Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b6zl4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-06T15:04:05.830Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

CONTINUOUS PIECEWISE LINEAR FUNCTIONS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 December 2005

CHARALAMBOS D. ALIPRANTIS
Affiliation:
Purdue University
DAVID HARRIS
Affiliation:
The University of Melbourne
RABEE TOURKY
Affiliation:
Purdue University and The University of Melbourne
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The paper studies the function space of continuous piecewise linear functions in the space of continuous functions on the m-dimensional Euclidean space. It also studies the special case of one dimensional continuous piecewise linear functions. The study is based on the theory of Riesz spaces that has many applications in economics. The work also provides the mathematical background to its sister paper Aliprantis, Harris, and Tourky (2006), in which we estimate multivariate continuous piecewise linear regressions by means of Riesz estimators, that is, by estimators of the the Boolean form

where X=(X1, X2, …, Xm) is some random vector, {Ej}jJ is a finite family of finite sets.

Type
MD SURVEY
Copyright
© 2006 Cambridge University Press

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this paper is twofold: first, to study the function space of continuous piecewise linear functions in the space of continuous functions; and second, to provide the necessary mathematical background to our paper, Aliprantis, Harris, and Tourky (2006), which studies statistical estimators that we dub Riesz estimators. In that paper, we envisage a situation in which we seek to estimate a random variable Y based on some observed random vector X=(X1, X2, …, Xm) using estimators of the Boolean form:

In this equation, each

is an affine function of the form fi(x)=ai·xi, where aiRm and αiR. Furthermore, {Ej}jJ is a finite family of finite sets and ∨ and ∧ are the vector lattice operations almost sure supremum and almost sure infimum, respectively.

One application of Riesz estimators is the parametric estimation of continuous piecewise linear functions from data. That is, a situation in which the conditional expectations E(Yt|Xt) is equal to fXt, where the function

is a continuous function that agrees with a finite number of affine functions. In other words, the estimated function is continuous and there exist regions S1, S2, …, SpRm and parameters β1, β2, …, βpRm+1 such that (in matrix notation)

In this paper, we explore in a deterministic setting the relationship between continuous piecewise linear functions that induces the functional form ([sstarf ]) and functions that are Max-Min of a finite number of affine functions that induce the form

. We also study in a deterministic setting the very special case of one-dimensional piecewise linear functions.

We briefly summarize the work in the present paper: we denote the function space of affine functions from Rm to R by Aff. A continuous piecewise linear function is a continuous function from

that agrees with a finite number of affine functions f1, f2, …, fp. These affine functions are the components of the piecewise linear function. Now, for each i=1, 2, …, p, let

The sets S1, S2, …, Sp are the “regions” of the function. (For a complete definition, see Section 4, in which we require that each Si be the closure of its interior.)

Following the recent work of Ovchinnikov (2002), we establish that the space of continuous piecewise linear functions is the linear lattice hull of Aff, that is, it is the smallest lattice subspace containing Aff. In particular, there exists a family of subsets E1, E2, …, EJ of {1, 2, …, p}, such that

for every xRm. We note several things about this Max-Min representation. First, we can compute the Max-Min representation of a piecewise linear function using information about the function f and its components f1, f2, …, fp. Second, we can compute the regions of the functions starting from Max-Min representations. Third, given a set of affine functions F={f1, f2, …, fp}, we can enumerate through a finite combination of Max-Min operations the finite family of continuous piecewise linear functions generated by the set F. This third property is exploited in Aliprantis, Harris, and Tourky (2006).

Continuous piecewise linear functions are often used in computational economics. For instance, in the computation of Nash equilibrium of two-person finite games and fixed points approximation. Therefore, the ideas studied in the present paper may be useful in computational economics. This avenue of research has not been explored by the authors.

RIESZ SPACES AND BANACH LATTICES

The objective of this section is to present a brief discussion of the basic mathematical background in Riesz space theory needed for the present work and to study the Riesz estimators in Aliprantis, Harris, and Tourky (2006). The mathematics behind the theory of Riesz estimators are those of Riesz spaces and Banach lattices. We recall here some basic properties of Riesz spaces, and for details and terminology we refer to Abramovich and Aliprantis (2002a), Aliprantis and Border (1999), Aliprantis and Burkinshaw (2003), Luxemburg and Zaanen (1971), and Schaefer (1974).

An ordered vector space is a real vector space L equipped with an order relation ≥ that is compatible with the algebraic structure of L in the sense that if xy, then:

An ordered vector space L is said to be a Riesz space (or a vector lattice) if L is also a lattice in the sense that every nonempty finite subset of L has a supremum (least upper bound) and an infimum (greatest lower bound). Following the standard terminology from lattice theory, we shall denote the supremum and infimum of a set {x1, …, xn} by

respectively. In particular, the supremum and infimum of any pair of vectors x and y are denoted by xy and xy, respectively. The simplest example of a Riesz space is R with the usual order. Here xy and xy are the largest and smallest numbers of the set {x, y}; for instance, 2∨3=3, 1∧0=0, and 3∧3=3.

For an element x of a Riesz space L, the positive part of x is defined by x+=x∨0, the negative part by x=(−x)∨0, and the absolute value by |x|=x∨(−x).

The following is a simple but very useful result.

LEMMA 2.1. An ordered vector space is a Riesz space if and only if x+ exists for each vector x.

For an illustration of the above notions, let L=C[0, 1], the vector space of all continuous real valued functions defined on ]0, 1]. With the pointwise ordering and algebraic operations C[0, 1] is a Riesz space such that for each xL and each t∈[0, 1] we have

Similarly, if xL and rR, then for each t∈[0, 1] we have

Also, notice that if {x1, …, xn}∈C[0, 1], then for each t∈[0, 1] we have

Since C(Rn) with the pointwise ordering is a Riesz space, the above formulas are also true for functions of C(Rn).

Our interest here is in the structure of the Riesz subspaces of a Riesz space. A vector subspace M of a Riesz space L is said to be a Riesz subspace (or a vector sublattice) if x, yM imply that both xy and xy belong to M. If we consider the product vector space RΩ (where Ω is any nonempty set) and order it pointwise, then (with the above lattice operations) RΩ is a Riesz space. Moreover, if Ω is a topological space, then C(Ω) (the vector space of all continuous real-valued functions on Ω) and Cb(Ω) (the vector space of all uniformly bounded continuous real-valued functions on Ω) are both Riesz subspaces of RΩ.

It should be clear that arbitrary intersections of Riesz subspaces are Riesz subspaces. This implies that every nonempty subset A of a Riesz space L is included in a smallest Riesz subspace, called the Riesz subspace (or the vector sublattice) generated by A and denoted

.

Next, we shall briefly describe the Riesz subspace

, an important subspace for our work. For every nonempty subset A of a Riesz space L, the symbol A will denote the collection of all vectors that can be written as infima of finite subsets of A. That is, a vector aL belongs to A if there exist vectors a1, a2, …, akA such that

. Similarly, A is the set consisting of all suprema of finite subsets of A. We write A for (A) and A for (A). So, a vector a belongs to A if and only if there exists a finite family {Ej}jJ of nonempty finite subsets of L such that

. It turns out that A=A is always true.

Now we can describe the Riesz subspace generated by a set as follows. For proofs and more discussion, see Section 5 of Abramovich and Aliprantis (2002a,b).

LEMMA 2.2. The Riesz subspace

generated by a vector subspace A of a Riesz space coincides with A and also with A. That is,

.

COROLLARY 2.3. The Riesz subspace generated by a nonempty subset A of a vector lattice is precisely the vector space

where [A] is the linear span of A.

When a Riesz space L is equipped with a norm that is compatible with the order structure of the space in the sense that |x|≤|y| implies ‖x‖≤‖y‖, then L is called a normed Riesz space.1

Any norm on a Riesz space such that |x|≤|y| implies ‖x‖≤‖y‖ is called a lattice (or a Riesz) norm.

. A Banach lattice is a Riesz space that is a Banach space under a lattice norm. It is not difficult to see that in a Banach lattice the closure of a Riesz subspace is likewise a Riesz subspace.

The two classical examples of Banach lattices are the

-spaces, where

is a compact topological space and the norm is the sup norm ‖ · ‖, that is,

and the Lp(μ)-spaces, where 1≤p≤∞, and the norm is given by

ONE-DIMENSIONAL PIECEWISE LINEAR FUNCTIONS

We present here a few properties and formulas dealing with continuous piecewise linear functions defined on R or on a closed interval of R.

DEFINITION 3.1. A function

is called piecewise linear (affine) if there exist real numbers −∞<a0<a1<[sdot ][sdot ][sdot ]<ak<∞ and pairs of real numbers (mi, bi), i=0, 1, …, k, k+1, such that

The parameters {a0, a1, …, ak} and the pairs (mi, bi), i=0, 1, …, k, k+1, are referred to as a representation of f and the functions fi(t)=mit+bi as the components of the representation.

Similarly, a function

where [a, b] is a closed interval of R, is piecewise linear if there exist a partition a=a0<a1<[sdot ][sdot ][sdot ]<ak=b of the interval [a, b[ and pairs of real numbers (mi, bi), i=1, …, k, such that f(t)=mit+bi for all ai−1tai.

Notice that, according to these definitions, piecewise linear functions are automatically continuous. The following result should be obvious.

LEMMA 3.2. If

is piecewise linear, then its restriction to any closed interval of R is likewise piecewise linear. Moreover, if [a, b[ is any closed subinterval of R, then the components of the piecewise linear function

are among the components of

.

In addition, every piecewise linear function on a closed interval of R can be extended to a piecewise linear function to all of R.

The piecewise linear functions on a closed interval are characterized as follows. The idea is depicted in Figure 1.

Notice that f(t)=b1+t+−2(ta1)++2(ta2)+.

LEMMA 3.3. Let

be a piecewise linear function. If {a0, a1, …, ak} and (mi, bi), i=1, …, k, is any representation of f, then for each tR we have

In particular, a function

is piecewise linear if and only if there exist a partition a=a0<a1<[sdot ][sdot ][sdot ]<ak=b of [a, b] and constants c, c0, c1, …, ck such that for each t∈[a, b] we have

.

Proof. Let atb. If a0ta1, then note that

So, we can assume that aj−1taj for some 1<jk. Notice that for each 1<ik−1 we have miai + bi=mi + 1ai + bi + 1 or (mi + 1mi)ai=−(bi + 1bi). Consequently, we have

and the proof is finished.

COROLLARY 3.4 [Brown, Huijsmans, and de Pagter (1991)]. The vector subspace generated in C[0, 1] by the collection {1, t}∪{(α−t)+:, α ∈ R} coincides with the Riesz subspace of all piecewise linear functions on [0, 1].

COROLLARY 3.5. Let

be a piecewise linear function. If {a0, a1, …, ak} and (mi, bi), i=0, 1, …, k, k + 1, is an arbitrary representation of g, then for each tR we have

In particular, a function

is piecewise linear if and only if there exist real constants m0, b0, a0, a1, …, ak and c0, c1, …, ck such that for each tR we have

Proof. Consider the function

defined by

As in the proof of Lemma 3.3, it is easy to see that h(t)=f(t) for all a0tak. Moreover, h(t)=m1t+b1 for all ta0 and h(t)=mkt+bk for all tak. Since

it follows that

as desired.

We close the section with two results that will be useful for our study later.

LEMMA 3.6. Let

be a piecewise linear function and let {a0, a1, …, ak} and (mi, bi), i=1, …, k, be a representation of f. Also let

the slope of the line segment joining the points (a, f(a)) and (b, f(b)).

Then there exist some 1≤ik with mim and some ai−1≤ξ≤ai satisfying f(ξ)=m(ξ−a)+f(a).

Proof. Assume by way of contradiction that if mim, then we have f(t)≠m(ta)+f(a) for all ai−1tai. In particular, we have m1<m. Given that for ata1 we have f(t)=m1t+b1=m1(ta)+f(a), the latter implies f(t)<m(ta)+f(a) for all a<ta1. Notice that for each a1ta2 we have

So, if m2<m, then for each a1ta2 we have f(t)<m(ta)+f(a). On the other hand, if m2m, then for each a1ta2 we must have f(t)<m(ta)+f(a); otherwise (by the intermediate value theorem) there should exist some a1≤ξ≤a2 with f(ξ)=m(ta)+f(a), which contradicts our assumption. The same argument yields f(t)<m(ta)+f(a) for all a2ta3. Continuing this way we see that f(ak)=f(b)<m(ba)+f(a)=f(b), which is impossible.

As an immediate consequence we get the following result.

COROLLARY 3.7 [Ovchinnikov (2002)]. Let

be a piecewise linear function and let {a0, a1, …, ak} and (mi, bi), i=1, …, k, be the parameters of a representation of f. Then there exists some 1≤ik such that f(a)≥mia+bi and f(b)≤mib+bi.

Proof. According to Lemma 3.6 there exist some 1≤ik and some ai−1≤ξ≤ai satisfying

and f(ξ)=m(ta)+f(a). Note that for each ai−1tai we have mit+bi=mi(t−ξ)+f(ξ) and that for all atb we have m(ta)+f(a)=m(t−ξ)+f(ξ). This implies mit+bim(ta)+f(a) for all at≤ξ and mit+bim(ta)+f(a) for all ξ≤tb, and our conclusion follows.

MULTIVARIATE PIECEWISE LINEAR FUNCTIONS

Recall that any function

of the form f(x)=α+a·x, where α∈R is a constant and aRm is a fixed vector, is called an affine function. As usual, an affine function f is linear if α=0, i.e., f(x)=a·x. A function

, where S is a subset of Rm, is said to be an affine function if it is the restriction of an affine function defined on Rm. Let Aff denote the collection of all affine functions on Rm and note that Aff is a vector subspace of C(Rm).

LEMMA 4.1. Regarding affine functions we have the following:

  1. The vector space Aff of all affine functions is the linear span in C(Rm) of the functions {1, e1, e2, …, em}, where 1(x)=1 and ei(x)=xi for all xRm. That is, we have
    and so Aff is an (m+1)-dimensional vector space.2

    As a matter of fact, if we identify every vector

    with the affine function on Rm defined by

    , then it is not difficult to see that we can identify Aff with the vector space Rm+1.

  2. Two affine functions
    coincide if and only if f(x)=g(x) for all x in a nonempty open subset of Rm. In particular, if a subset S of Rm has an interior point, then any affine function on S is the restriction of a unique affine function defined on Rm.

Proof. The proof of part (1) is obvious. The proof of part (2) follows easily from the following simple property: If a nonzero linear functional f satisfies f(x)≥α for all x in a nonempty open set

, then f(x)>α must be the case for all

.

To see this, fix

and assume that f(x)=α. Since

is an open set, there exists some ε>0 such that

. So, for each yB(0, ε) we have α+f(y)=f(x+y)≥α or f(y)≥0. This implies f(y)=0 for all yB(0, ε) and so f=0, which is impossible.

We are now ready to introduce the general concept of piecewise linear function.

DEFINITION 4.2. A function

is called piecewise linear (or piecewise affine) if there exist distinct affine functions f1, f2, …, fp and subsets S1, S2, …, Sp of Rm such that:

  1. Each Si is closed with nonempty interior and
    .3

    If A is any subset of Rm, then Int(A) denotes its interior and

    its closure. We remark that the sets Si are not assumed to be connected.

  2. If ij, then Int(Si)∩Int(Sj)=[empty ].
  3. .
  4. If xSi, then f(x)=fi(x).

We also introduce the following terminology and notation.

  1. The sets Si are called the regions of f and the functions fi will be referred to as the components of f.
  2. The pairs (S1, f1), …, (Sp, fp) are the characteristic pairs of f.
  3. The set of all piecewise linear functions will be denoted by PL.

A remark is in order here. The same definition of a piecewise linear function can be given for solid domains, that is, for closed convex subsets of Rm with nonempty interior. All results in this section hold true for piecewise linear functions with solid domains. We assume that our functions have domain Rm for the sole purpose of simplifying the exposition. The reader can verify directly that when m=1 the definitions for piecewise linear functions given in Definitions 3.1 and 4.2 are equivalent; see also Corollary 4.10

Here is an example of an piecewise linear function with a solid domain in R2.

Example 4.3. Let Q=[0, 12]×[0, 12]={(x, y)∈R2: 0≤x≤12; 0≤y≤12}. Consider the piecewise linear function

defined by

The regions of this function are shown in Figure 2 and its graph is depicted in Figure 3.

The regions of the function $f\colon {\bf R}^2\to {\bf R}$.

The graph of $f\colon {\bf R}^2\to{\bf R}$.

Notice that the regions cannot be specified by separate thresholds on the variables x1 and x2. This would be the case only when the function f is itself separable.

The rest of the discussion in this section is devoted to the properties of piecewise linear functions. The fundamental result for our work will be obtained in the sequel (see Theorem 4.15) and it states that the collection of all piecewise linear functions is precisely the Riesz subspace generated in C(Rm) by the affine functions.

LEMMA 4.4. Every piecewise linear function is continuous.

Proof. Let

be piecewise linear and let

. If

, then (by passing to a subsequence) we can assume without loss of generality that there exists some ε>0 such that |f(xn)−f(x)|≥ε for each n. Now notice that there exist some i and a subsequence {yn} of {xn} satisfying ynSi for each n. But then we have

, which is impossible. This shows that f is continuous.

The following result presents an extremely simple characterization of piecewise linear functions.

THEOREM 4.5. A continuous function

is piecewise linear if and only if there exist affine functions f1, …, fk such that for each xRm there exists some 1≤ik satisfying f(x)=fi(x).

Moreover, the set of components of f is a subcollection of the collection of affine functions {f1, …, fk}.

Proof. If f is piecewise linear, then the condition is trivially true. So, for the converse, assume that there exist affine functions f1, …, fk such that for each xRm there exists some 1≤ik such that f(x)=fi(x). We can assume that the affine functions f1, …, fk are distinct. We claim the following:

  • For each nonempty open subset V of Rm there exists a nonempty open subset W of V and some 1≤ik such that f=fi on W.

To see this, assume by way of contradiction that the claim is false. This implies that ff1 on V, that is, f1(v)≠f(v) for some vV. Since f and f1 are continuous, there exists some nonempty open subset V1 of V such that f1(x) ≠f(x) for all xV1. Similarly, since (by our hypothesis) ff2 on V1 there exists some nonempty open subset V2 of V1 such that f2(x)≠f(x) for all xV2. Continuing this way, we see that there exist nonempty open sets VkVk−1⊆[sdot ][sdot ][sdot ]⊆V1V such that for each 1≤ik we have fi(x)≠f(x) for all xVi. But then for each xVk we have f(x)≠fi(x) for all 1≤ik, which is impossible, and our claim has been established.

Now for each 1≤ik let

. That is,

is the largest open set on which f=fi. By the preceding discussion

for at least one i. (To see this take V=Rm and apply ([bull ]).) Deleting the

with

, we can assume that

for each i. Put

, and note that f=fi on Si. We shall verify that the closed sets S1, …, Sk satisfy the conditions of Definition 4.2. Start by observing that condition (4) is obvious.

For (1) note that from

, we get that Int(Si)≠[empty ] and that

. Moreover,

must be the case, since otherwise the maximality property of

will be violated. The condition

for ij should be obvious and the validity of (2) follows. If

, then by the above discussion there exists some nonempty open subset Q of

and some 1≤[ell ]≤k such that f=f[ell ] on Q. But then the open set

violates the maximality property of

. Hence,

.

That the components of f are among the affine functions f1, …, fk should be obvious from the above discussion.

An immediate consequence of the preceding result is that PL is a Riesz subspace.

COROLLARY 4.6. The collection of all piecewise linear functions on Rm is a Riesz subspace of C(Rm). In particular,

.

Recall that an affine transformation from Rk to Rm is any function

of the form T(t)=At+b, where A is an m×k real matrix and bRm is a fixed vector. Now if T is an affine transformation and

is an affine function, then the function

is also an affine function. To see this, assume that f is defined as f(x)=α+u·x and note that for each tRk we have

This conclusion in connection with Theorem 4.5 yields the following result.

COROLLARY 4.7. If

is an arbitrary piecewise linear function and

is an affine transformation, then the function

is piecewise linear. Moreover, if f has the components f1, …, fp, then the components of fT are among the affine functions f1T, …, fpT.

In particular, for any two fixed vectors a, bRm the function

defined via the formula θ(t)=f(ta+(1−t)b), is (one-dimensional) piecewise linear.

A hyperplane of Rm is any subset of the form H={xRm: a·x=α}, where aRm is a nonzero vector and α∈R is a constant. Clearly, every hyperplane is a closed set and has Lebesgue measure zero. Notice that two affine functions

either do not agree at any point or the set that they agree is a hyperplane, that is, the set [f=g]={xRm: f(x)=g(x)} is either empty or a hyperplane.

The boundaries of the regions of a piecewise linear function are parts of hyperplanes.

LEMMA 4.8. Let (S1, f1), …, (Sp, fp) be the characteristic pairs of a piecewise linear function

. For each i let

and SiSj≠[empty ]}. Then the boundary of the region Si has the following property:

In particular,

  1. each boundary ∂Si has Lebesgue measure zero and consists of, “parts” of hyperplanes, and
  2. if x∈Int(Si) for some i, then xSj for all ji.

Proof. Let x∈∂Si. Since

, there exists for each n some

such that

. It follows that for some ji we have xnSj for infinitely many n. This implies

and so xSiSj.

Now assume that xSiSj for some ji. If x∉∂Si, then x∈Int(Si) and so there exists some δ>0 such that B(x, δ)⊆Int(Si). Since Int(Si)∩Int(Sj)=[empty ], we infer that x∈∂Sj. From

, it follows that there exists some y∈Int(Sj) such that yB(x, δ). This implies y∈Int(Si)∩Int(Sj), which is impossible. Consequently, x∈∂Si, and the proof is finished.

The characteristic pairs of a piecewise linear function are uniquely determined.

LEMMA 4.9. The regions and the components of an arbitrary piecewise linear function

are uniquely determined in the following sense: If another collection of pairs {(S1′, g1), …, (Sq′, gq)} satisfies properties (1)–(4) of Definition 4.2., then q=p and {(S1′, g1), (S2′, g2), …, (Sq′, gq)} is a permutation of the collection of pairs {(S1, f1), (S2, f2), …, (Sp, fp)}.

Proof. Fix some 1≤ip. Because Int(Si) is nonempty (and hence it has positive Lebesgue measure), it follows from Lemma 4.8 that there exists some 1≤jq such that the open set V=Int(Si) ∩ Int(Sj′) is nonempty. In particular, as fi(x)=gj(x)=f(x) holds true for each xV, it follows from part (2) of Lemma 4.1 that fi=gj.

Now let x∈Int(Si). Fix δ>0 such that B(x, δ)⊆Int(Si) and let 0<ε<δ. As above, B(x, ε)∩Int(Sr′)≠[empty ] must hold true for some index 1≤rq. But then (as above again) gj=fi=gr must be the case. Because the affine functions g1, …, gq are all distinct, we infer that r=j. Therefore, B(x, ε)∩Int(Sj′)≠[empty ] for all 0<ε<δ. This implies

, and so Int(Si)⊆Sj′. Consequently,

.

By the symmetry of the situation, there exists some 1≤mp such that Sj′⊆Sm. This implies Int(Si)∩Int(Sm)=Int(Si)≠[empty ], from which it follows that m=i. Therefore, Si=Sj′ and so (Si, fi)=(Sj′, gj). From the last result, the desired conclusion now easily follows.

Another consequence of Theorem 4.5 is that for real functions defined on R the definitions for piecewise linear functions given in Definitions 3.1 and 4.2 are equivalent.

COROLLARY 4.10. A function

is piecewise linear according to Definition 3.1 if and only if it is piecewise linear according to Definition 4.2.

Proof. Let

be a function. If f is piecewise linear according to Definition 3.1, then f is clearly piecewise linear according to Definition 4.2.

For the converse, assume that f is piecewise linear according to Definition 4.2. Let {(S1, f1), (S2, f2), …, (Sp, fp)} be the collection of characteristic pairs of f. Notice that every fi is of the form fi(t)=mit+bi. So, every nonempty set of the form [fi=fj] is simply a point of R. This is connection with Lemma 4.8 shows that the boundary of each Si is a finite set. Now each Int(Si) is the union of an at most countable collection of pairwise disjoint open intervals. Because ∂Si is a finite set, a moment's thought reveals that Int(Si) is a union of a finite number of pairwise disjoint open intervals. From this it follows that Si is the union of the closures of these intervals. Now it is easy to see that f is a piecewise linear function according to Definition 3.1.

In order to further study piecewise linear functions, we shall need the theory of arrangements of hyperplanes, which are well-studied combinatorial constructions that are closely related to vector lattices and the simplex methods in linear programming; see Chapter 4 of Björner, Las Vergnas, Sturmfels, White, and Ziegler (1999).

Recall once more that any subset of Rm of the form H={xRm: a·x=α}, where aRm is a nonzero fixed vector and α∈R is a constant, is called a hyperplane of Rm. We can assume without loss of generality that ‖a‖=1 and refer to a as a (unit) vector normal to H. Since H={xRm:(−ax=−α}, we see that −a is also another (unit) normal vector to H. In other words, H has essentially two unit normal vectors, each of which defines an orientation in the sense that it divides Rm into three parts: a “positive” part {xRm: a·x>α}, a “zero” part {xRm: a·x=α}, and a “negative” part {xRm: a·x<α}. Of course, if we let H={xRm:(−ax=−α}, then the orientation changes: the positive part is now negative and the negative part is positive. Thus, writing H in the form H={xRm: a·x=α}, the vector a defines automatically an orientation, and H is called an oriented hyperplane.

Now let E be a finite index set and let (He)eE, where He={xRm: ae·xe}, be a family of (oriented) hyperplanes in Rm. The family (He)eE, is called an oriented arrangement of hyperplanes (or simply an arrangement). Every arrangement of hyperplanes (He)eE “almost” subdivides Rm into a finite number of nonempty convex regions. The subdivisions are obtained by means of the “sign” mapping x[map ]σx, from Rm to {+, −, 0}E, that is defined by

that is, σx=(Sign(ae·x−αe))eE. Let

denote the range of the function σ, that is,

.

A vector

satisfying T(e)≠0 for all eE is called a tope of

. Note that σx is a tope if and only if

. Let T1, T2…, TJ be an enumeration of the topes of

. For each 1≤hJ let

Obviously, each Kh is a nonempty, open, and convex set. Moreover, from the identity

, we see that

. The sets K1, K2, …, KJ are called the cells induced by the arrangement of the hyperplanes (He)eE. It should not be difficult to see that the collection of cells {K1, K2, …, KJ} is independent of the orientation of the planes He, and so we can refer to {K1, K2, …, KJ} as the collection of cells generated (or induced) by the family of hyperplanes (He)eE. For an example of an arrangement of hyperplanes, see Figure 4.

An arrangement of four oriented hyperplanes in R2.

Now let {f1, …, fp}, where p≥2, be a collection of distinct affine functions on Rm. If for each 1≤i<jp we let Hi,j=[fi=fj], then the set

is a finite set. Letting He=[fi=fj]={xRm: ae·xe} for each e=(i, j)∈E, we see that the family (He)eE is an arrangement of hyperplanes, called an arrangement generated by {f1, …, fp}. The collection of cells generated by (He)eE is called the collection of cells generated (or induced) by {f1, …, fp}.

With this terminology at hand, we are now ready to state several extra properties of piecewise linear functions.

LEMMA 4.11. Let F={f1, …, fk} be a finite collection of distinct affine functions of Rm and let {K1, K2, …, KJ} be the collection of cells induced by F. Assume also that

is a continuous function such that for each xRm there exists some 1≤ik satisfying f(x)=fi(x).4

Keep in mind that this implies (by Theorem 4.5) that f is piecewise linear.

Then for a vector xKh we have the following:
  1. If f(x)=fi(x), then f(y)=fi(y) for all yKh.
  2. If f(x)>fi(x), then f(y)>fi(y) for all yKh.
  3. If f(x)<fi(x), then f(y)<fi(y) for all yKh.

Moreover, for each 1≤hJ there is a unique 1≤ihk with

on Kh.

Proof. We shall prove (1) first. To this end, suppose that some xKh satisfies f(x)=fi(x).

Let

and note that X is an open dense subset of Rm. Notice that for each zX any pair of distinct functions fi, fjF we have

. So for each zX there exists a unique 1≤izk such that

. Because f and the fi are continuous functions and

for each jiz, there exists an open neighborhood NzX of z such that for each yNz and all jiz we have f(y)≠fj(y) and

. This implies that for each yNz we have

, that is, iy=iz.

Now fix yKh. Let L(x, y) be the line segment joining x and y and notice that L(x, y)⊆Kh as Kh is convex. Because L(x, y) is compact, there exists a finite set Z={z1, …, zr}⊆L(x, y) such that

. We can assume that the neighborhoods {Nz: zZ} form a chain, that is,

for each t=1, …, r−1; see (Abramovich and Aliprantis, 2002b, Problem {1.5.7}, p. {50}). This easily implies that for each zL(x, y) we have

. In particular, ix=iy.

Therefore, we have shown that for each Kh there exists a unique index 1≤ihk such that yKh implies

. This proves (1) and the last part of the lemma.

To establish (2), assume that f(x)>fi(x) holds true for some xKh and that some other yKh satisfies f(y)≤fi(y). If f(y)=fi(y), then according to (1) we must have f(x)=fi(x), which is impossible. If f(y)<fi(y), then there exists some z in the line segment joining x and y (and hence zKh) satisfying f(z)=fi(z). But then (according to (1) again) we get f(x)=fi(x), a contradiction. This establishes (2) and the validity of (3) can be proven in a similar fashion.

From Theorem 4.5 we know that if for a continuous function

and affine functions f1, …, fk for each xRm there exists some 1≤ik satisfying f(x)=fi(x), then f is piecewise linear. The next result constructs the characteristic pairs of such a piecewise linear function from a given collection of affine functions.

THEOREM 4.12. Assume that a continuous function

and a finite set of distinct affine functions F={f1, …, fk} are such that for each xRm there exists some 1≤ik satisfying f(x)=fi(x). Let {K1, K2, …, KJ} be the cells generated by F. For each 1≤ik let

and then define

. We have the following.

  1. If
    is the family of nonempty Ei, then the family
    is precisely the family of characteristic pairs of the piecewise linear function f.
  2. For each 1≤hJ there exists exactly one
    such that Kh⊆Int(Si).
  3. For each
    the nonempty set Int(Si) is a union of a finite collection of pairwise disjoint nonempty open and connected subsets of Rm.

Proof. (a) We know from Theorem 4.5 that the function f is piecewise linear whose components are among the f1, …, fk. The proof here will present also an alternate constructive proof of Theorem 4.5. Let {K1, …, KJ} be the collection of cells generated by F and for each 1≤ik define Ei and Si as in the statement of the lemma.

According to Lemma 4.11 at least one of the Ei is nonempty; relabeling, we can assume that E1, …, Ep are the nonempty Ei, that is,

. Clearly, f=fi on Si. Because the affine functions f1, …, fk are distinct, it follows from part (2) of Lemma 4.1 that ErEs=[empty ] for rs and from Lemma 4.11 we see that

. The latter yields

Next notice that because for each 1≤ip we have

, it follows, on one hand, that Int(Si)≠[empty ] and, on the other hand, that

. Moreover, using part (2) of Lemma 4.1, it is easy to see that Int(Sr)∩Int(Ss)=[empty ] for rs. Because f=fi holds true for each 1≤ip, it follows from Definition 4.2 that f is a piecewise linear function with characteristic pairs (S1, f1), …, (Sp, fp).

(b) Now let 1≤hJ. According to Lemma 4.11 there exists a unique 1≤ihk such that

on Kh. This implies that

and

.

(c) Observe that for each

every component of Int(Si), that is, every maximal (with respect to ⊇) nonempty and connected subset of Int(Si), is open. Now notice that every Kh⊆Int(Si) is open and connected (as being a convex set) and so is included in some component of Int(Si). Moreover, from the definition of Si, it is not difficult to see that every component of Int(Si) includes some Kh. Thus, the number of components of Int(Si) is at most J, and the proof is finished.

To continue our study, we need one more property of piecewise linear functions.

LEMMA 4.13 [Ovchinnikov (2002)]. If

is a piecewise linear function with components f1, …, fp, then for any pair a, bRm there exists a component fi of f satisfying fi(a)≤f(a) and fi(b)≥f(b).

Proof. Fix a, bRm and consider the continuous function

defined via the formula by g(t)=f[tb+(1−t)a[. By Corollary 4.7, g is a one-dimensional piecewise linear function whose components are among the affine functions g1, g2, …, gp, where gi(t)=fi(tb+(1−t)a). Consider g restricted to [0, 1] and then use Lemma 3.2 in conjunction with Corollary 3.7 to see that there exists a component gi satisfying f(a)=g(0)≥gi(0)=fi(a) and f(b)=g(1)≤gi(1)=fi(b).

The next result presents the basic structural properties of piecewise linear functions. Its proof is based on the discussion by Ovchinnikov on the referees' comments concerning his paper Ovchinnikov (2002).

THEOREM 4.14. Assume that

is a piecewise linear function with characteristic pairs {(S1, f1), …, (Sp, fp)} and let {K1, K2, …, KJ} be the set of cells induced by {f1, …, fp}.

  1. If for each h we pick xhKh and let Eh={i∈{1, …, p}: fi(xh)≥f(xh)}, then Eh is nonempty and
    In particular, f∈{f1, f2, …, fp}∨∧.
  2. If J* is the subset of {1, …, J} having the property that for each 1≤hJ there exists a jJ* such that EjEh, then we have

Proof. (1) For each 1≤hJ fix some xhKh and then use Theorem 4.12 to choose some 1≤jp such that Kh⊆Int(Sj). Clearly, fj(xh)=f(xh). This implies that if for each 1≤hJ we let

then, on the one hand, Eh≠[empty ] and, on the other hand, a glance at Lemma 4.11 guarantees that for each iEh and each yKh we have fi(y)≥f(y). Now for each 1≤hJ consider the function

and note that Fh(y)≥f(y) for each yKh. Because for some jEh we have fj(xh)=f(xh), it follows from Lemma 4.11 that fj(y)=f(y) for all yKh. Thus, Fh(y)=f(y) for all yKh.

Next, fix yRm. For each 1≤hJ there exists (according to Lemma 4.13) some fj satisfying fj(y)≤f(y) and fj(xh)≥f(xh). In particular, it follows that we have jEh and consequently

for all 1≤hJ. This implies

for all yRm.

On the other hand, because for each xKh we have Fh(x)=f(x), it must be the case that

on

. Because

is dense in Rm and

and f are both continuous functions, it follows that

holds true on Rm.

(2) To establish this identity, note first that if EjEh, then

. This implies

for each 1≤hJ, and consequently we have

, and the proof is finished.

Combining Corollary 4.6 and Theorem 4.14 we are now ready to state the fundamental result for this work.

THEOREM 4.15. The vector space PL of all piecewise linear functions is a vector sublattice of the Riesz space C(Rm) and coincides with

that is,

.

In other words, PL is precisely the Riesz subspace of C(Rm) generated by the (m+1)-dimensional vector subspace Aff of all affine functions.

The next example reported in Ovchinnikov (2002) shows that piecewise polynomial functions need not admit a sup-inf representation.

Example 4.16. Define the piecewise quadratic function

as follows:

Notice that x2∨0=x2 and x2∧0=0.

Noting that the set {f1, f2, …, fp}∨∧ is finite, Theorem 4.15 yields also the following.

COROLLARY 4.17. If F={f1, f2, …, fp} is a finite set of affine functions on Rm, then a function fC(Rm) is piecewise linear with components in F if and only if f belongs to the finite set F∨∧.

Theorem 4.14 also provides an algorithm for constructing the sup-inf representation of a piecewise linear function with components f1, f2, …, fp and unknown regions. The next example is a rudimentary algorithm illustrating this.

Example 4.18 (From f, f1, f2, …, fp to

).}\,\, Take

with components f1, f2, …, fp. Following Theorem 4.14 the function f can be reconstructed using the following step:

Step I: Determine E={(i, j): 1≤i<jp and [fi=fj]≠[empty ]} and then for each e=(i, j)∈E pick αeR and aeRm such that

Step II: Using the hyperplane arrangement (He)eE determine the cells K1, …, KJ.

Step III: For each h=1, 2, …, J choose some xh from the cell Kh.

Step IV: For each

determine Eh={i∈{1, …, p}fi(xh)≥f(xh)}.

Step V: Select a “minimal” set J*⊆{1, 2, …, J} so that it satisfies property (2) of Theorem 4.14. Then we have

This procedure gives a desired sup-inf representation of f.

The next example illustrates the preceding algorithm. It also shows how in applying this algorithm, we can restrict our attention to a closed convex domain with nonempty interior.

Example 4.19. Consider once again Example 4.3 but with the restricted domain shown in Figure 5. Take the four affine components of the function f:

These four affine functions induce eight cells. They are the eight regions of the oriented arrangement in Step I of the algorithm of Example 4.18 and they are depicted in Figure 5.

The eight regions of the oriented arrangement.

Notice that E1={1, 2, 3}, E2={1, 2, 3}, E3=E4=E5=E6=E7=E8={3, 4}. Therefore, if we take J*={1, 3}, then we can write

Because we have restricted the domain, we can now write f=(f3f4)∨(f1f2); compare Figures 3 and 6.

The graphs of f1∧f2 andf3∧f4.

A rudimentary algorithm for computing the regions of the functions in

by means of Theorem 4.12 is presented next.

Example 4.20 (From

to PL). Take f∈{f1, f2, …, fp}∨∧, where as usual f1, f2, …, fp are affine functions on

. Following Theorem 4.12 the regions of the function f can be obtained using the following steps:

  1. Step I: Determine E={(i, j): 1≤i<jp and [fi=fj]≠[empty ]} and for each e=(i, j)∈E and then pick αeR and aeRm such that He={xRm: ae·xe}=[fi=fj].
  2. Step II: Use the hyperplane arrangement (He)eE to determine the cells K1, …, KJ.
  3. Step III: For each h=1, 2, …, J choose some xhKh and then let
  4. Step IV: For each h=1, 2, …, J determine the set Ih={j∈{1, …, J}: ij=ih}.
  5. Step V: For each h=1, 2, …, J let
    .

The characteristic pairs of the piecewise linear function f are distinct members of the family

.

The research of Aliprantis is supported by the NSF Grants EIA-0075506, SES-0128039 and DMI-0122214 and the DOD Grant ACI-0325846. The research of R. Tourky is funded by the Australian Research Council Grant A00103450.

References

Y.A. Abramovich and C.D. Aliprantis 2002a An invitation to operator theory, vol. 50 of Graduate Studies in Mathematics. Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society.
Y.A. Abramovich and C.D. Aliprantis 2002b Problems in operator theory, vol. 51 of Graduate Studies in Mathematics. Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society.
C.D. Aliprantis and K.C. Border 1999 Infinite-dimensional analysis: a hitchhiker's guide. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
C.D. Aliprantis and O. Burkinshaw 2003 Locally solid Riesz spaces with applications to economics, vol. 105 of Mathematical Surveys and Monographs. Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society.
C.D. Aliprantis, D. Harris, and R. Tourky 2006 Riesz estimators. Journal of Econometrics, Forthcoming.Google Scholar
A. Björner, M. Las Vergnas, B. Sturmfels, N. White, and G.M. Ziegler 1999 Oriented matroids, vol. 46 of Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
D.J. Brown, C.B. Huijsmans, and B. de Pagter 1991 Approximating derivative securities in f-algebras, in C.D. Aliprantis, K.C. Border, and W.A.J. Luxemburg, eds., Positive operators, Riesz Spaces, and Economics, Studies in Economic Theory, Vol. 2, pp. 171–177. Springer-Verlag, New York and Heidelberg.
W.A.J. Luxemburg and A. C. Zaanen 1971 Riesz spaces, Vol. I. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing.
S. Ovchinnikov 2002 Max-min representation of piecewise linear functions. Beirtrage zur Algebra und Geometrie 43 (1), 297302.Google Scholar
H.H. Schaefer 1974 Banach lattices and positive operators, vol. 215 of Die Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften, New York: Springer-Verlag. Band 215.
Figure 0

Notice that f(t)=b1+t+−2(t−a1)++2(t−a2)+.

Figure 1

The regions of the function $f\colon {\bf R}^2\to {\bf R}$.

Figure 2

The graph of $f\colon {\bf R}^2\to{\bf R}$.

Figure 3

An arrangement of four oriented hyperplanes in R2.

Figure 4

The eight regions of the oriented arrangement.

Figure 5

The graphs of f1∧f2 andf3∧f4.