > 0.
\]
Farkas Lemma thus implies that $i\in B$ if and only if the following system of equations and inequalities has a solution:
\[
\matr{A^{\text{\sf T}} \\ e_i^{\text{\sf T}}} y = \matr{0 \\ 1},  y \ge 0.
\]
Since this holds for each $i\in B$, it follows that $A_B^{\text{\sf T}} y_B =0, y_B > 0$ has a solution.
\end{proof}

Suppose $L\subseteq {\mathbb R}^n$ is a linear subspace and $K \subseteq {\mathbb R}^n$ is a regular cone such that $L\cap \text{\rm int}(K) \ne \emptyset$.
Let
\begin{equation}\label{eq.hoffman}
\H(L,K) = \sup_{u \in {\mathbb R}^n\setminus L\cap K} \frac{\dist(u,L\cap K)}{\max\{\dist(u,L),\dist(u,K)\}}.\end{equation}
In the remainder of this paper, we will use the following notation for $A\in {\mathbb R}^{m\times n}$: Let $B,N$ denote the canonical partition defined by $A$ as in Proposition~\ref{prop.partition} and let $L\subseteq {\mathbb R}^n, K\subseteq {\mathbb R}^n$ be defined as
\[
L:=\{x: A_B x = 0\}, K := \{x: A_N x \le 0\}.
\]
Observe that $L$ is a linear subspace, $K$ is a regular cone, and $\{x: Ax\le 0\} = L\cap K$.  We now have all the necessary ingredients to upper bound $H_0(A)$.

\begin{theorem}\label{main.thm} Suppose $A\in {\mathbb R}^{m\times n}$ and
the componentwise compatibility condition holds. Let $B,N$ and $L,K$ be as above.  Then
\begin{equation}\label{eq.main.bound}
H_0(A) \le \H(L,K) \cdot \max\{H_0(A_N),H_0(A_B)\}.
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Suppose $u\in {\mathbb R}^n \setminus P$. The construction of $\H(\cdot,\cdot)$ and $H_0(\cdot),$ and the componentwise compatibility condition imply that there exists $x \in P=L\cap K$ such that
\begin{align*}
\|x-u\| &\le \H(L,K)\cdot \max\{\dist(u,L),\dist(u,K)\} \\
&\le
\H(L,K) \cdot \max\{H_0(A_B)\cdot \|(A_Bu)^+\|,H_0(A_N)\cdot \|(A_Nu)^+\|\} \\
&\le
\H(L,K) \cdot \max\{H_0(A_B),H_0(A_N)\}\cdot \|(Au)^+\|.
\end{align*}
Since this holds for all $u\in {\mathbb R}^n\setminus P$, the inequality in~\eqref{eq.main.bound} follows.
\end{proof}
Observe that unlike $H_0(A)$ that depends on the {\em data representation} $A\in {\mathbb R}^{m\times n}$ of the cone $P=\{x: Ax\le 0\}$, the constant $\H(L,K)$ only depends on the sets $L\subseteq {\mathbb R}^n$ and $K\subseteq {\mathbb R}^n$.  In particular, $\H(L,K)$ does not depend on the norm in ${\mathbb R}^m$ while $H_0(A)$ evidently does.

\medskip

The next proposition provides an upper bound on $\H(L,K)$ analogous to the upper bounds on $H_0(A)$ in Proposition~\ref{prop.case.1} and Proposition~\ref{prop.case.2}.  It will be useful for the computational procedure in Section~\ref{sec.computation}.

\begin{proposition}\label{prop.case.3}  Suppose $L\subseteq {\mathbb R}^n$ is a linear subspace and $K \subseteq {\mathbb R}^n$ is a regular cone such that $L\cap \text{\rm int}(K) \ne \emptyset$.  Then
\[
\H(L,K) \le 1 + 2\cdot \max_{u\in {\mathbb R}^n\atop \|u\|\le 1} \min_{x\in L, y\in K\atop x-y = u} \|x\|.
\]
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} To ease notation, let $$H:=\max_{u\in {\mathbb R}^n\atop \|u\|\le 1} \min_{x\in L, y\in K\atop x-y = u} \|x\|.$$ We need to show that $\H(L,K) \le 1 + 2H.$
To that end, suppose $u \in {\mathbb R}^n\setminus L\cap K$.  Let $u_L:=\argmin_v\{\|u-v\|: v \in L\}$ and $u_K:=\argmin_v\{\|u-v\|: v \in K\}$.  The construction of $H$ implies that there exist $x\in L, y\in K$ such that $\|x\| \le H\cdot \|u_K-u_L\|$ and
$
x-y = u_K-u_L.
$
Hence
$
u_L+x = u_K+y \in L\cap K
$
and
\begin{align*}
\dist(u,L\cap K) &\le \|u-u_L-x\|  \\
&\le \|u-u_L\| + \|x\| \\
&\le \|u-u_L\| + H\cdot \|u_K-u_L\| \\
& \le \max\{\dist(u,L),\dist(u,K)\} + H \cdot (\dist(u,K) + \dist(u,L))\\
&\le (1+2 H) \cdot\max\{\dist(u,L),\dist(u,K)\}.
\end{align*}
Since this holds for any $u\in {\mathbb R}^n\setminus L\cap K$, it follows that
\[
\H(L,K) \le 1+ 2H.
\]
\end{proof}

For computational purposes, it is useful to note that if $\bar x \in L \cap \text{\rm int}(K)$ is such that $\bar x + u \in K$ for all $\|u\|\le 1$ then Proposition~\ref{prop.case.3} implies that
\[
\H(L,K) \le 1 + 2\|\bar x\|.
\]

\section{A computable procedure to bound $H_0(A)$}
\label{sec.computation}
We next describe a procedure to compute an upper bound on $H_0(A)$.  The procedure consists of four main steps.  First, compute the partition $B,N$.  Second, compute an upper bound on $H_0(A_B)$.  Third, compute an upper bound on $H_0(A_N)$.  Fourth, compute an upper bound on $\H(L,K)$.  An upper bound on $H_0(A)$ thereby follows from Theorem~\ref{main.thm}.  For computational convenience, throughout this section we assume that ${\mathbb R}^m$ is endowed with the $\ell_\infty$ norm and ${\mathbb R}^n$ is endowed with the $\ell_2$ norm.  A Python implementation and some illustrative examples of this procedure are publicly available at
\begin{center}
{\tt https://github.com/javi-pena}
\end{center}

\subsection*{Step 1: partition $B,N$}

The partition $B,N$ can be obtained from any point $(x,y,s,t)$ that satisfies the following systems of equations and inequalities for some $t > 0$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq.BN}
\begin{array}{rl}
&A^{\text{\sf T}} y = 0\\
& Ax +s = 0 \\
& y + s -t\mathbf{1} \ge 0 \\
&\mathbf{1}^{\text{\sf T}} y + \mathbf{1}^{\text{\sf T}} s = 1\\
&y \ge 0, s \ge 0.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
More precisely, if $(x,y,s,t)$ satisfies~\eqref{eq.BN} with $t>0$ then $B,N$ can be obtained as follows:
\[
B:=\{i: y_i >0\}, \; \; N:=\{i:s_i > 0\}.
\]
Proposition~\ref{prop.partition} guarantees that a solution $(x,y,s,t)$ to~\eqref{eq.BN} with $t>0$ always exists and that the associated partition $B,N$ is unique.  Such a point $(x,y,s,t)$ can be computed via the following linear program:
\begin{equation}\label{eq.LP}
\begin{array}{rl} \displaystyle\max_{x,y,s,t} & t \\
&A^{\text{\sf T}} y = 0\\
& Ax +s = 0 \\
& y + s -t\mathbf{1} \ge 0 \\
&\mathbf{1}^{\text{\sf T}} y + \mathbf{1}^{\text{\sf T}} s = 1\\
&y \ge 0, s \ge 0.
\end{array}
\end{equation}

\subsection*{Step 2: upper bound on $H_0(A_N)$}
The remarks following Proposition~\ref{prop.case.1} show that \[H_0(A_N)\le \|\bar x\|_2\] for any $\bar x\in {\mathbb R}^n$ such that $A_N\bar x \ge \mathbf{1}$.   The best such upper bound can be computed via the following quadratic program
\begin{equation}\label{eq.QP.N}
\bar x := \argmin\{ \|x\|^2_2 : A_Nx \ge \mathbf{1}\}.
\end{equation}

\subsection*{Step 3: upper bound on $H_0(A_B)$}
The remarks following Proposition~\ref{prop.case.2} show that
\[
H_0(A_B) \le \frac{2}{\sigma_{\min}^+(A_B^{\text{\sf T}} \bar Y)}
\]
for any $\bar y\in {\mathbb R}^B_{++}$ such that $\mathbf{1}_B^{\text{\sf T}} \bar y = 1$ and $A_B^{\text{\sf T}} \bar y = 0$.  Although the best such upper bound is challenging to compute, an upper bound of this kind that is within a factor of $\sqrt{|B|}$ of the best possible one can be computed via the following convex program
\begin{equation}\label{eq.CP.B}
\bar y := \argmin_{y\in {\mathbb R}^B_{++}}\left\{-\sum_{i\in B} \log(y_i): \mathbf{1}_B^{\text{\sf T}} y = 1, A_B^{\text{\sf T}} y = 0\right\}.
\end{equation}

\subsection*{Step 4: upper bound on $\H(L,K)$}
Let $Q$ be an orthonormal basis for $L:=\{x:A_Bx =0\}$ and $M = DA_NQ$ where $D$ is the diagonal matrix with positive diagonal entries such that all rows of $DA_N$ have Euclidean norm equal to one. Then the remarks following Proposition~\ref{prop.case.3} imply that
\[
\H(L,K) \le 1+2\|\bar z\|_2
\]
for any $\bar z \ge 0$ such that $M\bar z \ge \mathbf{1}$. The best such upper bound can be computed via the following  quadratic program
\begin{equation}\label{eq.QP.H}
\bar z := \argmin\{ \|z\|^2_2 : Mz \ge \mathbf{1}\}.
\end{equation}

\subsection*{Putting it all together: a procedure to bound $H_0(A)$}

Theorem~\ref{main.thm} allows us to stitch together the partition $B,N$ and the upper bounds on $H_0(A_B),$ $H_0(A_N),$ and $\H(L,K)$ to obtain an upper bound on $H_0(A)$ as detailed in Algorithm~\ref{the.algo} below.

\begin{algorithm}
\caption{Upper bound on $H_0(A)$}\label{the.algo}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\State {\bf input:}  $A \in {\mathbb R}^{m\times n}\setminus \{0\}$
\State  solve~\eqref{eq.LP} to enough accuracy to get a solution $(x,y,s,t)$ to~\eqref{eq.BN} with $t>0$
\State Let $B:=\{i: y_i > 0\}, N:=\{i:s_i > 0\}$
\If{$N\ne \emptyset$}
\State solve~\eqref{eq.QP.N} to enough accuracy to get $\bar x \in {\mathbb R}^n$ such that  $A_N\bar x \ge \mathbf{1}$
\EndIf
\If {$B\ne \emptyset$}
\State solve~\eqref{eq.CP.B} to enough accuracy to get $\bar y \in {\mathbb R}^B_{++}$ such that  $\mathbf{1}_B^{\text{\sf T}} \bar y =1$ and $A_B^{\text{\sf T}} \bar y = 0$
\EndIf
\If{$N=\emptyset$} return the upper bound
$$
H_0(A) \le \frac{2}{\sigma_{\min}^+(A_B^{\text{\sf T}} \bar Y)}
$$
\EndIf
\If{$B=\emptyset$}
 return the upper bound
$$
H_0(A) \le \|\bar x\|_2
$$
\EndIf

\State let $Q$ be an orthonormal basis for $L:=\{x:A_Bx =0\}$ and $M = DA_NQ$ where $D$ is the diagonal matrix with positive diagonal entries such that all rows of $DA_N$ have Euclidean norm equal to one
\State solve~\eqref{eq.QP.H} to enough accuracy to get $\bar z$ such that $ M\bar z \ge \mathbf{1}$
\State return the upper bound
\[
H_0(A) \le (1+2\|\bar z\|_2) \cdot \max\left\{\|\bar x\|_2,\frac{2}{\sigma_{\min}^+(A_B^{\text{\sf T}} \bar Y)} \right\}
\]
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}

\bibliographystyle{plain}


Problems in Arithmetic Topology

Abstract: We present a list of problems in arithmetic topology posed at the June 2019 PIMS/NSF workshop on "Arithmetic Topology". Three problem sessions were hosted during the workshop in which participants proposed open questions to the audience and engaged in shared discussions from their own perspectives as working mathematicians across various fields of study. Participants were explicitly asked to provide problems of various levels of difficulty, with the goal of capturing a cross-section of exciting challenges in the field that could help guide future activity. The problems, together with references and brief discussions when appropriate, are collected below into three categories: 1) topological analogues of arithmetic phenomena, 2) point counts, stability phenomena and the Grothendieck ring, and 3) tools, methods and examples.

\subsection*{Acknowledgements}
We thank all of the people who posed problems, both for their original suggestions and for their help clarifying and refining our write-ups of them. We thank Christin Bibby, Aaron Landesman, Lior Silberman, and Bena Tshishiku for transcribing the problem sessions in real time. We thank Benson Farb for helpful commnts. We thank all the participants who commented and asked questions during the problem sessions. Last, we thank Alejandro Adem, Craig Westerland and Melanie Wood for co-organizing the workshop and we thank the PIMS staff for their hospitality and support in organizing the workshop.

\section{Topological Analogues}
\subsection{Craig Westerland}

This problem concerns the homology of random topological objects and the Cohen--Lenstra distribution, originally introduced to heuristically understand experimental observations about the class groups of number fields \cite{CL}.  The Cohen--Lenstra distribution on finite (abelian) groups posits that the probability of each group $G$ being in the support of the distribution is inversely proportional to $|G|^n |\operatorname{Aut}(G)|^m$ for some $n, m \geq 0$. Since its first use, it has appeared throughout number theory and in various models of random integral matrix cokernels; see, for example, \cite{CKLPW, EVW, koplewitz, wood15}.

Working one prime $p$ at a time, one can compute the $p$-power torsion and torsion-free part of the integral homology of a given chain complex by tensoring with the $p$-adic integers $\mathbb{Z}_p$ before taking homology. If one further specifies the total homological rank $r$ of such complexes, the Cohen--Lenstra distribution specifies a discrete measure on the resulting module $M = \mathbb{Z}_p^r \times N$ (for $N$ an abelian $p$-group). We can then ask the following question:

\begin{conjecture} Let $X_\bullet$ be a random simplicial complex. Does the torsion $H_\ast(X_\bullet)_{tors}$ have a Cohen--Lenstra distribution?
\end{conjecture}

This question was originally posed by Matt Kahle, Frank Lutz, Andrew Newman and Kyle Parsons, along with experimental evidence supporting the conjecture, in \cite{KLNP}. Westerland raised this standing problem and also discussed an analogue for random manifolds where one can introduce a torsion linking pairing
\[ \begin{split} H^i(X;\mathbb{Z})_{tors} \times H^{\dim X - i - 1}&(X;\mathbb{Z})_{tors} \stackrel{\cup}{\longrightarrow} H^{\dim X - 1}(X;\mathbb{Z})_{tors} \\
	& \stackrel{\delta}{\longrightarrow} H^{\dim X}(X;\mathbb{Q}/\mathbb{Z}) \cong \mathbb{Q}/\mathbb{Z}.
\end{split} \]
Delaunay \cite{delaunay} introduced heuristics in the context of a bilinear pairing \[\mu: G \times G \to \mathbb{Q}/\mathbb{Z},\] originally in the symplectic context of Tate--Shafarevitch groups but later expanded by others (e.g. \cite{BKLPR, wood14}) to additional phenomena, where $\operatorname{Aut}(G)$ is replaced with $\operatorname{Aut}^\mu(G)$ of automorphisms preserving the pairing.

\begin{question} Are there Delauney heuristics in the random manifold case?
\end{question}

Andy Putman mentioned useful models for random $3$-manifolds (e.g., Dunfield--Thurston manifolds via random classes in the mapping class group $\Mod_g$) that might help approach this problem.

\subsection{Daniel Litt}
Motivated by the Frobenius action on the pro-$p$ Galois group of a curve over $\mathbb{F}_p$, consider a random automorphism $\varphi$ of a free pro-$p$ group $F$, and construct a random Weil group
\[ W_\varphi \coloneqq F \rtimes \langle \varphi\rangle.\]

What is the representation theory of $W_\varphi$? Do the predictions from geometric Langlands theory hold? For example:
\begin{problem}
	Given an irreducible continuous representation $\rho: W_\varphi \to \GL_n\left(\mathbb{F}_p((t))\right)$, does the restriction $\rho|_F$ always have finite image?
\end{problem}
For $F$ the geometric \'etale fundamental group of a smooth projective curve $X$ over $\mathbb{F}_q$, the analogous problem was posed by de Jong \cite{dJ} and proven by Gaitsgory \cite{Ga}. Similarly, one could ask:
\begin{problem}
	Let $L/\mathbb{Q}_p$ be a finite extension, and let $\rho\colon W_\varphi\to \GL_n(L)$ be a continuous irreducible representation.  For almost every $\varphi$ (i.e. with probability 1), does $H^1_{cts}(F;\rho\otimes\rho^\vee)^\varphi=0$?
\end{problem}
Viewing $H^1_{cts}(F;\rho\otimes\rho^\vee)^\varphi$ as the tangent space to $\rho$ in the character variety of $F$, we can understand the previous problem as a ``cohomological rigidity'' statement.  Like the first problem, this problem is a theorem for $F$ the geometric \'etale fundamental group of a smooth projective curve $X$ over $\mathbb{F}_q$: indeed, a theorem of L. Lafforgue \cite{Lafforgue} implies that $\rho$ is pure of some weight, so $\rho\otimes\rho^\vee$ is pure of weight 0.  Deligne's bounds \cite{Deligne} therefore imply that $H^1_{cts}(F;\rho\otimes\rho^\vee)$ is pure of weight 1, and hence the invariants of Frobenius are trivial.

More generally, both of the above problems arise from trying to understand in what sense the action of Frobenius on the geometric \'etale fundamental group of a smooth projective curve over $\mathbb{F}_q$ is ``special''?  Affirmative answers to both of the questions above would suggest that it isn't!

\section{Point counting, Stability Phenomena and the Grothendieck Ring}

\subsection{Akshay Venkatesh} In many interesting number theory problems (e.g. counting number fields) one has not only a main term in the asymptotic count, but a secondary term or more.  For example, the number of cubic fields of discriminant up to $X$ is
\[
a X + b X^{5/6} +\text{lower order terms}
\]
We have very little understanding of these lower order terms, and they are not just of theoretical interest: when one tries to verify the conjectures numerically, one finds that the secondary terms are dominant in the computational range.

So the question, following the framework of the Weil conjectures, is:
\begin{problem}
	What is the topological meaning of secondary terms appearing in assymptotic counts in number theory?
\end{problem}
They do not correspond to stable cohomology classes (these are the main terms), but to some kind of slightly weaker structure, which is still much better behaved than cohomology near middle degree.

\subsection{Zachary Himes}

The recent work of Galatius--Kupers--Randal-Williams \cite{GKRW1, GKRW2} develops and applies a homology theory based on $E_k$-algebras, originally introduced to study $k$-fold loop spaces \cite{may}, with the goal of showing results ``beyond homological stability'' which they call \emph{secondary stability}. For example, in \cite{GKRW2}, $E_k$-homology is used to measure the failure of homological stability itself as a stable phenomenon in the context of mapping class groups, and in \cite{RW}, this perspective is used to explain the homological stability phenomena which underlie the breakthrough work of Ellenberg--Venkatesh--Westerland \cite{EVW}.

\begin{question} Building off \cite{EVW}, can one prove Hurwitz spaces have stability (for more general groups than the dihedral groups)?  Secondary stability, or higher-order-stability? What can one say  about the homology of Hurwitz spaces after restricting to subsets of connected components?
\end{question}

\subsection{Daniel Litt}

\begin{problem} Fix $n, d,$ and $q$. How many supersingular hypersurfaces $X \subset \mathbb{P}^n$ exist of degree $d$ over $\mathbb{F}_q$? In particular, does such a hypersurface exist for every degree, dimension, and characteristic? Moreover, the set of such varieties are the $\mathbb{F}_q$-points of some supersingular locus $V$---what is the class $[V]$ in the Grothendieck ring?
\end{problem}

A great deal is known about the supersingular locus in particular cases. See, for example, the work of Oort and Li \cite{lioort} on moduli spaces of supersingular abelian varieties, especially on the case of principally polarized abelian varieties $S_{g,1}$.

\subsection{Aaron Landesman}

Cohen--Lenstra heuristics can be used to describe distributions of class groups of certain global fields. In many ways, the Selmer groups of elliptic curves behave similarly to class groups. As such, Landesman provided two conjectures---a number-theoretic version and a topological version---relating topological techniques to the average size of Selmer groups of elliptic curves over function fields. We describe the latter here, framed as a question of homological stability, which would likely imply the number-theoretic conjecture. For more details, see \cite{landesman}.

\begin{defn}
	The \emph{moduli space of Weierstrass models} is given by
	\[ \begin{split}
		\mathcal{W}_d \coloneqq \{ \left( a(S,T),b(S,T) \right) \in \mathbb{C}[S,T]^2 \mid & \text{ homogeneous degree $4d$} \\
		& \quad \text{and $6d$, respectively}\} \subseteq \mathbb{C}^{10d+2}.
	\end{split} \]
	A point $W = (a(S,T),b(S,T)) \in \mathcal{W}_d$ gives rise to an elliptic surface $S_W$ via
	\[ S_W \coloneqq \{ ([S:T],[X:Y:Z]) \in \mathbb{CP}^1 \times \mathbb{CP}^2 \mid Y^2Z = X^3 + a(S,T)XZ^2 + b(S,T)Z^3 \}, \]
	together with the natural projection map $\varphi_W: S_W \to \mathbb{CP}^1$. The \emph{universal family of Weierstrass models}, $\mathcal{UW}_d$, is the space parameterizing models $W$ and a point $p$ on the corresponding elliptic surface $S_W$. That is,
	\[ \mathcal{UW}_d \coloneqq \{ (W,p) \in \mathcal{W}_d \times (\mathbb{CP}^1 \times \mathbb{CP}^2) \mid p \in S_W \}. \]
	There are natural projection maps
	\[ \mathcal{UW}_d \stackrel{f}{\longrightarrow} \mathbb{CP}^1 \times \mathcal{W}_d \stackrel{ g}{\longrightarrow} \mathcal{W}_d. \]

	The Selmer space is constructed as $\Sel_n^d(\mathbb{C}) \coloneqq R^1 g_*( R^1 f_*(\mu_n))$.
\end{defn}

\begin{question}
	For fixed $n$, do $\Sel_n^d(\mathbb{C})$ satisfy homological stability as $d \to \infty$?
\end{question}

In particular, Landesman provided a more precise prediction:

\begin{conjecture}
	There are constants $A$ and $B$ depending on $n$ so that
	\[ \dim H_i(\Sel_n^d(\mathbb{C}); \mathbb{Q}) = \dim H_i(\Sel_n^{d+1}(\mathbb{C});\mathbb{Q}) \]
	whenever $d \geq Ai+B$.
\end{conjecture}

\subsection{Will Sawin}
Continuing the paradigm put forward by Vakil--Wood \cite{VW}, Sawin proposed further comparison of three types of convergence for families of varieties:
\begin{enumerate}
	\item Homological stability, i.e. isomorphisms between low-degree singular cohomology groups (equivalently, high-degree compactly-supported cohomology groups), ideally in some way respecting arithmetic structures such as Galois representations, Hodge structures, etc.
	\item Point counts, in particular after normalizing by a factor of $q^{-\dim}$.
	\item Convergence in the Grothendieck ring under the dimension filtration; see, for example, \cite{VW}.
\end{enumerate}

In particular, Sawin suggested fixing a degree $d$ and considering a sequence $H_n$ of smooth degree $d$ hypersurfaces in $\mathbb{P}^n$ as follows:

\begin{question}
	Does $\displaystyle \lim_{n \to \infty} \frac{[H_n] - [\mathbb{P}^{n-1}]}{[\mathbb{A}^{n-1}]}$ exist? Is the limit zero?
\end{question}

This convergence makes sense for many objects that came be obtained via maps out of the Grothendieck group (i.e., Hodge structures), so a negative result would show the Grothendieck ring is richer than these. In the setting of homological stability, this question reduces to the Lefschetz hyperplane theorem; with respect to counting points over $\mathbb{F}_q$, the limit can be controlled when $\sqrt{q}$ is larger than $d-1$ using Lefschetz together with the Weil conjectures. While any progress towards answering this question is interesting in its own right, there is also an application to proving Grothendieck ring analogues of the Browning--Sawin circle method \cite{browningsawin}.

\subsection{Ronno Das}

In 1849, Cayley and Salmon \cite{cayley} showed that every smooth cubic surface over an algebraically closed field contains exactly 27 lines. If we instead let $X$ be a smooth cubic surface over $k = \mathbb{R}$ or $\mathbb{F}_q$, for example, the number of lines contained in $X$ and defined over $k$ can be strictly less than 27. In fact, as shown by Das \cite{das}, the average number of lines on a cubic surface over $\mathbb{F}_q$ is exactly 1 for all but finitely many characteristics.

More generally, as suggested in correspondence with Ravi Vakil, one can consider lines on del Pezzo surfaces of degree $1 \leq d \leq 9$, where $d=3$ is the case of cubic surfaces. For more details see, for example, \cite{BG} and \cite{josef}.

\begin{problem}
What is the average number of $\mathbb{F}_q$-lines of a degree 1 del Pezzo surface over $\mathbb{F}_q$?
\end{problem}

The average number of lines on a del Pezzo surface defined over $\mathbb{F}_q$ is $1$ for degree $d \geq 3$, except when $d=7$ where the average is 2. Moreover, the $d=2$ case is closely related to Bergvall's computations \cite{bergvall}.

\begin{problem}
Is there a uniform proof for all degrees $1 \leq d \leq 9$?
\end{problem}

\subsection{Jesse Kass}

When $q$ is odd or when $k = \mathbb{R}$, Segre \cite{segre} observed that a line $\ell$ on a cubic surface $X$ comes equipped with a distinguished involution $L$ that is necessarily \emph{hyperbolic} or \emph{elliptic} as an element of $\PGL_2$, determined by whether or not the fixed points of $L$ are defined over $k$.

\begin{defn} A line $\ell$ on a cubic surface $X$, both defined either over $\mathbb{R}$ or $\mathbb{F}_q$ for $q$ odd, is said to be \emph{hyperbolic} (respectively, \emph{elliptic}) if the distinguished involution $L$ (see \cite{segre}) is hyperbolic (respectively, elliptic). \end{defn}

See the papers of Finashin--Kharlamov \cite{finashinkharlamov}, Okonek--Teleman \cite{okonekteleman}, and Kass--Wickelgren \cite{KW17} on how this distinction gives rise to restrictions for the number of lines on cubic surfaces defined over $\mathbb{R}$ and $\mathbb{F}_q$ with odd characteristic.

\begin{problem} Let $X$ be a cubic surface over $\mathbb{F}_q$, a finite field of odd characteristic, and with 27 lines defined over $\mathbb{F}_q$. Let $H$ and $E$ be the number of hyperbolic and elliptic lines, respectively.
\begin{enumerate}
\item What pairs $(H,E)$ can appear?
\item Statistically, how often do each appear?
\item What subgraphs of the intersection graph of lines can be given by hyperbolic and elliptic lines?
\end{enumerate}
\end{problem}

\subsection{Isabel Vogt}

\begin{problem} Let $X$ be a smooth cubic hypersurface defined over $\mathbb{F}_q$ and fix $n \leq q+1$ points from $X$. Does there exist an algebraic map $f: \mathbb{P}^1_{\mathbb{F}_q} \to X$ such that the $n$ points are contained in the image? If so, what degree is necessary?
\end{problem}

As proved by Koll\'ar \cite{kollar}, the answer to the first question is yes when $q \geq 8$, but the degree of $f$ grows rapidly. In general, for $X$ a fixed hypersurface with $g: Z \to X$ a map on some finite subscheme $Z$ of $\mathbb{P}^1$, one can consider the space
\[ \Mor_d(\mathbb{P}^1,X;g) \coloneqq \left\{ f \in \Mor_d(\mathbb{P}^1,X) : f|_Z = g \right\} \]
of maps extending $g$ to all of $\mathbb{P}^1$. The preceding question becomes that of the $\mathbb{F}_q$-points of $\Mor_d(\mathbb{P}^1,X;g)$. In this spirit, Vogt offered the following general problem:

\begin{problem}\label{extend_top} Asking these questions over $\mathbb{C}$, how does the topology of the associated spaces vary as $d$ grows?
\end{problem}

As a related example, fixing a degree $d$ holomorphic function $g: \mathbb{CP}^{m-1} \to \mathbb{CP}^n$, Mostovoy \cite{Mostovoy03, Mostovoy12} considered the space
\[ \Mor_d(\mathbb{CP}^m,\mathbb{CP}^n;g) \coloneqq \left\{ f: \mathbb{CP}^m \to \mathbb{CP}^n | f \circ i = g \right\} \]
for some fixed embedding $i: \mathbb{CP}^{m-1} \hookrightarrow \mathbb{CP}^m$, and exhibited a map
\[ \Mor_d(\mathbb{CP}^m,\mathbb{CP}^n;g) \to \Omega^{2m} \mathbb{CP}^n \]
that induces isomorphisms in homology up to degree $d(2n-2m+1)-1$. Since the latter space has a homotopy type naturally invariant of $d$, this result (and subsequent generalizations into toric varieties \cite{MMV}) gives a homological stability result in the spirit of problem \ref{extend_top}.

\subsection{Vlad Matei}

\begin{problem} Consider the variety of monic square-free polynomials,
\[ \Poly_n(k) \coloneqq \{ (a_{n-1},\dots,a_0) \in k^n \mid t^n + a_{n-1} t^{n-1} + \cdots + a_0 \text{ is square-free} \}. \]
Fixing $n$ and $k = \mathbb{F}_q$, what is the distribution of the $a_i \in \mathbb{F}_q$ for $i \leq n-2$?
\end{problem}

In the $q \gg 1$ regime, the coefficients are well-known to be uniformly distributed.
On the other hand, fixing $q$, one can see immediately that $a_{n-1}$ is uniformly distributed simply by elementary substitutions. The question of fixing some of the coefficients is of particular interest to computer scientists; see, for example, \cite{granger} for a history of the problem. Matei outlined two distinct ways to study the aforementioned problem:

The first is by dualizing---considering the discriminant hypersurface $\Delta \subset \mathbb{A}^n$ and picking out $\mathbb{F}_q$-points by their coordinates. These, in turn, can be thought of as hyperplane sections of $\Delta$. The downside of this approach is that we would need an explicit formula for $\Delta$ in terms of the coefficients, which becomes computationally infeasible even in small degrees.

The second approach is by considering hypersurfaces determined by the symmetric sums of the roots $\{z_1,\dots,z_n\}$. Writing $\sigma_k$ for the $k$th symmetric sum, one could consider hypersurfaces of the form $\sigma_k = a \in \mathbb{F}_q$ on the open locus of distinct roots. In this case, the objective is to understand the $S_n$-action on these hypersurfaces and the associated cohomology groups, in order to count $\mathbb{F}_q$ points on the quotient.

\subsection{Oishee Banerjee}

While many of the results concerning the cohomology of moduli spaces of polynomials concentrate on data encoded in their zeroes, i.e. configuration spaces on $\mathbb{C}$, one can also proceed by studying ramification. Such work is in the spirit of long-standing open problems concerning the topology of Hurwitz spaces.

Indeed, the irreducibility of the Hurwitz space is a classical result proved in \cite{clebsch}, where the topology of its subvarieties corresponding to specific ramification loci is almost completely unknown. Banerjee \cite{banerjee} studied the stable cohomology of these Hurwitz spaces satisfying certain conditions. In addition her work shows that the \'etale cohomology does not stabilize in positive characteristic, which is in contrast to comparable stability results (see \cite{FW, EVW}.)

\begin{problem} Fix a prime power $q$ and integer $n$ with $\Char(\mathbb{F}_q) > n+1$. For which $f(t) \in \Poly_n(\mathbb{F}_q)$ does the anti-derivative
\[ F(t) \coloneqq \int_0^t f(x) dx \]
give a simply-branched mapping $F: \mathbb{A}^1 \to \mathbb{A}^1$? Alternatively, how many simply-branched maps $F: \mathbb{A}^1 \to \mathbb{A}^1$ over $\mathbb{F}_q$ of degree $n+1$ have $\tfrac{dF}{dt} \in \Poly_n(\mathbb{F}_q)$?
\end{problem}

\subsection{Patricia Hersh}

This question is motivated by the task of moving from studying the configuration space of $n$ distinct points on a manifold, either entirely labeled or unlabeled, to instead looking at situations where the $n$ points are partitioned into groups of points that cannot be distinguished from each other but can be distinguished from the other groups of points.

If $A$ is a hyperplane arrangement one can count the number of $\mathbb{F}_q$ points in the complement $X$ of $A$ using the M\"obius function $\mu_A$ of the intersection poset $L_A$ (see, for example, \cite{geometriccombinatorics}). In short: \begin{equation}\label{complement count} \# X(\mathbb{F}_q) = \sum_{y \in L_A} \mu(\hat{0},y) q^{\dim A - \operatorname{rk} y}. \end{equation}
Hersh--Kleinberg introduced a multiplicative deformation of the M\"obius function, $\mu'$, defined somewhat similarly to $\mu_A$ but (1) replacing the recursion for $\mu_A$ by a recursion that forces $\mu'$ to be multiplicative, and (2) replacing the intersection poset $L_A$ in the counting formula above by the multiset partition poset ordered by refinement. In particular, $\mu'$ records multiplicities of incidences and thus behaves more elegantly in various contexts (see \cite{HK} for details).

\begin{question} Replacing $\mu$ with $\mu'$ in (\ref{complement count}) and replacing $L_A$ by the multiset partition poset, does the resulting formula have arithmetic meaning?
\end{question}

Additional references are \cite{garton} and \cite{hersh}, the former remarked by Melanie Wood.

\subsection{Joseph Gunther}

\begin{question}
	Let $\mathcal{C}(a,b)$ be moduli space of smooth complex curves in $\mathbb{P}^1 \times \mathbb{P}^1$ of bi-degree $(a,b)$. Is there a homological stability for $\mathcal{C}(a,b)$ as $b \to \infty$ with $a$ fixed?
\end{question}

This problem is solved over $\mathbb{F}_q$ by \cite{EW} and a motivic treatment is found in \cite{BH}.

\subsection{Vlad Matei}

In 1984, Kani--Rosen \cite{KR} studied relations between idempotents in the algebra
of rational endomorphisms of a fixed abelian variety. In particular, if a group $G$ covered by subgroups $H_1,\dots,H_r$ acts on a smooth variety $X$ over $\mathbb{Q}$, we obtain idempotents $\epsilon_{H_i}$ given by
\[ \epsilon_{H_i} \coloneqq \frac{1}{H_i} \sum_{h \in H_i} h \]
in the group algebra $\mathbb{Q}[G]$ that come with linear relations of the form
\[ \sum_{i=1}^n a_i \epsilon_{H_i} = 0. \]

\begin{question}
	Do these transfer to relations in the Grothendieck ring? That is, are there $a_i \in \mathbb{Z}$ such that
	\[ \sum_{i=1}^r a_i [X/H_i] = 0? \]
\end{question}

Matei observed that this holds for the action of $G = S_3$ on affine space $\mathbb{A}^3$, but Daniel Litt commented that he expects this to be false mod $p$ generically.

\section{Developing tools, methods, and new examples}
\subsection{Will Sawin}

Sawin's talk outlined joint work with Tim Browning on a geometric version of the Hardy--Littlewood circle method, used to compute the compactly supported cohomology of the space of rational curves on a smooth hypersurface (see \cite{browningsawin}).

\begin{question}
	Can we apply these methods to other cases, such as to maps
	\begin{enumerate}
		\item from higher genus curves?
		\item into projective varieties?
		\item into complete intersections?
		\item with local conditions?
		\item with Hodge structure modules?
	\end{enumerate}
\end{question}

\subsection{Michael Fried}
For $n\ge 4$, two {\em moduli} spaces associated to $\mathbb{P}^1_z$ appear often:
\begin{center}
	The moduli of ordered (distinct) points $\Mc_{0,n}:=((\mathbb{P}^1_z)^n\setminus \Delta_n)/\PGL_2(\mathbb{C})$, and\\
	The moduli of unordered (distinct) points $J_n:=(\mathbb{P}^n\setminus D_n)/\PGL_2(\mathbb{C})$
\end{center}
where $\Delta_n$ is the ``fat diagonal'', i.e. the locus of points with repetitions, and $D_n$ is the discriminant (treating the homogeneous coordinates in $\mathbb{P}^n$ as the coefficients of a degree $n$ polynomial in one variable). For $n=4$, these are the (open) classical lines $\mathbb{P}^1_\lambda\setminus\{0,1,\infty\}$ and $\mathbb{P}^1_j\setminus\{\infty\}$. The fundamental group of $\Mc_{0,n}$ mod outer automorphisms, $\pi_n$, is the pure (spherical) braid group on $n$ strands mod its center $\mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z}$. Note that $\pi_4$ is a free group on two generators, $F_2$.

The Grothendieck--Teichm\"uller group is a conjectured description (cf. \cite{GrEsquisse, IharaICM, DrGT}) of the absolute Galois group $G_{\mathbb{Q}}$ given by its action on the profinite fundamental group(oid)s of $\Mc_{0,4}$ and $\Mc_{0,5}$. Even if correct, Grothendieck's conjecture is not useful without a way to name elements in the action of $G_{\mathbb{Q}}$ (cf. \cite[Question 2, p. 6]{IharaICM}).

Ihara replaced $\pi_n$ by $\pi_n^{nil}$, its nilpotent completion, as a way to name the elements in their action; note that this won't capture all of $G_{\mathbb{Q}}$. He, along with Anderson, documented aspects  of this for explicit collections of covers (e.g. \cite{IharaAnderson1,IharaAnderson2}).  Foremost was his identification of the second commutator quotient of $G_{\mathbb{Q}}$ (the 2-step nilpotent quotient), using the 3, 4, and 5-cycle relations developed by Drinfeld (and apparently known to Grothendieck). This generalized the Kronecker-Weber description fo the abelian quotient of $G_{\mathbb{Q}}$ as the (Galois group over $\mathbb{Q}$ of the) cyclotomic closure of $\mathbb{Q}$ (see \cite{IharaKW}).

\begin{problem}
	Go beyond the nilpotent quotient $\pi_n^{nil}$ to give a naming scheme for elements in $G_{\mathbb{Q}}$.
\end{problem}

 We propose that a moduli-theoretic approach is possible using reduced Hurwitz space covers (see \cite{Fried} and \cite{BF,FV}). These covers of $J_n$ -- defined by finite groups and conjugacy classes withing these group, and parametrizing branched covers of $\mathbb{P}^1$ with fixed branching data and monodromy group -- pull back to unramified covers of $\Mc_{0,n}$ whose components and their fields of definition are controlled by an explicit braid group action.  For example, for $n=4$, components, genuses and cusps of these covers of $\Mc_{0,4}=\mathbb{P}^1_{\lambda}\setminus\{0,1,\infty\}$ are efficiently computable. We propose that these Hurwitz moduli spaces give a way to identify the $G_{\mathbb{Q}}$ action.  Using versions of Deligne's tangential base points \cite{DeligneDroite} based in $J_n$ rather than $\Mc_{0,n}$ (significant even for $n=4$)  thereby gives tests relating Drinfeld's relations to the fields of definition of components of Hurwitz sapce.

{\bf Special case:} even the case when the Hurwitz space pullbacks to $\Mc_{0,n}$ are nilpotent covers should be doable and significant (e.g. in shedding new light on Ihara's results).

\subsection{Jesse Kass}

The following was discussed in the context of developing an enriched discriminant or conductor using $\mathbb{A}^1$-homotopy theory, in the context of the mini-course by Kirsten Wickelgren and work by Marc Levine; see, for example, \cite{levine17}.

Consider a generically separable non-constant Galois cover $f: Y \to X$ of smooth projective curves with Galois group $G$. Associated to $df$ there is a certain Euler class, the \emph{enriched different}, which is related to the ``enriched Riemann--Hurwitz formula'' due to Levine. In classical theory, the different is related to the discriminant and the conductor; see, for example, \cite{neukirch} for an overview.

\begin{question}
	Is there an \emph{enriched conductor} associated to $y \in Y$ and $x = f(y)$?
\end{question}

\begin{defn}
	The classical conductor is defined via the Artin character (see \cite{greenbergserre}). In this context, where $G_y \coloneqq \operatorname{Stab}_G(y)$, we have an \emph{enriched Artin character}
	\[ \begin{gathered}
		G_y \to \GW(k) \\
		\sigma \mapsto \text{local Lefschetz trace of } \sigma,
	\end{gathered} \]
	where $\GW(k)$ is the Grothendieck-Witt group associated to the field $k$.
\end{defn}

\begin{question}
	Is the enriched Artin character the character of some map?
\end{question}

More generally, the task here is to continue enriching Serre's book \cite{greenbergserre}.

\subsection{Daniel Litt}

Following the work of Marc Levine, Jesse Kass, Kirsten Wickelgren, and others (see, for example, \cite{KW17,KW19,levine18}), Daniel Litt asked about creating enriched Gromov-Witten invariants.

\begin{question}
	Can we develop enriched Gromov-Witten invariants in the non-enumerative case? Can we relax the conditions, e.g. for non-smooth varieties?
\end{question}

Kass remarked that there are computations over the real numbers, for example \cite{GZ,ST,welschinger}, which might give us some hint on how to define them.

\subsection{Hannah Knight}

In 1979, based on intuition from Morse theory, Segal \cite{segal} proved that the map
\[ \Rat_d^n(\mathbb{C}) \hookrightarrow \Omega^2 \mathbb{C}\mathbb{P}^n \]
is a homotopy equivalence through dimension $(2n-1)d$, where $\Omega^2 \mathbb{C}\mathbb{P}^n$ is the space of based continuous maps $\mathbb{C}\mathbb{P}^1 \to \mathbb{C}\mathbb{P}^n$ with the compact-open topology.
Part of his proof included exhibiting homological stability via (non-algebraic) maps
\[  \Rat_d^n(\mathbb{C}) \hookrightarrow  \Rat_{d+1}^n(\mathbb{C}). \]
This work inspired many generalizations in the 40 years since, for example extending the domain to genus $g \geq 1$ curves and the target to Grassmannians or toric varieties; see, for example, \cite{BHM, CCMM, GKY, Guest, KM, Kirwan}. Jun-Yong Park remarked that his joint work with Changho-Han and Hunter Spink \cite{HP,PS} showed stability for maps from $\mathbb{P}^1$ to weighted projective spaces $\mathbb{P}(a,b)$.  Kirsten Wickelgren commented that the Chow ring of stable maps from $\mathbb{P}^1 \to \mathbb{P}^n$ is known to stabilize in the degree, due to Pandharipande \cite{pandharipande}.

Knight asked what was known about extensions of Segal's results to the case
\[ \Hol_d(\mathbb{C}\mathbb{P}^m,\mathbb{C}\mathbb{P}^n) = \left\{ (f_0,\dots,f_n) : \text{each } f_i \in \mathbb{C}[x_0,\dots,x_m]_d \text{ with no common root} \right\}, \]
where $1 < m \leq n$ and $d \geq 1$. Claudio G\'omez-Gonz\'ales remarked that this work had been carried out, first by Mostovoy \cite{Mostovoy03, Mostovoy12} and, more generally, by Mostovoy--Munguia-Villanueva \cite{MMV}. Further,  \cite{gomezgonzales} calculates the stable homology as $d \to \infty$, and shows that both the unstable rational homology and corresponding point counts seem to be independent of $d$ (except for dimension reasons, for the latter). Benson Farb added that, in general, little is known about spaces of algebraic maps when the (complex) dimension of the domain is greater than one (except when those spaces are finite).  This motivates:

\begin{question}
	Can we develop more general methods to study the topology of spaces of algebraic maps $X \to Y$ between varieties, especially when $X$ has dimension greater than 1?
\end{question}

\begin{question}
	Can we replace homology/cohomology with the Chow ring in more general settings?
\end{question}

\subsection{Jesse Kass}

\begin{question}
What are the standing obstructions to computing cohomologies of discriminants? Are there problems that can serve as benchmarks for extending the existing techniques?
\end{question}

Orsola Tommasi commented that she uses Vassiliev's method (see \cite{vassiliev, tommasi}). Many papers cited here use some variant of Vassiliev's spectral sequence; Mostovoy \cite{Mostovoy12}, for example, use a truncated version of the spectral sequence when the limiting terms become too cumbersome to compute.

\subsection{Jun-Yong Park}

Trace formulas give a concrete way to work with arithmetic topology. However, moduli functors that we want to study are often represented in the category of stacks rather than schemes, which are harder to work with. Kai Behrend \cite{behrend} established a trace formula for algebraic stacks, which has extended this arithmetic topology bridge to many moduli stacks. For example, Han and Park \cite{HP,HP2,park20} computed the $\ell$-adic cohomology of the Hom stack $\Hom_n(\mathbb{P}^1, \mathbb{P}(\lambda_0, \ldots, \lambda_N))$ and its class in the Grothendieck ring, with connections to fine moduli stacks of elliptic and hyperelliptic fibrations over $\mathbb{P}^1$.

\begin{question}
	Can we develop a robust and general theory of point counting to understand moduli stacks arithmetically?
\end{question}

Wei Ho remarked on important connections to the work of Ellenberg--Satriano--Zureick-Brown \cite{ESZB}, bringing together many arithmetic problems about counting points, such as the Batyrev--Manin Conjecture, the Malle Conjecture, and more via, among other things, establishing a theory of heights on stacks. See, for example, the paper by Boggess and Sankar \cite{BS}, which discusses stacky versions of these conjectures in the context of the Ellenberg--Satriano--Zureick-Brown framework.

\subsection{Inna Zakharevich}

Consider the Grothendieck ring of varieties over a field $k$, $K_0(\operatorname{Var}_k)$, equipped with its dimension filtration, where the $n$th graded piece of the filtration is given by those elements that can be represented as sums of varieties of dimension at most $n$, i.e., the image of the natural map
\begin{equation}\label{natural map}
	K_0(\operatorname{Var}_k^{\leq n}) \coloneqq \mathbb{Z}[X| \dim X \leq n]/([X] = [Y]+[X-Y]) \to K_0(\operatorname{Var}_k). \end{equation}
The quotients $K_0(\operatorname{Var}_k^{\leq n})/K_0(\operatorname{Var}_k^{\leq n-1})$ have a simple presentation as the free abelian group on the birational isomorphism classes of $n$-dimensional varieties.

However, as shown by Karzhemanov \cite{karzhemanov} in 2014 and Borisov \cite{borisov} in 2015, the map (\ref{natural map}) is non-injective when $k \subseteq \mathbb{C}$. The failure of injectivity is measured by a spectral sequence whose differentials compute the differences \[[X-U]-[X-V],\] where $U$ and $V$ are isomorphic open subsets identified by a birational automorphism of $X$; for details, see \cite{zakharevich}. This motivates the following problem:

\begin{problem} Fix a field $k$, variety $X$, and a birational automorphism $f: X \dashrightarrow X$. Let $U, V \subseteq X$ be open subsets such that $f: U \to V$ is an isomorphism. Give an explicit example such that the complements $X-U$ and $X-V$, which will be equal in the Grothendieck ring, are not piecewise isomorphic.
\end{problem}

As remarked above, such an example must exist for $k \subseteq \mathbb{C}$, though none is known; it is unknown if examples exist over other fields.

\subsection{Zinovy Reichstein}
\begin{problem} Let $G$ be a finite group and fix subgroups $H_1,\dots,H_r \leq G$, not necessarily distinct. Moreover, fix $d > 0$ and faithful $d$-dimensional representations $V_i$ of each of the $H_i$. Is there a $d$-dimensional irreducible variety $X$ over $\mathbb{C}$ with a $G$ action such that there are $r$ distinct points $x_1, \dots, x_r$ with $x_i$ fixed by $H_i$ and isotropy representation given by $V_i$?
\end{problem}

Reichstein remarked that this is analogous in spirit to the Chinese Remainder Theorem and can be done if each $H_i$ is abelian; see \cite[Theorem 8.6]{RY} for details.  Moreover, when $r=1$ and $H=G$, one can simply take $X = V$, while for $r=2$ and $H_1=H_2=G$, it is an unpublished result of A. Kresch. In the special case, where $H_1,\ldots, H_r$ are the non-conjugate Sylow subgroups of $G$ (i.e., a list of Sylow subgroups for the different primes dividing $|G|$), this problem arose in the context of work on essential dimension of finite groups (see [Conjecture 11.5]\cite{DR}).

\subsection{Hunter Spink}

\begin{problem}\label{spink_fraction} Let $R$ be a ring with $m_1, \dots, m_k \in R$. Assume that, for any subset $A \subset \{1,\dots,k\}$, we have
\[ \sum_{i \in A} m_i \in R^\times. \]
Also set $a_i = m_1 x_1^i + \dots + m_k x_k^i \in R[x_1,\dots,x_k]$. What is the smallest $n$ such that there exist monic $f(z), g(z)$ with coefficients in $R[a_1,\dots,a_n]$ giving
\[ \frac{f(z)}{g(z)} = \frac{m_1}{z-x_1} + \cdots + \frac{m_k}{z-x_k}? \]
\end{problem}

For context on this problem, see the paper by Spink and Dennis Tseng \cite{spinktseng} on incidence strata of affine varieties that also outlines their conjecture of $n = 2^k+1$ to problem \ref{spink_fraction}.

\bibliographystyle{amsplain}

Algebraic Topology (math.AT); Algebraic Geometry (math.AG); Number Theory (math.NT)

Problems in Arithmetic Topology