Geodesic in the Gromov-Hausdorff class for which the real line is an interior point

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2510.22707
• Title: Geodesic in the Gromov-Hausdorff class for which the real line is an interior point
• Author: Ivan N. Mikhailov
• Classification: math.MG (Metric Geometry)
• Publication Date: October 26, 2025
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.22707

Abstract

This paper constructs a geodesic in the Gromov-Hausdorff class such that the real line with its natural metric becomes an interior point of this geodesic. Such a construction is impossible in the cloud of bounded metric spaces, since bounded spaces satisfy the ultrametric inequality.

Research Background and Motivation

Problem to be Solved

This paper investigates the construction of geodesics in the Gromov-Hausdorff class, particularly seeking a geodesic such that the real line ℝ becomes an interior point (i.e., not an endpoint).

Significance of the Problem

1. Understanding Geometric Structure: The Gromov-Hausdorff distance is a core concept in metric space theory. Understanding the structure of geodesics is crucial for grasping the geometric properties of the entire space.
2. Contractibility of Moduli Spaces: Gromov mentioned in 3 that these moduli spaces (clouds) are complete and contractible, but for unbounded metric spaces, contractibility remains an open problem. The construction of geodesics is a key tool for studying contractibility.
3. Pathological Homotopy Maps: For unbounded spaces, the natural homotopy map (X, d_X) → (X, λd_X) behaves poorly:
   • There exist metric spaces X such that d_GH(X, λX) = ∞ (e.g., the geometric series X = {3^n : n ∈ ℕ} has d_GH(X, 2X) = ∞)
   • Even in multiplicatively invariant clouds, homotopy maps may be discontinuous (e.g., d_GH(ℤn, λℤn) ≥ 1/2 for all λ > 1)

Limitations of Existing Methods

1. Results on Bounded Spaces Cannot be Generalized: In the cloud Δ₁ of bounded metric spaces, the curve λX is a geodesic, but this construction cannot be extended to unbounded spaces.
2. Restrictions of General Position Spaces: Reference 6 constructed a class of "general position" metric spaces that are dense in the Gromov-Hausdorff class, and any two such spaces can be connected by linear geodesics. However, it remains unknown whether any two spaces with finite GH distance can be connected by a geodesic.
3. Limitations of Existing Geodesic Constructions: References 4 and 5 provide examples of geodesics in the cloud of the real line, but none successfully construct a geodesic for which ℝ is an interior point.

Research Motivation

Constructing a geodesic for which ℝ is an interior point is impossible in bounded spaces due to the ultrametric inequality. Therefore, this construction reveals the essential geometric differences between unbounded and bounded spaces.

Core Contributions

1. Construction of Novel Geodesic: First construction of a geodesic in the Gromov-Hausdorff class for which the real line ℝ is an interior point.
2. Proof of Geodesic Property: Rigorous proof that the constructed curve is indeed a geodesic (shortest curve), with exact GH distances computed between arbitrary points on the curve.
3. Revelation of Geometric Differences: This construction clearly demonstrates the geometric structural differences between clouds of bounded and unbounded metric spaces.
4. Technical Innovation: Development of new techniques based on correspondence relations and graph-theoretic methods to estimate lower bounds for GH distances.

Detailed Methodology

Task Definition

Input: A bounded, path-connected metric space X with diameter 1, parameter δ ∈ (0, 1/2)

Output: A continuous curve composed of two parts:

• First part: Z_t = ∪_{n∈ℤ}n-t, n+t ⊂ ℝ, parameter t ∈ 1/2 - δ, 1/2
• Second part: R_d = ℝ ×_{ℓ₁} (dX), parameter d ∈ 0, δ

Goal: Prove that this curve is a geodesic in the Gromov-Hausdorff class, and that ℝ = Z_{1/2} = R_0 is its interior point.

Construction Details

First Part: The Z_t Family

Z_t is a closed subset of the real line ℝ, consisting of infinitely many intervals n-t, n+t centered at integers.

• When t = 1/2 - δ, adjacent intervals are just separated
• As t increases to 1/2, adjacent intervals begin to overlap
• When t = 1/2, Z_{1/2} = ℝ

This family forms a continuous transition from a discrete structure to the complete real line.

Second Part: The R_d Family

R_d = ℝ ×_{ℓ₁} (dX) is the ℓ₁-product of ℝ with the scaled space dX, where:

• dX denotes the space X with metric multiplied by d
• The ℓ₁-metric is defined as: d_{ℝ×_{ℓ₁}Y}((x,y), (x',y')) = d_ℝ(x,x') + d_Y(y,y')
• When d = 0, R_0 ≅ ℝ
• When d = δ, R_δ = ℝ ×_{ℓ₁} (δX)

Gluing Method

At t = 1/2 (i.e., Z_{1/2} = ℝ) and d = 0 (i.e., R_0 = ℝ), the two curves are glued together through the common point ℝ, forming a complete geodesic.

Key Lemmas

Lemma 1: d_GH(R_{d₁}, R_{d₂}) = |d₁ - d₂|/2

• Directly follows from Theorem 3

Lemma 2: d_GH(Z_{t₁}, Z_{t₂}) = |t₁ - t₂|

• Follows from Corollary 1 (regular Hausdorff geodesic theory)

Lemma 3 (Core): d_GH(Z_t, R_d) = d/2 + 1/2 - t

• This is the key to connecting the two families of spaces and proving that the glued curve is indeed a geodesic

Technical Innovations

1. Graph-Theoretic Analysis of Correspondences

When proving Lemma 3, the author introduces a clever graph-theoretic method:

• For each interval I_n = n-t, n+t in Z_t, define vertex v_n
• Define A_n = R(I_n) as the image of I_n under the correspondence R
• Connect v_n and v_m when d(A_n, A_m) = 0

Lemma 4: The graph G is connected

• The proof utilizes the path-connectedness of R_d
• Connectivity of the graph is established through analysis of preimages of continuous curves

2. Adjacency Constraints

It is proven that in graph G, v_n and v_m are adjacent if and only if |n-m| = 1:

• If |n-m| > 1 and they are adjacent, distance estimates lead to a contradiction
• This constraint is fundamental for subsequent lower bound estimates

3. Projection Coverage

Lemma 5: For any n ∈ ℤ and x ∈ dX, we have A_n ∩ (ℝ × {x}) ≠ ∅

• That is, each A_n covers the entire dX in the second coordinate
• The proof uses proof by contradiction, leveraging path-connectedness and graph structure

4. Diameter Estimation Technique

By selecting two points x and x' in dX with distance close to the diameter, the author analyzes their corresponding points' projections in A_n:

• Define key points A, B, C, D as boundary points of specific projections
• Through refined coordinate difference estimation, obtain |AB| + |CD| < 2(1-ε+ε')
• Using summation techniques and limiting arguments, derive a contradiction

Experimental Setup

Note: This is a pure mathematics theoretical paper containing no numerical or computational experiments. All results are rigorous mathematical proofs.

Theoretical Verification Framework

• Foundational Theory: Gromov-Hausdorff distance theory, correspondence theory
• Known Results: Utilizes Theorem 3 and Corollary 1 as foundations
• Proof Strategy: Combines upper bounds from triangle inequality with lower bounds from correspondence analysis

Experimental Results

Main Theorem

Theorem 5: By gluing (and reparametrizing) Z_t (t ∈ 1/2-δ, 1/2) and R_d (d ∈ 0, δ), we obtain a shortest curve in the Gromov-Hausdorff class, where ℝ is an interior point.

Distance Formulas

Distances between arbitrary points on the complete geodesic:

• d_GH(Z_{t₁}, Z_{t₂}) = |t₁ - t₂|, for t₁, t₂ ∈ 1/2-δ, 1/2
• d_GH(R_{d₁}, R_{d₂}) = |d₁ - d₂|/2, for d₁, d₂ ∈ 0, δ
• d_GH(Z_t, R_d) = d/2 + 1/2 - t

Geodesic Verification

The geodesic property is verified through the triangle inequality: for three points on the curve, the distance along the curve equals the GH distance, confirming that the curve is geodesic.

For example:

• d_GH(Z_{1/2-δ}, ℝ) = d_GH(Z_{1/2-δ}, Z_{1/2}) = δ
• d_GH(ℝ, R_δ) = δ/2
• d_GH(Z_{1/2-δ}, R_δ) = d_GH(Z_{1/2-δ}, ℝ) + d_GH(ℝ, R_δ) = δ + δ/2

Interior Point Property

ℝ = Z_{1/2} = R_0 is simultaneously an endpoint of both curves, thus becoming an interior point in the glued curve. This is the core result of the paper.

Related Work

Foundations of Gromov-Hausdorff Theory

1. Gromov (1999) 3: Introduced the concept of moduli spaces, noting that these spaces are complete and contractible (verified for bounded spaces; remains open for unbounded spaces).
2. Burago, Burago, Ivanov (2001) 2: Systematically presented fundamental properties of GH distance, including correspondence theory (Proposition 1).

Cloud Theory

3. Bogatyi, Tuzhilin (2021) 1:
   • Introduced NBG set theory framework for handling set-theoretic issues in GH classes
   • Verified completeness of each cloud
   • Discovered pathological phenomena: there exist X such that d_GH(X, λX) = ∞
4. Mikhailov (2025) 4:
   • Proved d_GH(ℤn, λℤn) ≥ 1/2 for all λ > 1
   • Constructed new geodesic families R ×_{ℓ₁} (tX) (the R_d family used in this paper)

Geodesic Constructions

5. Ivanov, Mikhailov, Tuzhilin (2024) 5:
   • Developed regular Hausdorff geodesic theory
   • Proved that in metric trees, regular Hausdorff geodesics are shortest curves in GH classes
   • The Z_t family in this paper utilizes these results
6. Vihrov (2023) 6:
   • Constructed a class of "general position" metric spaces
   • Proved this class is dense in GH classes
   • Any two points in this class can be connected by linear geodesics
   • However, geodesic existence in the general case remains unresolved

Positioning of This Work

This paper combines techniques from 4 and 5, creatively gluing two different geodesic families to obtain new geometric phenomena. It is the first construction of a geodesic for which ℝ is an interior point, filling an important gap in understanding the geometry of unbounded spaces.

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. Existence Result: First proof that there exists a geodesic in the Gromov-Hausdorff class for which the real line ℝ is an interior point rather than an endpoint.
2. Geometric Differences: This result clearly demonstrates the essential geometric differences between clouds of bounded and unbounded metric spaces—in bounded space clouds, such construction is impossible due to the ultrametric inequality.
3. Technical Contribution: Develops new techniques based on correspondence relations and graph theory for precise computation of GH distances.

Limitations

1. Specificity of Construction: The construction depends on specific space families (Z_t and R_d). It is unclear whether other types of geodesics exist for which ℝ is an interior point.
2. Parameter Restrictions: The requirement δ < 1/2 for validity of the construction; the geometric significance of this restriction remains unclear.
3. Generalization Problems: The construction heavily depends on special properties of ℝ (one-dimensional, complete, path-connected, etc.). Generalization to other unbounded spaces remains challenging.
4. Geodesic Uniqueness: The paper does not discuss whether geodesics connecting given points are unique.

Future Directions

1. General Geodesic Existence: Can one prove that any two metric spaces with finite GH distance can be connected by a geodesic?
2. Contractibility of Clouds: Utilize geodesic constructions to study contractibility of clouds of unbounded spaces.
3. Interior Points of Other Spaces: Can one find geodesics for which other important spaces (such as ℤ, ℚ, etc.) are interior points?
4. Higher-Dimensional Generalization: Can one construct geodesic "surfaces" or higher-dimensional geodesic submanifolds?
5. Computational Methods: Develop algorithms for practical computation of GH distances and construction of geodesics.

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Theoretical Innovation

• Novel Result: First solution to the problem of making ℝ an interior point of a geodesic, representing a new phenomenon in GH geometry
• Technical Breakthrough: Cleverly combines two known geodesic construction methods to create new geometric objects
• Deep Insight: Reveals essential geometric differences between bounded and unbounded spaces

2. Rigor of Proof

• Complete Argument Chain: From basic lemmas to main theorem, the logic is rigorous
• Refined Estimates: The proof of Lemma 3 demonstrates high technical skill, obtaining precise results through multi-layered estimates and limiting arguments
• Innovative Use of Graph Theory: Organically combines topological and combinatorial methods

3. Clarity of Exposition

• Clear Structure: From preliminaries to main theorem, well-organized hierarchy
• Standard Notation: Uses standard metric geometry notation
• Lemma Decomposition: Complex proofs are decomposed into understandable lemmas

4. Theoretical Value

• Fills a Gap: Addresses an important gap in the study of GH geometry of unbounded spaces
• Methodological Contribution: Provides new tools and techniques for studying GH geodesics

Weaknesses

1. Limitations of Construction

• Excessive Specificity: The construction heavily depends on properties of ℝ and specific space families, limiting generalizability
• Lack of Systematicity: No general method or criterion for constructing such geodesics is provided

2. Geometric Intuition

• Difficulty of Visualization: Although the proof is rigorous, it lacks geometric intuition explaining why this gluing produces a geodesic
• Parameter Choice: The choice of δ appears arbitrary, lacking geometric explanation

3. Completeness of Results

• Uniqueness Not Discussed: The paper does not address whether this geodesic is unique
• Optimality Unknown: Whether "better" geodesics exist for which ℝ is an interior point
• Generalization Problems Remain Open: No discussion of possibilities for generalization to other spaces

4. Practical Prospects

• Limited Utility: As a pure theoretical result, direct applications are difficult to foresee in the short term
• Computational Complexity: Practical computation of these GH distances may be extremely difficult

Impact

Contribution to the Field

1. Theoretical Breakthrough: An important step forward in foundational research of GH geometry
2. Technical Demonstration: Demonstrates effective techniques for studying GH geometry of unbounded spaces
3. Inspirational Value: May inspire further research in geodesic constructions and cloud geometry

Practical Value

• Short-term: Primarily theoretical value, laying foundation for further research
• Long-term: May find applications in shape space and moduli space theory

Reproducibility

• Theoretical Verifiability: Complete proofs can be independently verified
• Computational Implementation: In principle, specific cases can be numerically verified, though computing GH distances itself is difficult

Applicable Scenarios

1. Theoretical Research

• GH Geometry: Study of topological and geometric properties of GH classes
• Moduli Space Theory: Understanding the structure of moduli spaces of metric spaces
• Contractibility Problems: Provides tools for studying contractibility of clouds

2. Related Fields

• Shape Analysis: May provide insights for geodesic research in shape spaces
• Optimal Transport: Has certain connections with Wasserstein geometry
• Topological Data Analysis: Understanding continuous deformations of metric spaces

3. Educational Value

• Graduate Education: Excellent case study for advanced metric geometry courses
• Methodological Demonstration: Shows how to combine multiple techniques to solve complex problems

Key References

1 S. A. Bogatyi, A. A. Tuzhilin, Gromov–Hausdorff class: its completeness and cloud geometry, arXiv:2110.06101, 2021.

• Establishes NBG set theory framework for cloud theory

2 D. Burago, Yu. Burago, S. Ivanov, A Course in Metric Geometry, Graduate Studies in Mathematics 33, AMS, 2001.

• Classical textbook on metric geometry providing foundational theory

3 M. Gromov, Metric structures for Riemannian and non-Riemannian spaces, Birkhäuser (1999).

• Original source for GH distance

4 I. Mikhailov, New geodesic lines in the Gromov–Hausdorff class lying in the cloud of the real line, Chebyshevskii Sbornik, 2025.

• Provides construction of the R_d family

5 A. O. Ivanov, I. N. Mikhailov, A. A. Tuzhilin, Gromov–Hausdorff geometry of metric trees, arXiv:2412.18888, 2024.

• Provides regular Hausdorff geodesic theory supporting geodesic property of Z_t family

Overall Assessment: This is a high-quality theoretical mathematics paper achieving original breakthroughs in the important field of Gromov-Hausdorff geometry. The proof techniques are sophisticated, and the results are novel with significant theoretical value. While limitations exist regarding generalizability and applicability, as foundational theoretical research, it provides important insights for understanding GH geometry of unbounded metric spaces and merits the attention of researchers in this field.