Metric function composed with concave function

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around proving that the composition of a metric function with an increasing, concave function results in a metric. Participants focus on demonstrating the triangle inequality as the primary challenge in this proof.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • One participant states the problem of proving that f∘d is a metric, emphasizing the difficulty lies in the triangle inequality.
  • Another participant suggests starting with the inequality f(tx) ≥ tf(x) as a hint for the proof.
  • A participant describes their struggle with manipulating the inequalities involving f and d, expressing frustration at not being able to "free" the d's from the function.
  • Some participants discuss their attempts to apply the hint but find that their calculations do not yield useful results.
  • One participant confirms they have tried using the hint but did not find it helpful in their proof attempts.
  • Another participant proposes a new approach involving a specific equation to apply the hint with fractions, suggesting a different angle to tackle the problem.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various approaches and challenges in proving the statement, indicating that there is no consensus on the best method to proceed or on the correctness of the attempted proofs.

Contextual Notes

Participants have not resolved the mathematical steps necessary to prove the triangle inequality, and there are unresolved assumptions regarding the properties of the function f and its application to the metric space.

shoescreen
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I have been reading about metric spaces and came across an elementary property that I am having difficulty proving. A quick search on these forums and google has also failed.

Given a metric space with distance function d, and an increasing, concave function f:\mathbb{R} \rightarrow \mathbb{R} so that f(0)=0, show that f\circ d is a metric.

Of course, only the triangle inequality is nontrivial.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hint: First show that f(tx) >= tf(x).
 
I have been struggling with this problem all day so I described it in a google search and found this forum.

I have that f(d(x,y)) <= f(d(x,z)+d(z,y)) but I hit a brick wall when I try to "free" the d's out of the function, i.e. I get for example that f(d(x,z)+d(z,y)) >= (d(x,z)+d(z,y))*f(1) =d(x,z)*f(1) + d(z,y) * f(1) <=f(d(x,z)+f(d(z,y)), but that's worthless because the inequalities go back and forth.

I also tried putting f(d(x,z)+d(z,y)) = f((a+b)(d(x,z)+d(z,y))) = f(a*(d(x,z)+d(z,y))+b*(d(x,z)+d(z,y))) >= f(a*d(x,z)+b*d(z,y)) >= a*f(d(x,z)) + b*f(d(z,y)) but that doesn't give me anything useful.

Can anyone give another tip how I should be thinking about this problem?
 
trickycheese1 said:
I have been struggling with this problem all day so I described it in a google search and found this forum.

I have that f(d(x,y)) <= f(d(x,z)+d(z,y)) but I hit a brick wall when I try to "free" the d's out of the function, i.e. I get for example that f(d(x,z)+d(z,y)) >= (d(x,z)+d(z,y))*f(1) =d(x,z)*f(1) + d(z,y) * f(1) <=f(d(x,z)+f(d(z,y)), but that's worthless because the inequalities go back and forth.

I also tried putting f(d(x,z)+d(z,y)) = f((a+b)(d(x,z)+d(z,y))) = f(a*(d(x,z)+d(z,y))+b*(d(x,z)+d(z,y))) >= f(a*d(x,z)+b*d(z,y)) >= a*f(d(x,z)) + b*f(d(z,y)) but that doesn't give me anything useful.

Can anyone give another tip how I should be thinking about this problem?

Did you first show that mathman's hint is correct??
 
micromass said:
Did you first show that mathman's hint is correct??

Yes, I put y=0 in the equation f(ax + by) >= af(x) + bf(y), and in my calculations I tried to apply the hint but it didn't get me anywhere.
 
Now write

f(a)+f(b)=f\left((a+b)\frac{a}{a+b}\right)+f\left((a+b)\frac{b}{a+b}\right)

Apply the hint with t = the fractions.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K