arxiv: v1 [math.mg] 13 Jun 2016

Transcription

1 ON CONVEX SETS WITH MANY NORMAL CONES STEPHAN WEIS arxiv: v1 [math.mg] 13 Jun 2016 Abstract. We characterize convex sets of finite dimension who share properties of a linear image C of the set of positive-semidefinite n-by-n matrices of trace one. Notably, the normal cone N of every proper exposed face F of C has dim(n) linearly independent exposed extreme rays which are normal cones of C. It follows that F is the intersection of dim(n) inclusion maximal exposed faces of C with linearly independent normal vectors. One motivation for this work is to study ground state spaces. 1. Introduction The set M n of positive-semidefinite complex n-by-n matrices of trace one, called density matrices, represents the state space (normalized positive linear functionals) of an algebra of observables [1, 6]. A projection of M n, say onto a vector space X of self-adjoint matrices, is a reduction of a statistical model of quantum mechanics [20]. It is know as algebraic polar [32] (semi-definite programming), joint algebraic numerical range [29] (operator theory), which is the convex hull of the joint numerical range; we call this set convex support [42] in analogy with statistics [5]. Its geometry is a topic in operator theory [2, 24, 17, 23, 14, 12, 39] and, as further detailed below, in quantum mechanics and convex algebraic geometry. We study a convex set C, dim(c) <, not necessarily closed or bounded. An exposed face of C is defined either as or as the set of maximizers of a linear functional on C. The exposed faces of C form a lattice under the partial ordering of inclusion, their general lattice theory is understood for closed convex cones [4, 26]. Ground state spaces of operators in X, that is eigenspaces of least eigenvalues, correspond to exposed faces of the convex support (Remark 4.11). This idea reduces the dimension of some energy computations of quantum chemistry exponentially [15, 28], if the convex support is a set of marginals. However a numerical advantage is missing because the marginal problem of separating a point from a set of marginals is hard even on a quantum computer [25, 45]. Meanwhile, convex geometry [31, 10] and order theory [11] are becoming stronger methods in the field. While [11] studies inclusion minimal exposed faces and their suprema, we focus on inclusion maximal exposed faces and their infima (intersections) [43]. Our work has points of contact with the theory of affine sections of the cone of positive-semidefinite matrices and their linear images. These sets are central to convex algebraic geometry [9] because efficient algorithms exist to optimize over them [7]. Their theory includes convex duality [32], algebraic duality [35], polynomials vanishing on the boundary [38], and exposed faces [30]. The inclusion ordering of exposed faces was studied for some symmetric convex semi-algebraic sets [27, 36] Mathematics Subject Classification. primary 52A20, 52B05, secondary 81P16, 47L07, 47A12, 51D25, 14P10. Key words and phrases. normal cone, extreme ray, exposed face, coatom, joint numerical range, convex support, ground state, coorbitope.

2 2 On convex sets with many normal cones We will work with four classes of convex sets having differing degrees of richness in normal cones. The normal cone of a convex subset C R m, m N, at x C is N C (x) := {u R m y C : u,y x 0} where, is the standard inner product 1. Elements of N C (x) are called normal vectors of C at x. A face of a convex subset C R m is a convex subset of C containing every closed segment in C whose corresponding open segment it intersects. Exposed faces being faces, those faces which are not exposed are called non-exposed faces. If a face is a singleton then its element is called extreme point, exposed point, or non-exposed point in the obvious correspondence to the properties of the face. The relative interior of a convex subset C R m is the interior of C with respect to the topology of the affine hull of C. The normal cone N C (F) of C at a face F of C is well-defined as the normal cone N C (x) at any relative interior point x of F (see Section 2.2 of [37] or Section 4 of [43]). We put N C ( ) := R m. Any vector in N C (F) is called normal vector of C at F. An exposed face F {,C} of C is called proper exposed face. We call coatom 2 an inclusion maximal element of the set of exposed faces of C without C itself. Recall that the normal cone of a proper exposed face has dimension 1. Definition 1.1. We define classes of convex subsets C R m, m N, with an interior point 3 such that for every proper exposed face F of C C 0 m N C (F) has an exposed extreme ray which is a normal cone of C, C m N C (F) has dim(n C (F)) linearly independent exposed extreme rays which are normal cones of C, C m every extreme ray of N C (F) is a normal cone of C, C m every non-empty face of N C (F) is a normal cone of C. Lemma 2.7 which shows C m C m which gives (1.1) Cm 0 C m C m C m. Notably, C m is closed under linear mappings. But C0 m,c m,c m are not, which we prove for convex bodies, that is compact convex sets. This analysis will be done in Section 4 based on earlier results [42, 43, 44] and on a translation of Definition 1.1 to a polar convex body. We will also see that the inclusions (1.1) are strict for m = 3. Example 1.3 shows C2 0 C 2 while C 2 = C 2 is clear. Section 2 studies coatoms and their intersections for convex sets which may not be compact. The following global reformulation of Theorem 2.3 characterizes C m. Corollary 1.2. Let C R m, m N, be a convex subset with an interior point. Then C C m if and only if every proper exposed face F of C is the intersection of dim(n C (F)) coatoms of E C with linearly independent normal vectors. 1 All results remain valid when (R m,, ) is replaced by an arbitrary Euclidean vector space. 2 Coatom is a standard notion of partially ordered sets, see the references in Section 2. Coatoms of exposed faces of polyhedral convex sets are called facets in [16], they are facets in the sense of [46, 37], that is faces of codimension one. 3 The assumption that C has interior points is technical and could be dropped if rays were replaced with direct sums of rays plus the orthogonal complement of the affine hull of C. Our assumption implies that the normal cone of every point of C is a pointed closed convex cone. By definition [40], a convex cone is a non-empty convex subset K of R m such that αx K for all α 0 and x K. A convex cone K is pointed, if K ( K) = {0}.

3 S. Weis 3 Corollary 1.2 improves the theorem of Section of [43] whose global reformulation has the stronger hypothesis of C C m and the weaker conclusion that every proper exposed face of C is an intersection of coatoms. This conclusion is a well-known property of polytopes [46]. It is wrong for some sets of C2 0\C 2 but holds for others outside of C2 0, as Example 1.3 demonstrates. The coatoms of Corollary 1.2 are mutually distinct because the normal cones of coatoms of C Cm 0 are rays by Lemma 2.2. Further, these rays are included in N C (F), see the proof of Theorem 2.3, so d := dim(n C (F)) is maximal. Of course, if d 3 then F can be an intersection of less or more than d coatoms without the linear independence condition. 3D examples are a pyramid where the apex is the intersection of two facets but may lie on any finite number of facets, or a cone where the apex is the intersection of two surface lines but lies on a continuum of them. Example 1.3. Let conv(x) denote the convex hull of X R m. We study lens C () := {(x,y) R 2 (x± 3 2 )2 +y 2 ( 5 2 )2 }, the truncated disk C ( := {(x,y) R 2 x 2 +y 2 1,x 1 2 }, and the drop C 0> := conv({(x,y) R 2 x 2 +y 2 = 1} {(2,0)}). We havec () C 0 2 because the coatomc ± := (0,±2) has a 2D normal cone. Normal cones of coatoms of C ( are rays, so C ( C 0 2 holds. However, t ± := 1 2 (1,± 3) lies only on one coatom of C (, which is the segment [t,t + ], and so t ± is no intersection of coatoms. Sincet ± is an exposed point, Corollary 1.2 provesc ( C 2. Equivalently, C ( C 2 follows from the definition of C 2 because the 2D normal cone N C( (t ± ) has only one extreme ray which is a normal cone of C. The drop C 0> belongs to C 2 because 4 a := (2,0) is the only point of C 0> with a 2D normal cone and because the two extreme rays of N C0> (a) are normal cones of C 0>, namely at the coatoms [t ±,a]. The extreme point t ± of C 0> lies on a single coatom of C 0>, which is [t ±,a]. The contrapositive of the first proof of C ( C 2 shows that t ± is a non-exposed point of C 0>. This follows also since t ± is a tangent point from a to the unit disk. Definition 1.1 has an interpretation in terms of smoothness because a boundary point of a convex set is smooth [37] if its normal cone is a ray. Section 3 further characterizes Cm 0 in this context and explores strictly convex sets. In addition to what is stated above, we recall in Section 4 that C m includes M n and its linear images the convex support sets [43], hence all polytopes. This also holds because polars of convex support sets are spectrahedra which have no nonexposed faces. The classc m includes all polars of convex bodies without non-exposed points, hence all coorbitopes [36]. The article finishes with a discussion of 3D convex support sets of 3-by-3 matrices [39]. Acknowledgements. The author is grateful for a PNPD/CAPES scholarship of the Brazilian Ministry of Education. 4 Since C 0> is the polar of C ( which has no non-exposed points, C 0> ) C 2 follows also from Corollary 4.5(4). Further, since C 0> is the numerical range { x, x x C 3, x,x = 1} which is convex [41, 19], the inclusion C 0> C 2 ( follows also from Lemma 4.10.

4 4 On convex sets with many normal cones 2. Intersections of coatoms We study intersections of coatoms of the lattice of exposed faces, mainly in the context of the class C m. We further prove a characterization of C 0 m. A lattice is a partially ordered set where the infimum and supremum of each two elements exists. An atom in a lattice (L,,,,0) with smallest element 0 is an element x L, x 0, such that y x, y x implies y = 0 for all y L. Similarly, a coatom in a lattice (L,,,,1) with greatest element 1 is an element x L, x 1, such that y x, y x implies y = 1 for all y L. The lattice (L,,,,0) is atomistic if every element of L is the supremum of the atoms which it contains [26] (such a lattice is called atomic in [8, 46]). The lattice (L,,,,1) is coatomistic if every element is the infimum of the coatoms in which it is contained. A lattice is complete if an arbitrary subset has an infimum and a supremum. The smallest and greatest elements of a lattice, when they exist, are called improper elements, all other elements are proper elements. If x,y L and x y then we define the interval [x,y] L := {z L x z y}. Let C R m, m N, be a convex subset. We denote the set of its exposed faces by E C and the set of normal cones of faces of C by N C. Each of E C and N C is, partially ordered by inclusion, a complete lattice where the infimum is the intersection [43]. The improper elements of E C are, C and the improper elements of N C aren C ( ) = R m and N C (C), which is the orthogonal complement of the affine hull of C. By Proposition 4.7 of [43], if C is not a singleton then (2.1) N C : E C N C is an antitone lattice isomorphism from the exposed faces to the normal cones of C. We start with an observation about faces of normal cones. Recall that the positive hull of a non-empty subset X R m is pos(x) := {αx α 0,x X}. Lemma 2.1. Let C R m, m N, be a convex set and let F,G E C. If F is a proper exposed face of C and G F then N C (G) is an exposed face of N C (F). Proof: By applying a translation toc we can assume that zero is a relative interior point of F. Let x be a relative interior point of G. The equalities of normal cones N C (x) = N pos(c) (x) and N C (0) = N pos(c) (0) and the observation that N pos(c) (x) is the intersection of N pos(c) (0) = {u R m y pos(c) : u,y 0} with the orthogonal complement of the translation vector space of pos(g) are easy to prove. It is well-known (keyword conjugate face in [40]) that this intersection is an exposed face of N pos(c) (0). Since N C (F) = N C (0) and N C (G) = N C (x) the claim follows. We characterize C 0 m in terms of smoothness, as we recall later in Section 3. Lemma 2.2. Let C R m, m N, be a convex set with interior point. Then C C 0 m if and only if the normal cone of every coatom of E C is a ray. In that case (2.1) restricts to a bijection from the coatoms of E C to the normal cones which are rays. Proof: Let F E C be a proper exposed face. If we assume C Cm 0 then N C (F) contains a ray which is a normal cone of C. If F is a coatom then N C (F) is an atom by (2.1). Hence, N C (F) must be a ray itself. The converse follows from (2.1) and Lemma 2.1. Normal cones which are rays are obviously atoms of N C, so the second statement follows from the first one.

5 Corollary 1.2 is a consequence of the following statement. S. Weis 5 Theorem 2.3. Let C R m, m N, be a convex set with non-empty interior and let F E C be a proper exposed face. The following assertions are equivalent. (1) The cone N C (F) has dim(n C (F)) linearly independent exposed extreme rays which are normal cones of C. (2) The set F is the intersection of dim(n C (F)) coatoms of E C with linearly independent normal vectors. Proof: (1) = (2). The supremum K inn C of thed := dim(n C (F)) linearly independent exposed extreme rays is a normal cone included inn C (F). Lemma 2.1 shows that K is an exposed face of N C (F) hence K = N C (F), for otherwise dim(k) < d contradicts the assumption that K contains d linearly independent vectors. The rays in question are obviously atoms of N C. Hence, the antitone lattice isomorphism (2.1) shows that the corresponding exposed faces are coatoms of E C whose intersection is F. (2) = (1). This follows from the isomorphism (2.1) and from Lemma 2.1. We discuss corollaries. Let C R m, m N, be any convex subset. We call a face F of C a corner, if dim(n C (F)) = m. Every corner is an exposed face of C and a singleton, see for example Lemma 4.4 of [44]; we call its element a corner point. Corollary 2.4. If the assumptions and the equivalent statements of Theorem 2.3 hold then the following is true. (1) If F is a coatom of E C then its normal cone is a ray. (2) If dim(n C (F)) = 2 then F lies on a unique pair of coatoms of E C. (3) The exposed face F is a corner of C if and only if there exist m coatoms of E C with linearly independent normal vectors whose intersection is F. (4) The lattice [F,C] EC is coatomistic. The coatoms of [F,C] EC are the coatoms of E C which are included in [F,C] EC. Proof: Items (1) (3) follow immediately from Theorem 2.3(2). Item (4) follows from Theorem 2.3(2) and properties of intervals and coatoms. The converse of Corollary 2.4(1) is obvious from the antitone lattice isomorphism (2.1). Generalizing Corollary 2.4(4), if F is a proper exposed face of a convex subset C R m, m N, with interior point then the bijection (2.1) restricts to an antitone lattice isomorphism from the interval of exposed faces [F,C] EC to the interval of normal cones [{0},N C (F)] NC. This isomorphism is geometrically appealing when C C m where all faces of N C (F) are exposed faces by Lemma 2.1 and where the interval [{0},N C (F)] NC contains them all (except ). Before addressing the class C m we wish to clarify a subtlety. Namely, the intersection of proper exposed faces may be non-empty for some non-closed sets and is empty for all closed convex cones 5. This is not so for convex bodies. Lemma 2.5. Let C R m be a convex body with interior point. Then the intersection of coatoms of E C is empty. 5 If the intersection of coatoms of E C is non-empty then E C \ { } would be a more natural definition of the lattice of exposed faces of C.

6 6 On convex sets with many normal cones Proof: If the intersection of coatoms of E C is non-empty then by (2.1) there is a proper normal cone N N C which contains all proper normal cones. Since N is pointed some vectors of E m are no normal vectors at points of C. This can only happen when C is unbounded or not closed. Lemma 2.5 shows that Corol- Corollary 2.4(4) has two global formulations. lary 2.6(1) applies to convex bodies. Corollary 2.6. Let C C m. (1) If the intersection of coatoms of E C is empty then E C is coatomistic. (2) If the intersection of coatoms of E C is A then E C \ { } = [A,C] EC is a coatomistic lattice where the infimum is the intersection. Proof: This follows immediately from Theorem 2.3. A basic geometric idea clarifies the inclusionc m C m. We recall that Straszewsky s theorem (see for example Theorem of [37]) states that every extreme point of a convex body C is a limit of exposed points of C. Lemma 2.7. Let C R m, m N, be a convex set with non-empty interior and let F E C be a proper exposed face such that every exposed extreme ray of the normal cone N C (F) is a normal cone of C itself. Then N C (F) has dim(n C (F)) linearly independent exposed extreme rays which are normal cones. Proof: The normal cone N C (F) contains no line because C has non-empty interior. Therefore Theorem of [37] proves that N C (F) is the convex hull of its extreme rays. By applying Straszewsky s theorem to a bounded affine section of the pointed convex cone N C (F) it follows that N C (F) is the closure of the convex hull of its exposed extreme rays. Hence N C (F) has dim(n C (F)) exposed extreme rays which are linearly independent. By assumption these rays are normal cones. 3. Smooth coatoms We have seen in Lemma 2.2 that normal cones of coatoms of C C 0 m are rays. So the relative interior points of coatoms are smooth points. Now we show that C C 0 m if and only if the smooth coatoms cover the boundary of C. We use this result to characterize ovals. A sublattice [8] of a lattice (L,,, ) is a subset L L such that a,b L implies that a b and a b lie in L. Clearly, the intersection of any family of sublattices is another sublattice. Therefore the smallest sublattice of L containing a given subset X L exists, we call it the sublattice generated by X. Let C R m be a convex subset with interior points. Recall that s C is a smooth point [37] of C if the normal cone N C (s) is one-dimensional. In that case N C (s) is a ray and an atom of N C. Similarly we call F E C a smooth exposed face of C if N C (F) is a ray and we call C a smooth convex set if all proper normal cones of C are rays. Cleary, if C is a smooth convex set then C C m. The isomorphism (2.1) shows that every smooth exposed face of C is a coatom of E C. Hence, every smooth exposed point s of C is simultaneously a coatom and an atom of E C (we identify the point with its singleton). Therefore {,{s},c} is

7 S. Weis 7 a sublattice of E C and the remainder E C \ {s} is a sublattice, too. Similarly, if we define S C := {s C s is a smooth exposed point of C} then S C {,C} and E C \ S C are sublattices of E C. We define the lattice of large smooth coatoms L C as the sublattice of E C generated by {,C} and by the smooth coatoms of E C having dimension 1. Clearly, L C E C \S C holds. Lemma 3.1. Let C R m be a convex subset with interior point. Then S C and F L C \C F are disjoint. The convex set C lies in C0 m if and only if the boundary of C is the union of the smooth coatoms of E C. Proof: A smooth exposed point s of C is a coatom of E C. So s cannot lie on any other proper exposed face. Further, since L C E C \ S C we have s L C, hence s does not lie on any F L C \C. This proves the first statement. Recall that the union of proper exposed faces of C is the boundary of C (see for example Theorem 18.2 of [34] and Lemma 4.6 of [43]). Hence, the union of coatoms of E C also is the boundary of C. If C Cm 0 then Lemma 2.2 shows that every coatom of E C is smooth. Therefore, every coatom of E C lies either in S C or in L C, which proves one direction of the second statement. Conversely, let F be a proper exposed face of C and x a relative interior point of F. By assumption, the smooth coatoms of C cover the boundary of C so x lies on a smooth coatom G of E C and hence, by Theorem 18.1 of [34], the set F is a subset of G. Now Lemma 2.1 shows that N C (F) has an exposed extreme ray, namely N C (G). Since F was arbitrary this proves C Cm. 0 The equality E C = S C L C holds for C C m by Theorem 2.3, that is E C is generated by the smooth coatoms of E and by,c. 2D examples demonstrate that the assumptions cannot be weakened arbitrarily: The boundary of the lens C () C 0 2, see Example 1.3, is not covered by smooth coatoms of E C. And we have a proper inclusion S C L C E C for the truncated disk C = C ( C 0 2 \C 2. Lemma 3.1 allows us to generalize Theorem 3.1 of [39], which is a characterization of ovals, and simplify the proof. We call C strictly convex if the open segment of every closed segment in C lies in the interior of C, pseudo-oval if C is smooth and strictly convex, and oval if C is a compact pseudo-oval. Lemma 3.2. Let C R m be a convex subset with interior point. Then the following statements are equivalent. (1) the set C is strictly convex, (2) every coatom of E C is a singleton, (3) every boundary point of C is an exposed point of C. Proof: We show (1) = (2) = (3) = (1). The first implication is true because coatoms of E C lie in the boundary of C, see the second paragraph of the proof of Lemma 3.1. The first implication is true because every proper face of C lies in a proper exposed face of C, which is proved for example in Lemma 4.6 of [43]. The third implication follows from the definition of a face. Belonging tocm 0 is enough smoothness to prove a strictly convex set a pseudo-oval.

8 8 On convex sets with many normal cones Proposition 3.3. Let C C 0 m. Then C is a pseudo-oval if and only if C is strictly convex. Proof: We only need to show that every strictly convex set C Cm 0 is a pseudooval. Lemma 3.1 shows that the boundary of C is covered by smooth coatoms. The proof is completed by observing from Lemma 3.2 that every coatom of C is a singleton. Proposition 3.3 improves Theorem 3.1 of [39]. The lens C () C2 0 from Example 1.3 shows that the assumption C Cm 0 cannot be weakened arbitrarily. The next statement has a stronger assumption. The proof uses Minkowski s theorem, which states that every non-empty convex body is the convex hull of its extreme points (see for example Corollary of [37]). Lemma 3.4. Let C R m, m N, be a smooth convex body with interior point. Then C is an oval if and only if C has no non-exposed face. Proof: It is clear that an oval has no non-exposed face. Conversely, let F be any face of C. By hypothesis F is an exposed face. If F is not a singleton then Minkowski s theorem shows that F contains an extreme point x which, analogous to F, is an exposed face of K. The isomorphism (2.1) then shows that the normal cone N C (x) has at least dimension two, which contracts the smoothness of C. The analogous statement of Lemma 3.4 is wrong when C is replaced by an unbounded or non-closed convex set because of missing extreme points, as the examples {(x,y) R 2 y 0} and {(x,y) R 2 1 < x < 1, 1 < y 1} demonstrate. A characterization of smooth convex bodies is given in Corollar Convex bodies Using the notion of touching cone [37] we recall a characterization of C m and its closedness under linear maps. We assume throughout this section that K R m, m N, is a convex body including the origin 0 R m in its interior. Its polar is K := {u R m u,x 1,x K}. It is well-known [34, 37] that K is a convex body with the origin in its interior and (K ) = K. We derive an equivalent statement of Definition 1.1 in terms of K. This allows us to find a sufficient condition for K C m, to recall that convex support sets belong to C m, and it facilitates the discussion of examples. Definition 4.1. Let C R m be a convex subset. The touching cone T of C at a vector u is defined for each u R m where x x,u has a maximum on C. In this case the exposed face F := argmax x C x,u is non-empty and T is defined to be the face of the normal cone N C (F) including u in its relative interior [37]. The normal cone N C ( ) = R m is a touching cone by definition. The set of touching cones of C is denoted by T C, the set of faces of C by F C. Partially ordered by inclusion, F C andt C are complete lattices where the infimum is the intersection [43]. Every normal cone is a touching cone, N C T C, and every exposed face is a face, E C F C. We observe that C m is characterized by N C = T C and is closed under linear maps. Thus we use Theorem 7.4 of [43]:

9 S. Weis 9 Fact 4.2. Let C R m be a convex subset. Then T C is the set of non-empty faces of normal cones of C. If C has an interior point and if T 0 T C is a proper subset of R m then the interval [{0},T 0 ] TC equals {T R m T is a non-empty face of T 0 }. Example 4.8 will show that 2D projections of sets from C 3 may not lie in C0 2. This is different for sets from C m. Remark 4.3 (C m and linear images). Fact 4.2 shows that a convex subset C Rm, m N, with interior point lies in C m if and only if N C = T C. Second, the class C m is closed under projection. More precisely, a k-dimensional linear image in R k of any set from C m is either a singleton, if k = 0, or belongs to C k, if k N. Indeed, the property that all non-empty faces of normal cones are normal cones is passed from C to its linear images by Corollary 7.7 of [43]. The lattices of K and K are related by a commutative diagram [43, 44]: (4.1) F K E K = NK T K pos pos pos pos T K N K = EK F K The antitone lattice isomorphism (2.1) appears once as E K N K and once as E K N K. The positive hull operator pos defines isotone lattice isomorphisms F K T K, E K N K, E K N K, and F K T K (we set pos( ) = {0}). The map E K E K which makes the diagram commute maps F E K to its conjugate face {u K u,x = 1 for all x F}. The diagram (4.1) and Lemma 3.2 provide the following. Corollary 4.4. The convex body K is smooth if and only if K is strictly convex. If K is smooth then K C m. The diagram (4.1) allows Definition 1.1 to be reformulated in terms of the polar. This is reminiscent of the principle of duality in projective geometry. Corollary 4.5. (1)K C 0 m every proper exposed face of K contains an exposed point of K, (2)K C m every proper exposed face F of K contains dim(f)+1 affinely independent exposed points of K, (3)K C m K has no non-exposed points, (4)K C m E K = F K N K = T K. Proof: The diagram (4.1) immediately shows (1) and (2) and proves that K C m is equivalent to the statement that every face of every proper exposed face F of K is an exposed face of K. We assume the last statement to be true and show that any proper face G of K is exposed. The face G lies on a proper exposed face F of K, see for example Lemma 4.6 of [43]. Hence G is a face of F and by assumption G is an exposed face of K, which shows E K = F K. The converse is trivial. The proof of (3) is a analogous to (4) with the difference that G is now an extreme point and not a face. The condition N K = T K of (4) follows from (4.1) or, as mentioned in Remark 4.3, from Fact 4.2.

10 10 On convex sets with many normal cones We observe that Corollary 4.5(4) simplifies (4.1) to the following commutative diagram, valid for K C m. (4.2) F K E K = NK = T K pos pos pos pos T K N K = EK = F K Notably, if K C m then Minkowski s theorem shows that E K = F K is atomistic, so E K is coatomistic (compare to Corollary 2.6 for general convex sets). Let us extend Corollary 4.4 to find convex bodies of C m. This method applies to coorbitopes because the extreme points of their polars lie on a sphere [36]. Corollary 4.6. If the extreme points of K lie on the boundary of a strictly convex set then K C m. Proof: Let C be the strictly convex set whose boundary includes the extreme points of K. By Lemma 3.2 every boundary point of C is an exposed point of C. A boundary point of C which lies in K is a fortiori an exposed point of K, which therefore has no non-exposed points. Now Corollary 4.5(3) shows K C m. Two examples show that the inclusions C 3 C 3 C 3 are strict. The second example also shows that the classes Cm 0,C m,c m are not closed under linear maps. Example 4.7 (Convex hull of torus). Consider the convex hull K of the algebraic set {(x,y,z) R 3 p(x,y,z) = 0} defined by p := (x 2 +y 2 +z 2 ) 2 4(x 2 +y 2 ) which is a torus with rotation symmetry about the z-axis and self-intersection at the origin 0 R 3. The radius from 0 to the center of the torus tube and the radius of the tube are both equal one. The convex body K is smooth, so K C 3, and has the following proper exposed faces: D ± := {(x,y,±1) R 3 x 2 +y 2 1} (two disks) and exposed points (x,y,z) for x,y,z R such that p(x,y,z) = 0 and x 2 +y 2 > 1. The non-exposed points of K are ξ ± (ϕ) := (cos(ϕ),sin(ϕ),±1), ϕ [0,2π). By intersecting K with three half-spaces (ϕ 0 = 0,ϕ 1 = 2π,ϕ 3 2 = 4 π) we define 3 L := {(x,y,z) K xcos(ϕ i )+ysin(ϕ i ) 1,i = 0,1,2}. The convex body L has five 2D exposed faces, namely D ± and the exposed faces in the boundaries of the three half-spaces. The latter three exposed faces of L contain no non-exposed points of L. The disk D ± contains three exposed points ξ ± (ϕ 1 ), ξ ± (ϕ 2 ), ξ ± (ϕ 3 ) of L while the remaining exposed points of D ± are nonexposed points of L. The convex body L has no 1D exposed faces. This discussion of exposed points of L and Corollary 4.5(2),(3) show L C 3 \C 3. Example 4.8 (Convex hull of unit ball and lens). Consider the lens C () from Example 1.3 and its embedding into R 3 defined by C () := C () {0} = {(x,y,0) R 3 (x,y) C () }.

11 S. Weis 11 We define K := conv( C () B) where B is the Euclidean unit ball of R 3. The polar of K is K = conv( C () B) = C () B by Corollary of [34], while C () = (C() {0}) = C () R and B = B. Let D ± := {(x,y) R 2 (x± 3 2 )2 +y 2 ( 5 2 )2 }. Then the polar of C () = D D + is, again by Corollary of [34], the convex hull C () = (D D + ) = conv(d D + ) and finally (4.3) K = conv(d D +) R B. Equation (4.3) shows clearly that the extreme points of K lie on the boundary of the unit ball B. So Corollary 4.6 proves K C 3. We use Theorem 5.23 and Algorithm 5.1 of Chapter 5 of [9] to compute the polar of D ±, D± = {(x,y) R (8x 3)2 +(2y) 2 1}. Clearly conv(d D + ) has the non-exposed points (σ3,τ 1 ) for signs σ,τ {+, }. 8 2 The two ellipses D± lie in the unit disk, so the segments [(σ 3,τ 1 8 2, 39 8 ),(σ3,τ 1 8 2,+ 39 )], σ,τ {+, } 8 are non-exposed faces of K by equation (4.3). Now Corollary 4.5(4) shows K C 3. The projection of K onto the x-y-plane is C () which does not belong to C2. 0 Therefore the classes Cm 0, C m, and C m are not closed under linear maps, unlike C m as we recalled in Remark 4.3. We discuss convex support sets. Definition 4.9. Let F = (F 1,...,F m ) be a list of complex hermitian n-by-n matrices for m,n N. We define the convex support of F to be cs(f) := { ρ,f i m i=1 ρ M n} where a,b = tr(a b) is the Hilbert-Schmidt inner product of n-by-n matrices a,b, andm n is the state space introduced in the introduction. The joint numerical range of F is defined by W(F) := { x,f i (x) m i=1 x,x = 1,x Cn } where x,y is the inner product of vectors x,y C n. We define a spectrahedron S(F) := {x R m 1+x 1 F 1 + +x m F m 0} where a 0 means that a is positive semi-definite and 1 is the n-by-n identity matrix. Recall that every polytope is a convex support set. If m,n R then the polytope in R m with n extreme points p j = p j (i) m i=1 Rm, j = 1,...,n, is the convex support of the diagonal matrices F i = (p j (i)) n j=1, i = 1,...,m. Notice that the m-by-nmatrix with rows F i is has columns p j. A less detailed proof of the following result was given in Fact 3.2 of [39]. Lemma Let F = (F 1,...,F m ) be a list of complex hermitian n-by-n matrices for m,n N such that cs(f) contains an interior point. Then cs(f) C m.

12 12 On convex sets with many normal cones Proof: It is well-known [29, 18, 39] thatcs(f) is the convex hull ofw(f). Further, S(F) = cs(f) holds, see Section 2 of [13]. By assumption cs(f) has an interior point which we can take the origin, after applying a translation. Then the theory of polarity provides cs(f) = S(F). Every face of a spectrahedron is an exposed face by Corollary 1 of [32]. Therefore, if we put K := cs(f) then K = S(F) satisfies E K = F K and Corollary 4.5(4) shows K C m. The equation S(F) = cs(f) has a longer history, see for example Section 3 of [32], Section 5.5 of Chapter 5 of [9], or Section 2.4 of [42]. A second proof of Lemma 4.10 is given in Fact 3.2 of [39] based on the condition N cs(f) = T cs(f) of Corollary 4.5(4), which follows from N Mn = T Mn by projecting M n to cs(f), using Remark 4.3. We point out a connection of exposed faces to ground state spaces. Remark It is well-known that the exposed face of cs(f) with (inner) normal vector u R m is argmin{ x,u x cs(f)} = { ρ,f i m i=1 ρ M n,ρ = P 0 ρp 0 } where P 0 is the ground state projection of u 1 F 1 + +u m F m, see for example [42], that is the orthogonal projection onto the ground state space. In fact, there is a lattice isomorphism between exposed faces of cs(f) and ground state projections of hermitian matrices in the real span of F 1,...,F m. We discuss 3D convex support sets of 3-by-3 matrices. Example Let C R 3 be a 3D convex support set of 3-by-3 matrices. Lemma 4.2 of [39] shows that every proper face F of C is a singleton, a segment or a filled ellipse. If F is not a singleton then F is an exposed face of C and a coatom of E C. We call F a large coatom. Let s denote the number of large coatoms which are segments and e the number of ellipses. There are s+e large coatoms in E C. Let us first discuss the normal cones of all boundary points. Since C C 3 holds by Lemma 4.10 we have C C3 0 by (1.1). Thus either Lemma 2.2 or Corollary 2.4(1) proves that relative interior points of coatoms of E C are smooth points, that is their normal cones are rays. Clearly the coatoms cover the boundary C of C (see also Lemma 3.1 about the lattice of large smooth coatoms). If F is a large coatom then each proper face G of F is an extreme point of F, say G = {x}, because F is a segment or ellipse. If x is a non-exposed point of C then F is the smallest exposed face of C containing x, so x is a smooth point because N C (x) = N C (F) holds by Lemma 4.6 of [43]. If x is an exposed point of C then the antitone lattice isomorphism (2.1) shows dim(n C (x)) > dim(n C (F)) = 1 and Corollary 1.2 implies thatxis the intersection ofdim(n C (x)) > 1 coatoms ofe C with linearly independent normal vectors. Let n C C denote the subset of boundary points which are not smooth. Summarizing the preceding paragraph, every x n C is an exposed point of C which is the intersection of dim(n C (x)) large coatoms with linearly independent normal vectors. Furthermore C \ n C is a C 1 -submanifold of R 3 (continuously differentiable). Indeed, we will see that n C is closed so we can mimic the proof of Theorem of [37] which asserts that if all boundary points of a convex body in R m are smooth then the boundary is a C 1 -submanifold of R m, m N.

13 S. Weis 13 The classification [39] of C is very simple because large coatoms intersect mutually (this is wrong for 4-by-4 matrices): IfC has a corner pointa, that isdim(n C (a)) = 3, then either C is the convex hull of an ellipsoid and of a which lies outside of the ellipsoid, or C is the convex hull of an ellipse and of a which lies outside of the affine hull of the ellipse. In the first case n C = {a} and (s,e) = (,0). In the second case n C is the union of {a} with the ellipse and (s,e) = (,1). If C has no corner points then any three mutually distinct coatoms have an empty intersection, by (2.1). As large coatoms do intersect mutually, a complete graph embeds into their union with one node on each large coatom and with one edge passing through each non-smooth point. So the complete graph has s+e 4 nodes [33] and n C = ( ) s+e 2. As already observed in Corollar 2.4(2), each point x n C lies on exactly two large coatoms whose intersection is x. After excluding the case s 2, see [39], it follows that (s,e) belongs to {(0,i) i = 0,1,2,3,4} or to {(1,i) i = 0,1,2}. References [1] E. M. Alfsen and F. W. Shultz (2001) State Spaces of Operator Algebras: Basic Theory, Orientations, and C*-Products, Boston: Birkhäuser [2] Y. H. Au-Yeung and Y. T. Poon (1979) A remark on the convexity and positive definiteness concerning Hermitian matrices, Southeast Asian Bull Math [3] G. P. Barker (1973) The lattice of faces of a finite dimensional cone, Linear Algebra Appl [4] G. P. Barker (1978) Faces and duality in convex cones, Linear Multilinear A [5] O. Barndorff-Nielsen (1978) Information and Exponential Families in Statistical Theory, Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd [6] I. Bengtsson and K. Życzkowski (2006) Geometry of Quantum States, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press [7] A. Ben-Tal and A. Nemirovski (2001) Lectures on Modern Convex Optimization: Analysis, Algorithms, and Engineering Applications, Philadelphia, PA: SIAM [8] G. Birkhoff (1967) Lattice Theory, 3rd ed., Providence, R.I.: AMS [9] G. Blekherman, P. Parrilo, and R. Thomas (2013) Semidefinite Optimization and Convex Algebraic Geometry, MOS-SIAM series on optimization, Philadelphia: SIAM [10] J. Chen, Z. Ji, M. B. Ruskai, B. Zeng, and D.-L. Zhou (2012) Comment on some results of Erdahl and the convex structure of reduced density matrices, J Math Phys [11] J. Chen, Z. Ji, D. Kribs, Z. Wei, and B. Zeng (2012) Ground-state spaces of frustration-free Hamiltonians, J Math Phys [12] W.-S. Cheung, X. Liu, and T.-Y. Tam (2011) Multiplicities, boundary points, and joint numerical ranges, Oper Matrices [13] M.-T. Chien and H. Nakazato (2009) Flat portions on the boundary of the Davis-Wielandt shell of 3-by-3 matrices, Linear Algebra Appl [14] M.-T. Chien and H. Nakazato (2010) Joint numerical range and its generating hypersurface, Linear Algebra Appl [15] R. M. Erdahl (1972) The convex structure of the set of N-representable reduced 2-matrices, J Math Phys [16] B. Grünbaum (2003) Convex Polytopes, 2nd ed., New York: Springer [17] E. Gutkin, E. A. Jonckheere, and M. Karow (2004) Convexity of the joint numerical range: topological and differential geometric viewpoints, Linear Algebra Appl [18] E. Gutkin and K. Życzkowski (2013) Joint numerical ranges, quantum maps, and joint numerical shadows, Linear Algebra Appl [19] F. Hausdorff (1919) Der Wertvorrat einer Bilinearform, Math Z [20] A. Holevo (2011) Probabilistic and Statistical Aspects of Quantum Theory, 2nd edition, Pisa: Edizioni della Normale [21] R. Kippenhahn (1951) Über den Wertevorrat einer Matrix, Math Nachr

14 14 On convex sets with many normal cones [22] D. S. Keeler, L. Rodman, and I. M. Spitkovsky (1997) The numerical range of 3 3 matrices, Lin Alg Appl [23] N. Krupnik and I. M. Spitkovsky (2006) Sets of matrices with given joint numerical range, Linear Algebra Appl [24] C.-K. Li and Y.-T. Poon (2000) Convexity of the joint numerical range, SIAM J Matrix Anal A [25] Y.-K. Liu (2006) Consistency of local density matrices is QMA-complete, in Approximation, Randomization, and Combinatorial Optimization. Algorithms and Techniques, vol. 4110, J. Díaz, K. Jansen, J. D. P. Rolim, and U. Zwick, Eds., Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, [26] R. Loewy and B.-S. Tam (1986) Complementation in the face lattice of a proper cone, Linear Algebra Appl [27] M. Longinetti, L. Sgheri, and F. Sottile (2010) Convex hulls of orbits and orientations of a moving protein domain, Discrete Comput Geom [28] D. A. Mazziotti (2012) Structure of Fermionic density matrices: Complete N-representability conditions, Phys Rev Lett [29] V. Müller (2010) The joint essential numerical range, compact perturbations, and the Olsen problem, Stud Math [30] T. Netzer, D. Plaumann, and M. Schweighofer (2010) Exposed faces of semidefinitely representable sets, SIAM J Optimiz [31] S. A. Ocko, X. Chen, B. Zeng, B. Yoshida, Z. Ji, M. B. Ruskai, and I. L. Chuang (2011) Quantum codes give counterexamples to the unique preimage conjecture of the N-representability problem, Phys Rev Lett [32] M. Ramana and A. J. Goldman (1995) Some geometric results in semidefinite programming, J Global Optim [33] G. Ringel and J. W. T. Youngs (1968) Solution of the Heawood map-coloring problem, P Natl Acad Sci USA [34] R. T. Rockafellar (1970) Convex Analysis, Princeton: Princeton University Press [35] P. Rostalski and B. Sturmfels (2013) Dualities, Chapter 5 of [9], [36] R. Sanyal, F. Sottile, and B. Sturmfels (2011) Orbitopes, Mathematika [37] R. Schneider (2014) Convex bodies: the Brunn-Minkowski theory, 2nd ed., New York: Cambridge University Press [38] R. Sinn and B. Sturmfels (2015) Generic spectrahedral shadows, SIAM J Optimiz [39] K. Szymański, S. Weis, and K. Życzkowski (submitted) Classification of joint numerical ranges of three hermitian matrices of size three, arxiv: [math.fa] [40] B.-S. Tam (1985) On the duality operator of a convex cone, Lin Alg Appl [41] O. Toeplitz (1918) Das algebraische Analogon zu einem Satze von Fejér, Math Z [42] S. Weis (2011) Quantum convex support, Linear Algebra Appl [43] S. Weis (2012) A note on touching cones and faces, J Convex Anal [44] S. Weis (2012) Duality of non-exposed faces, J Convex Anal [45] B. Zeng, X. Chen, D.-L. Zhou, and X.-G. Wen (2015) Quantum Information Meets Quantum Matter From Quantum Entanglement to Topological Phase in Many-Body Systems, arxiv: [cond-mat.str-el] [46] G. M. Ziegler (1995) Lectures on Polytopes, New York: Springer-Verlag Stephan Weis Departamento de Matemática Instituto de Matemática, Estatística e Computação Científica Universidade Estadual de Campinas Rua Sérgio Buarque de Holanda, 651 Campinas-SP, CEP Brazil maths@stephan-weis.info